In comments on my last post, some say that they are relatively unperturbed by the Equality Bill. Only where candidates are equal in all respects will discrimination against men and white people be permitted, they argue - and even then it will be entirely voluntary.
But Andrew Lilico showed yesterday just how naive it is to think that the provisions of this bill allowing sex and racial discrimination will be genuinely voluntary. Recent history certainly backs up his point: just five years after it became legal for unmarried and same sex couples to adopt, it became illegal for religious institutions not to be willing to hand over children to couples unable to provide a mum and a dad.
This bill likewise is about creating an expectation that companies have a racial and 'gender' composition similar to that of Britain as a whole. Companies that do not quite meet expectations may have to publish all data on salaries and certainly will have some explaining to do.
The most controversial elements of this bill only begin to make sense if one starts with the unempirical, socialist assumption that differing outcomes for different groups of people can only be explained by discrimination. In fact, the Equal Opportunities Commission confirmed that the vast majority of the difference between average full time wages for men and women is explained by differences in education, employment experience and career choices.
As for the idea that it will only apply where candidates are equally qualified, who decides if the candidates are equally qualified? Qualities such as experience, academic qualifications, personality and judgement are partly subjective, apples-and-oranges factors. An employer can almost always argue that two candidates were equally qualified, or so it seemed at the time of interview. If this kind of argument is accepted, then parliament has legislated for what approaches an absolute defence for employers who feel bullied into taking on people based on skin colour and sex rather than ability. That's fine for them, but the losers will be so many people who didn't happen to be born non-white or female, and find the hiring process loaded against them from the start.
This bill has potential to significantly harm race relations, businesses, equality of opportunity, merit-based hiring - and so many individuals who through no fault of their own simply don't fall into Harriet Harman's favoured social groups.
