Clause 26

Part of Equality Bill – in a Public Bill Committee am 1:30 pm ar 18 Mehefin 2009.

Danfonwch hysbysiad imi am ddadleuon fel hyn

Photo of Lynne Featherstone Lynne Featherstone Shadow Minister (Children, Schools and Families), Liberal Democrat Spokeperson (Children, Schools and Families) 1:30, 18 Mehefin 2009

I do not know what is in the gents, but the ladies have adult-size hand dryers and child-size hand dryers. That is very good practice, as such thinking incorporates children in the provision of goods and services. That should rightly apply to a range of public services.

One can go on endlessly thinking of instances, but I shall not hold the Committee up too long with my examples, as they are not exceedingly brilliant. Should a car hire firm offer to provide car seats for children, not just because that is good business, but because it is the law? Obviously, that is good practice and good business, but there is an issue about provision, including in the private sector. Restaurants or instructions are probably the most common examples. Should we think about how to write the instructions on the use of a fire extinguisher, so that a child could use it? Although such things are not necessarily common occurrences, they can involve the provision of public services.

I understand the concerns about cumbersome exemptions, but my understanding is that the Australian Age Discrimination Act outlaws age discrimination in a range of areas beyond employment. That Act is able to set out the differences without them becoming cumbersome and burdensome. Young Equals—I am sure that we have all received one of its briefings—is convinced that those concerns can be overcome by robust legislation. I, too, will be interested to hear the Minister’s response about how we might improve our inclusion of children into society and the protections in respect of goods and services under this part of the Bill.

Clause 26(1)(b) will remove the exclusion of married and civil partners from the goods and services provisions. Our amendment 156 would put that protection right back. I want to explore whether the Minister really has no evidence whatsoever, even on the hypothetical example of a gay bar or club excluding those who are members of a civil partnership because it does not want to admit couples. The amendment is intended to probe the Minister’s thinking, to find out why the Government have removed those two technical characteristics from the provision of goods and services.