Equality Act to encompass "caste" discrimination but not social or economic "class"

The UK Government has agreed to amend the Equality Act 2010 to include a new definition of Race to include a form of social stratification known as Caste.

The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill is currently being negotiated through both the House of Lords and the House of Commons in the United Kingdom Parliament.

This Bill already contains a number of provisions designed to reform the work of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and also the repeal certain aspects of the Equality Act 2010 already in force.

The inclusion of Caste, as a new form of Race discrimination, was conceded by the Government. Although, according to the BBC report of the Government's position, Caste will not become a new protected characteristic in its own right.

The final position will not be clear until the Bill is agreed in the substantive by both Houses of Parliament.

At the moment, the Bill has been sent back to the House of Lords for consideration. This process is known as legislative "ping pong" whereby the Bill is sent back and forth until agreement is reached.

If agreement cannot be made, the Government reserves the right to utilise the Parliament Act. This is a legal mechanism created to prevent an indefinite period of legislative ping pong whereby the House of Commons "calls time" on the game if no agreement is reached.

The Government can only use the Parliament Act to push through legislation if no agreement is reached between both Houses of Parliament over the period of one year.

It remains to be seen to what extent the new definition of Race will truly embrace the concept of Caste.

No doubt, it will be left to the Courts to tidy up the legislative mess by a process of tactful interpretation of Parliaments's true intention.

It is disappointing, however, that other forms of social stratification have not been considered as part of the proposed reform. For example, social or economic class.

Given the Government's hostility to pro active legislative intervention and their refusal to bring into force the existing socio economic equality protections within the Equality Act, I doubt any further positive amendments will follow in the near future.

Abolish the Bishops

The House of Lords, which forms part of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, has 26, unelected, Bishops of the Church of England within its membership.  

The Bishops are all from the same religious denomination, they are able to participate in Parliamentary business and they do not have to answer to any particular local community or constituency.  

In a modern 21st Century United Kingdom, should we allow one religious group an automatic right to sit in the House of Lords and have such an important role in the life of our Parliamentary democracy?

It is easy to answer this question in a partisan way.

If you believe that Parliament should be formed as part of a representative democracy, it is difficult to argue that one religious group should be given automatic representation in Parliament to the expense of other communities of faith or belief.

Another argument concerns the legitimacy of having religious representation in Parliament at all.  If we believe that the Government should operate on a secular basis and not subscribe to any one religion, then it follows that religion should play no part in the Parliamentary process.

I have concerns about the way the "Upper House" operates within our constitutional settlement generally, but for this purpose of this article, I shall focus on the "Lords Spiritual" to give the Bishops their proper constitutional title.

The Constitutional Position

The Church of England is the established Church.  The Queen - the Head of State - is also the head of the Church of England.

Parliament sits under the authority of the Queen and the Bishops are members of the House of Lords by virtue of their ecclesiastical role in the established Church.

For this reason, it is difficult to argue that the United Kingdom can ever be a truly secular state.

They are not members of any Political Party but they do always sit on the Government side of the House of Lords.  Their seats are located closest to the Queen; symbolising their loyalty.

No other religious group is represented as the Church of England is the only state Church.

The House of Lords is the Upper House of the British Parliament.  This means that although the Bishops only represent the Church of England, they can also become involved in matters that concern the whole of the United Kingdom and not just the dioceses from which they come.

Constitutional lawyers always argue over the relationship between the Church of England and the State.

Because of the link between the Queen, as Head of the Church of England and also as Head of State and also because Parliament sits under the authority of the Queen, arguments over the role of the Bishops in the House of Lord are often left unresolved.

Petition for Reform

A new petition has been launched on the HM Government e-petitions site.  This petition highlights the constitutional inequality, where one faith group is represented and others not.  It also calls on the House of Lords to become a fully elected second Chamber of Parliament.

There are whole text books dedicated to the subject of the British Constitution.

There are also numerous Government, academic and public media commentaries available on the subject of reform of the House of Lords.

For this reason, I cannot truly do the subject justice in a small article on this Blog.

I have signed the petition calling for reform.

If anything, the current constitutional settlement within the United Kingdom is already in a state of flux.

There is no better time to consider proposals for reform.

The Petition is available by clicking here