Proceeding contribution from Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 11 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Equality Bill.
Equality Bill
I am very grateful for that explanation. What it comes to is that the Government accept that one has to read our domestic legislation compatibly with the CERD and that the CERD refers to descent. There is therefore a gap between the literal language of the definition of race and what is required under the CERD. I think that the Minister has already accepted that the courts must try to make the two fit to each other. The case involving the immigration officer at Prague was a recent example, as was the Jewish Free School case. Why can Parliament not ensure that there is no gap—let us forget about caste—between what the CERD requires and what the statute will say?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c347
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Conditions of employment Civil partnerships Depressive illnesses Employment Equality Gender Harassment Discrimination Ethnic groups Public sector Minority groups Racial discrimination Married people Scotland Religion Travellers Widowed people Single people International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Hinduism Dalits Transgender people
- Legislation
- Equality Bill 2008-09 to 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-11 10:00:14 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_606577
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_606577
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_606577