Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Equality Bill

Labour promised in the 2005 Manifesto that we would have an Equality Bill. So the introduction next month is keeping an election promise.
I hate discrimination in all forms, its one of the main reasons I got involved in politics. I'm proud that we are doing this even in difficult times. Nobody else would.

The Bill has 5 main points. It will:
* introduce a groundbreaking new law to help narrow the gap between rich and poor;
* shine a light on the hidden pay unfairness against women at work;
* end the last lawful discrimination which is against older people;
* allow employers – if they want to – to make their workforce more diverse by choosing for example a woman or black person who was equally suitable for the job; and
* require public authorities – like councils – to use their purchasing power to drive equality when buying goods and services from the private sector.

It was Labour governments that introduced the Race Relations Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Sex Discrimination Act, new legal rights for disabled people and changed the law to allow gay and lesbian “civil partnerships”.
Labour governments always stand up for equality.
When the Tories were in government they did nothing to press forward on equality – instead they brought in the notorious homophobic “clause 28”.

The new Equality Bill will provide a strong legal framework. It will become law – after being debated by Parliament – in about autumn 2010. But to put flesh on the bones and to make these new measures work in practice we need a Labour government. This is an important law and it’s another good reason to keep Labour in government.
Many party members, trade unionists and others have campaigned for all the things that are in the Bill.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

This law enshrines into statute an inbuilt assumption that women have the right to make the personal decision to take years of from their career and yet have the same rate of renumeration as a man/woman who have dedicated those years to the furtherment of his/her career / company.

What does that have to do with fairness and equality ?

I am sick to the back teeth with the Labour party which I steadfastly voted for piling tax upon tax upon me as a single childless person and then discriminating against me in terms of service provision and workplace leglisation.

Why should I vote for this ?

Anonymous said...

This law enshrines into statute an inbuilt assumption that women have the right to make the personal decision to take years of from their career and yet have the same rate of renumeration as a man/woman who have dedicated those years to the furtherment of his/her career / company.

What does that have to do with fairness and equality ?

I am sick to the back teeth with the Labour party which I steadfastly voted for piling tax upon tax upon me as a single childless person and then discriminating against me in terms of service provision and workplace leglisation.

Why should I vote for this ?

Anonymous said...

So you hate discrimination yet your government discriminates against Gurkhas who have faithfully supported this country for centuries, oh dear David Labour is truly in big difficulties,time to wake up and smell the coffee

Anonymous said...

David - what rights do unborn children have under this Equality Bill?

Ben Kelly, Japan.

Peter Checksfield said...

Do you think it's right that people under the age of 21 can still get paid a lower rate for doing the same work as everyone else?

Cllr David Green said...

Not if they truely are doing exactly the same work

Anonymous said...

The minimum wage act makes no distinction as to the nature of the work undertaken by young people.

It assumes they will be doing lesser work with an element of training to it and so forth and thus can legitimately be payed less.

The key word here is assumes, in reality the picture is mixed with the worst employers being allowed to arbitarily pay less purely on the basis of age. Another example of inequality being enshrined into law by the labour government.

Peter Checksfield said...

Also, as young people get a lower wage until they're almost 21, it's quite conceivable that they could be doing the same job for almost 5 years, whereas someone older (including disabled &/or elderly people who in theory may be not quite as capable at doing many jobs as fitter & younger people) can walk into a job on the first day with full pay.

I find it a shame that so few politicians have strong feelings about this, & if I was more cynical I'd think it was because those being discriminated against are either unlikely or unable to vote...