Clause 56 - Organisations relating to religion or belief
Equality Bill [Lords]
5:30 pm
Paul Goggins (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Home Office; Wythenshawe and Sale East, Labour)
Once again, we are discussing where precisely to draw the line in exemptions. Some have argued from time to time during the passage of the Bill that it is drawn too narrowly or too widely. I am, however, slightly confused by the hon. Gentleman's comments because he has given the impression that a massive debate has been raging in another place, which has spilled over to our deliberations. That is not my understanding. He quoted my right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Scotland, who said in Committee that exceptions must be based on something between necessity and expedience. She paid tribute to the draftsmen who produced amendments to reflect that judgment. When those amendments were considered in another place, Lord Bishop of Chelmsford spoke warmly in endorsement of the Minister's comments, and the hon. Gentleman's colleague Lord Lester of Herne Hill said:
''My Lords, I echo that remark and pay tribute to the draftsman and to the Government. This is a suitable way of meeting the points which were raised and I am grateful.''—[Official Report, House of Lords, 19 October 2005; Vol. 674, c. 861.]
It appears that, through a careful process of discussion, consideration and further drafting, the House of Lords Committee arrived at a form of words that was acceptable to all parties. We have benefited enormously from that work because they provided us with a form of words that works well.
The hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon argues in favour of reasonable justification. My concern, among others, is that that would place an undue burden on religious and other organisations that are, necessarily, very small. Those organisations often provide, for example, luncheon clubs, sports groups and other low-key, local, but important services, particularly on occasions such as Christmas or Easter. Many of those organisations do not have formal constitutions, and it is right that they should be able to continue their engagement and involvement with the community without having to worry about restricting their membership to people of the same belief or having to open their activities to all. That is why a definition somewhere between necessity and expedience is one that respects the legislation and the need to tackle discrimination.
This is an area of considerable debate and concern, but there is a growing consensus on the right words. I hope that the hon. Gentleman can confirm that that consensus has been reached in another place. If he is having difficulties, I can provide him with the page number.