Equality Bill

I am grateful that the noble Lord, Lord Lester, has accepted that he has changed his mind—that is possibly a U-turn—but left-wing Irish friend is certainly not a description that I would give to my Chief Whip. I turn to the issue of practicability. The noble Lord, Lord Ouseley, rightly refers to whether or not the legislation will achieve what the clause purports to do. Indeed, most of the arguments put forward by my noble friend Lord Tebbit referred to that. In my Second Reading speech, I did say that outcomes are measurable. It is important to see the context of what I was discussing there—effectively, that there is no point having something in a Bill if it is merely about box-ticking, if the clause does not achieve anything. I return to the concern that I raised when I moved the amendment, which is, in summary, that the Government state in their document that they are not creating new equalities, that the clause will not address discrimination against individuals on account of socioeconomic factors, that it will not directly determine operational decisions and that it will not require bodies to use their resources to remove unequal outcomes. Their document states that no real objective will be achieved. Much research and opinion has been referred to by many Members around the House, which needs to be considered. I may well need to consider those references, and we may well return to this again at Report but, at this stage, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 1 withdrawn. Amendments 2 and 3 not moved. Clause 1 agreed. Clause 2 agreed. Clause 3 agreed. Amendment 4 not moved. Clause 4 : The protected characteristics Amendment 5 Clause 4 : The protected characteristics Amendment 5 Moved by