Schedule 6 - Sex Discrimination
Gender Recognition Bill [Lords]
2:30 pm
Dr Evan Harris (Oxford West and Abingdon, Liberal Democrat)
I had got as far as the letter ''l'' in ''law''. I was saying that the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, uniquely in British discrimination law history, went further than European comparators—directives—in protecting rights against discrimination. It was the product of the last liberal Home Secretary that we have had, from any party: the late Roy Jenkins. The 1975 Act provided for a bar to discrimination on the grounds of sex or gender in relation not only to employment and vocational training, but to education, housing and the supply of goods and services. The sky has not fallen in on this country because of those protections.
As the Minister has acknowledged, many of us feel—certainly everyone in the Liberal Democrat party feels this, because it is our party policy, and many people in the Labour party feel it, too—that those sorts of protection should be available to other groups of people, and not only to people who would otherwise be discriminated against on the ground of gender. I will quote from paragraph 98 of the initial report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights on the draft Bill, although sadly nothing has changed since the draft Bill in this respect. The report states:
''It seemed to us that it would be strange to make such discrimination unlawful in one field covered by the 1975 Act but to continue to permit it in other fields covered by the same Act. This prompted us to consider whether discrimination against people on the ground that they have undergone, are undergoing or plan to undergo sex reassignment therapy would constitute unlawful discrimination on the ground of sex in the fields of education, housing and the supply of goods and services.''
It is not clear whether British courts would take the same view as the European Court of Justice did in the case of P v. S and Cornwall county council, when it judged that it was hard to separate one's status as a transsexual pre or post-surgery—in the process of transitioning—from sex itself.
After consideration, the Joint Committee stated, in paragraph 99, that it did not feel ''sufficiently confident'' that it could rely on that achieving the desired result, so it asked the Government for their view on
''the desirability of extending the legal protection against such discrimination under the 1975 Act from employment and vocational training to education, housing and the supply of goods and services.''
It explained that the Government said that it was not a high priority and that the most pressing need was
''to amend the law in relation to employment and vocational training in order to comply with Community law.''
That is like saying, ''The only thing that we will consider to be a top priority is what we are forced to do'', rather than considering the merits of tackling the problems of discrimination.
We have already heard from the Minister that there is discrimination against people in this area. I believe that to be unacceptable, and I would have hoped that a Government that thought that it was unacceptable would legislate to prevent it, particularly considering that the issue is so closely related to sex and gender, an area in which the Government, and the Labour party, for the past 28 years, have felt that discrimination is inappropriate.
Paragraph 100 states that the Government told the Joint Committee that they
''did not consider that there was any evidence of a pressing need to protect transsexual people against discrimination in other fields.''
I find that astonishing because it is clear that there is a problem. The Committee did not accept the Government's approach. It states:
''The evidence provided by our correspondents shows that there is a significant amount of discrimination against transsexual people in the supply of goods and services, particularly pubs and clubs, and in housing, where homeless people may be left without access to a hostel because the people in charge of hostels for men and women respectively refuse to take in people on account of their status as transsexuals. This is borne out by other anecdotal evidence.''
It was of the view that there is a pressing need to protect transsexual people against discrimination in areas other than employment and vocational training.