Proceeding contribution from Baroness Keeley (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 16 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Equality Bill (HL).
Equality Bill [Lords]
I apologise for not being present earlier, but I have been following the debate elsewhere. Many hon. Members and many agencies believe that it is vital that the CEHR is a new, single statutory body that can offer integrated advice and guidance, and that is the problem. Does my hon. Friend not see that the amendment and the idea of a London committee work against that aim? People who favour London rather than Manchester as the location for the main services of the new body are almost striving to split it. The key point is that it is integrated and can offer advice by working across all the disciplines. The question of the CEHR’s location has been settled and the amendment would work against the key features that would make the commission work as a body.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 441 c630
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Admissions Age Disability Rights Commission Commission for Racial Equality Bureaucracy Delegated legislation Committees Equality Human rights EU law Gender Equality and Human Rights Commission Equal Opportunities Commission Exemptions Faith schools Harassment Legal representation Facilities Powers Public appointments Pupils Staff Race relations Schools Religion Transport Small businesses Sexuality Transgender people
- Legislation
- Equality Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 22:04:29 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291114
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291114
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291114