§ 2.38 p.m.
§ The MARQUESS of DONEGALLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what future they envisage for the Equal Opportunities Commission.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE: HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)My Lords, the Government see a continuing role for the Equal Opportunities Commission; however, our detailed policies regarding the Commission's work are being worked out.
§ The MARQUESS of DONEGALLMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Are the Government aware that any review—and I understood the noble 1418 Lord to say that one was being undertaken —of the work of the Equal Opportunities Commission, if it is to be a useful review on behalf of the taxpayers, need occupy only a very short time? Are the Government further aware that it would be extremely difficult to take seriously their intention to economise and give the taxpayers good value for their money if they continue to employ this organisation in any form whatever?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, the Equal Opportunities Commission's budget will be included in the Government's overall review of public expenditure.
§ Lord LEATHERLANDMy Lords, does the noble Lord agree that there are still many examples of discrimination which operate to the detriment of men? Is he, for example, aware of the fact that if a Peer marries his wife becomes a Lady with a capital " L ", whereas if a Peeress (or woman Peer) marries, her husband remains plain " Mr "? That is a scandalous example of discrimination.
§ Lord BELSTEADIf that is the case, my Lords, it is a matter for the Equal Opportunities Commission. I should like to point out to the noble Lord and to my noble friend that the Commission is, of course, independent in the day-to-day conduct of its business.
§ Lord HATCH of LUSBYMy Lords, will the noble Lord comment on the statement contained in the Conservative Political Centre's recent publication The Quango Explosion, that the Equal Opportunities Commission employs a total of 400 staff? Will he tell the House the actual number of staff currently employed by the Commission?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, 171.
§ [See Personal Statement: col. 2035.]
§ Lord BOSTON of FAVERSHAMMy Lords, will the noble Lord bear in mind that the work of the Commission is regarded as very important indeed, not only here at home, but abroad as well, and that some of your Lordships who have represented this country abroad—I am thinking particularly of the United Nations —have found it of immense value to be able to refer to the work of this Commission, especially when dealing with human 1419 rights matters and in trying to encourage other countries to advance the cause of human rights? Will he accept, therefore, that it is vitally important that nothing is done to impede the work of this Commission, both for national and international reasons?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I accept what the noble Lord has said. He mentioned human rights. It might be for the information of your Lordships if I remind the House that the Commission has published discussion documents on such subjects as taxation and the pension age. It has published its findings on credit facilities for women and on services available from building societies for women. Full details of those and other matters are in the Commission's annual reports, the third of which was published on 14th June. However, I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Boston of Faversham, will agree that none the less the Commission's budget must be included in the Government's overall review of public expenditure.
§ Lord MURRAY of GRAVESENDMy Lords, regarding the question which my noble friend Lord Hatch of Lusby asked, will the noble Lord not agree that the figure of 400 — compared with 171 which the Minister mentioned—is just a blatant lie by the Conservative Political Central Office?
§ Lord BELSTEADNo, my Lords. Perhaps we were just not too good at figures.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, if the Government are genuinely committed to the policy of equal treatment, will they reconsider the policy advocated in their Manifesto of allowing wives to come to the United Kingdom to reside with husbands who are United Kingdom citizens, while in the future denying entry to men who marry United Kingdom citizens?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I think I am right in saying that the Commission is responsible for dealing with sex discrimination and equal pay. I believe that the noble Lord's question falls within the scope of race relations. If the noble Lord would care to table a Question about that, I should be only too ready to do my best to reply on another occasion.
§ Lord PITT of HAMPSTEADMy Lords, will the noble Lord not agree that, in fact, it is a case of sex discrimination?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, if I may, I should like to think about that and will write to the noble Lord. If the noble Lord feels that my answer was misconceived and would like to table a Question, I should be at his disposal to answer it on an appropriate future occasion.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, by that time it will be too late because the House will have risen for the Recess. Will the Minister not reconsider, as a matter of urgency, this policy of denying entry to men who marry United Kingdom citizens, in view of the fact that, if we seek to discriminate against women as regards entry into the United Kingdom at the ports, such a policy by the Government will undermine the equal treatment of women as compared to men within the boundaries of the United Kingdom?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, my answer to the noble Lord's substantive question is " No ". If the noble Lord would like to table a Question, I repeat that I am at the disposal of your Lordships to do my best to give whatever satisfaction I can to noble Lords who wish to ask me further Questions.
§ The EARL of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, and his complaint that there might not be time to answer a Question, is it not the case that the Prime Minister has promised a Statement on immigration before the House rises?
§ Lord MISHCONMy Lords, will the Minister reflect upon his eventual reply to my noble friend Lord Hatch of Lusby? Will he note that the Labour Party did not take an equal opportunity of being inaccurate in its figures in the general election? Therefore, will he report the matter to the Equal Opportunities Commission?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I am delighted to tell the noble Lord that the noble Baroness, Lady Lockwood, who is the very distinguished chairman of the Commission, is present and has been listening. If she wishes to discuss these matters with my right honourable friend or any of the junior Ministers, we are at her disposal.