Clause 9 - Human rights
Equality Bill [Lords]
5:15 pm
Sandra Gidley (Women & Older People, Non-Departmental & Cross Departmental Responsibilities; Romsey, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move amendment No. 70, in clause 9, page 5, line 4, at end insert—
‘(1A)In promoting the awareness, understanding and protection of human rights, the Commission shall assess whether, and to what extent, adequate advice and assistance is available to individuals who are or may become party to proceedings under section 7(1)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42) (proceedings)’.
I, too, welcome you to this sitting, Ms Anderson.
This is a probing amendment. It attempts to obtain clarification and assurances that the Commission for Equality and Human Rights will be expected to follow the recommendations of the Joint Committee on Human Rights on monitoring access to case support for individual action under the Human Rights Act 1998. Concerns have been expressed that individuals may find it more difficult under the Bill to obtain the funding to pursue a case. There is a lack of clarity about what the Legal Services Commission will fund. There are also anxieties that people who may previously have qualified for support or assistance will fall through gaps, and the support will no longer be available.
The Bill was amended in the other place to give the Commission for Equality and Human Rights the power to bring about judicial review proceedings against a public authority that acts in a manner that is not compatible with the rights of the convention. It provided a strategic power which would be a useful tool for challenging and ending routine abuses of human rights. That is particularly important in respect of disability because, as the previous clause acknowledges, it is a problem. We often have to go the extra mile to ensure equality of opportunity and access for disabled people, whose needs are sometimes complex. Another problem with disability is that the DRC’s power to provide individual case support was never activated and there are worries that the group will continue to be disfranchised.
It is also important that the CEHR’s role in promoting human rights standards in the delivery of public services is supported and encouraged. Active promotion and awareness of good standards will, in the long run, probably decrease the need for legal advice and support in certain cases. It is not clear whether the CEHR will be expected to signpost or refer individuals whose rights appear to have been infringed. It is not clear either how the system would work and who people would be referred to. Rather than a lack of clarity, it may simply be complex. The Minister may recall that she and I served on the Committee that considered the Adoption and Children Act 2002; a flowchart was created to explain the particularly complex matters dealt with in that legislation. I hope that the Equality Bill is not that complex and that the Minister will be able to describe the situation, but there seems to be a lack of understanding among those who will be lobbying the commission.
The Joint Committee On Human Rights has expressed concern that the powers of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights to assist people under the Human Rights Act 1998 might be restricted. The matter needs to be kept under review. If the Minister feels that adequate provision has already been made, will she promise a review to monitor how it is working in practice? Or does she have other means of allaying some of the fears that have been expressed?