It is high time that all forms of discrimination were tackled in a uniform, coherent way
The Guardian – Comment Is Free – 14 March 2007
QUESTION: What is the one thing you would most like to see happen by this time next year?
We need a comprehensive Equal Rights Act to consolidate and standardise all equality laws in a single, all-inclusive legal framework, based on the gold standard of the race equality laws.
Without harmonised equality legislation, the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights will not be able to tackle all forms of discrimination with equal effectiveness.
The current uneven patchwork of equality laws is unjust and bad for community relations. It sends a signal that some people are deemed more worthy and deserving than others.
Instead of many different equality laws, it is time that all forms of discrimination were tackled in a uniform, coherent way. Existing legal protection against discrimination based on gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity and religion or belief should be upgraded to the same high standard that already prevails for race discrimination.
This upgraded protection should also be extended to people who currently have no legal redress at all: the victims of discrimination on the grounds of marital status, social background, genetic inheritance, physical appearance, area of residence and medical condition. Equality is a right for all, not just for some.
Addendum
With regard to extending protection against discrimination to new categories of people who currently have no protection:
What I am proposing is to outlaw is irrelevant, petty, unjustified discrimination that is motivated by prejudice, as opposed to discrimination based on a person’s ability to do a job and so on.
For example:
Genetic inheritance: gene research suggests that certain people may be more likely to suffer from heart disease and cancer, or be more prone to alcoholism and other self-abusive traits. Gene screening may in future be used by employers to “weed out” job candidates who are deemed to have “unsuitable” genes. Similar genetic discrimination could also be applied by house or life insurers, or by mortgage companies. If such discrimination is permissible, it would have devastating effects on the life chances of people born with the “wrong” genes.
Physical appearance: It cannot be right that people suffer exclusion because of their size, looks and so on. But this does not mean that any selectivity with regard to physical appearance would be unlawful. Discrimination would only be illegal if a certain physical appearance (such as facial disfigurement) was not a requirement to do the job effectively. So model agencies would not be obliged to employ facially disfigured models, but they could not lawfully refuse to hire a facially disfigured person as a photographer or a delivery driver.
Area of residence: There is increasing discrimination based on the area of the country in which people live. Taxis and couriers should not be allowed to refuse to pick up and deliver to people in particular neighbourhoods, as currently happens. Likewise, the “postcode lottery” in health care and treatment should be prohibited.
Medical condition: people with certain medical conditions face stigma, bias, and unequal treatment, even though they are not infectious and are not diminished in their ability to do a job. Discrimination by employers, landlords, holiday companies, restaurant owners and others against well, able and competent people with HIV, MS, sickle cell and other medical conditions is not justified and should be unlawful.