Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill: Lords second reading and Lords Committee stage

Equality and human rights impact statement

Clause 56: Amendments to the EHRC's remit

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (‘the Commission’) has examined the government’s proposals to use the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill to amend the Equality Act 2006 and remove or amend some of its powers. The Commission concludes that the government could better use this opportunity to strengthen its accountability to Parliament, thereby making it better able to fulfil its mandate as Britain’s equality regulator and a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) in accordance with the Paris Principles.
The Commission would also stress the importance of functions that the government is removing from its remit. For example, the conciliation, helpline and grants functions have been crucial in ensuring people are able to access the protections of equality and human rights law. The Commission is of the view that ensuring these functions continue to be provided is more important than the question of who provides them.
A separate briefing has been issued on clauses 57, 58 and 74 (third party harassment, discrimination questionnaires, and equal pay audits).

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (‘the Commission’) has examined the government’s proposals to use the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill to amend the Equality Act 2006 and remove or amend some of its powers.
The Commission concludes that the government could better use this opportunity to strengthen its relationship with Parliament, thereby making it better able to fulfil its mandate as Britain’s equality regulator and a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) in accordance with the Paris Principles.
The Commission would also stress the importance of functions that the government has removed from its remit. For example, the conciliation, helpline and grants functions have been crucial in ensuring people are able to access the protections of equality and human rights law. The Commission is of the view that ensuring these functions continue to be provided is more important than the question of who provides them. The Commission does maintain that the rationale for removing management of the helpline no longer applies given the substantial improvements in its management and performance.
A separate briefing has been issued on clauses 57, 58 and 74 (third party harassment, discrimination questionnaires, and equal pay audits).

Third party harassment

The Commission’s analysis points to the need to preserve the clause related to third party harassment of employees in the Equality Act 2010. The identity-based nature of discriminatory harassment means that the Equality Act 2010 is the best place to address it and the other remedies suggested as alternatives are not appropriate.
The Commission has found evidence of the prevalence of third party harassment and its impact. Repealing the provision now would be premature, as there is a need for a better evidence base on the number of claims brought under the new provision.

Discrimination questionnaires

The Commission’s analysis has also pointed to the need to preserve the clause for obtaining information on discrimination cases in the Equality Act 2010. Our analysis does not support the government’s suggestion that questionnaires may be used for ‘fishing exercises’.
Experience from the Commission's legal casework suggests the use of the question and answer forms leads to a reduction in claims proceeding to the tribunal or court. Removing the structured form may place more onerous demands on businesses dealing with discrimination claims.

Equal pay audits

The Commission’s analysis finds the government’s proposal to extend the powers of employment tribunals to require employers to conduct an equal pay audit is a very welcome development. This will introduce a mechanism to deal with potential discrimination that is evidenced by pay gaps.

Third party harassment

The Commission’s analysis points to the need to preserve the clause related to third party harassment of employees in the Equality Act 2010. The identity-based nature of discriminatory harassment means that the Equality Act 2010 is the best place to address it and the other remedies suggested as alternatives are not appropriate.
The Commission has found evidence of the prevalence of third party harassment and its impact. Repealing the provision now would be premature, as there is a need for a better evidence base on the number of claims brought under the new provision.

Discrimination questionnaires

The Commission’s analysis has also pointed to the need to preserve the clause for obtaining information on discrimination cases in the Equality Act 2010. Our analysis does not support the government’s suggestion that questionnaires may be used for ‘fishing exercises’.
Experience from the Commission's legal casework suggests the use of the question and answer forms leads to a reduction in claims proceeding to the tribunal or court. Removing the structured form may place more onerous demands on businesses dealing with discrimination claims.

Equal pay audits

The Commission’s analysis finds the government’s proposal to extend the powers of employment tribunals to require employers to conduct an equal pay audit is a very welcome development. This will introduce a mechanism to deal with potential discrimination that is evidenced by pay gaps.

Last Updated: 12 Nov 2012