Clause 33 - Equality and human rights enactments
Equality Bill [Lords]
2:15 pm
Meg Munn (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department of Trade and Industry; Sheffield, Heeley, Labour)
One of the joys of my post is in discovering that issues of equality and human rights have a great deal of support across the House and in all parties in a way that I understand has not always been the case. One of the frustrations for Members on both sides, and indeed for Ministers, is that it takes time to resolve many of these issues and to bring forward legislation. I understand the hon. Gentleman’s frustration that things are not moving as fast as he would like, but a process is in place, and the discrimination law review is under way. A Green Paper next year will enable everyone who has concerns in these areas to respond.
While I understand why hon. Members want to press the Government to do more and to do it more quickly, I believe we can get something better that responds more appropriately to all the concerns of the different groups. Transsexual or transgendered people are just one group who are pressing me to go faster and further. We will get much better legislation if we do that in a planned and effective way through the discrimination law review.
I have the advantage of being able to sit down with officials to see how much progress is being made, and I appreciate that I am asking hon. Members to be patient until early next year or late spring. It may seem that no progress is being made, but I assure them that progress is being made and that we will move as fast as we can to get a single equality Bill into a session in Parliament so that we can fulfil our firm manifesto commitment to have one within the life time of this Parliament.
In that spirit, we recently started the work necessary to ensure that there will be legal protection for transsexual people in the field of goods and services. The discrimination law review will also look at further extending public duties to promote equality of opportunity for transsexual people. The output of that review will be the single, simplified framework for equality legislation. As we extend the law into new areas, we have to consider carefully how to frame it.
A number of issues that transsexual people face need to be carefully considered, including complex questions about insurance and pension services. Privacy issues may need to be addressed both in relation to access to facilities and disclosure of previous gender identity. Many interested parties are involved and we need to explore how the law will work in practice. That will take time.
Amendment No. 74 would insert a definition of gender reassignment as
“an individual’s gender representation when a person has proposed, commenced or completed reassignment of gender (within the meaning given section 82(1) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (c. 65)).”
The amendment is consequential to new clause 10, which would insert a new part 4, equivalent to part 3 on sexual orientation, giving the Secretary of State powers to make regulations outlawing discrimination against transsexual people in the provision of goods and services. The amendment is problematic because it introduces a definition of gender reassignment that is inconsistent with that in the Sex Discrimination Act, which defines discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment as discrimination on the ground that a person intends to undergo or is undergoing gender reassignment or has at some time in the past undergone gender reassignment. The difference in wording, particularly the addition of the words “an individual’s gender representation” could cause confusion, not least for the courts and legal practitioners.
Amendment No. 84 would extend the Secretary of State’s order-making powers in part 3 in relation to discrimination or harassment on the ground of sexual orientation to include the ground of “transgender status”. While the discrimination faced by transsexual people in the provision of goods and services has some similarities to those faced by people who are discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, there are a number of issues unique to transsexual people which we need to consider properly. The term “transgender status” is problematic because there is no established legal definition. Without a clear definition, the courts would struggle to uphold the law that would result from the amendment, as was illustrated by the hon. Member for Epping Forest a short time ago.
I understand the intention behind amendments Nos. 71 and 72. Transsexual people are protected from discrimination in employment and vocational training by the Sex Discrimination Act. They will not be covered explicitly in the requirement on public authorities, with the gender duty, to promote equality of opportunity between men and women. However, transsexual people will benefit as men or women from the general obligation to promote equality of opportunity between the sexes.
The effect of amendment No. 71 would be to extend the gender duty to include the promotion of equality of opportunity between transsexual people and others. We believe that it is better to consider that issue under the discrimination law review. There is, of course, nothing to prevent public authorities from ensuring that their public functions or goods and services are provided to transsexuals or transgender people on the basis of equality of opportunity. Indeed, we encourage them to do so.