Guernsey Press

Anti-discrimination laws to protect religious beliefs

RELIGIOUS beliefs will be protected under new anti-discrimination laws, but the States voted against including secular beliefs.

Published
Deputy Heidi Soulsby disputed the suggestions that discrimination did not exist in Guernsey. (Picture by Sophie Rabey, 30164177)

It means that people will not be able to claim for discrimination because of beliefs such as feminism and humanism.

Employment & Social Security had wanted to broaden the ground of religion to include secular beliefs, but it was defeated by 20 votes to 16. However, the overall package of legislation looks to be back on track and will return to the States for approval next year, despite coming under a barrage of criticism over the last few days.

Critics were able to chip away at the package, but the core remains intact. Every States member who spoke in the debate went to great pains to stress that they were not against anti-discrimination legislation.

However, the issue for some was the approach taken by ESS and whether it went too far and created a lawyers’ charter.

Deputy Nick Moakes was one of the sceptics.

‘We've seen no research showing what types of discrimination exist and how much of a problem there is in Guernsey, and we have not seen very much of an impact assessment showing how businesses will need to change or how much this will cost them. This is not the first time that the committee has put forward legislation with little or no evidence to support it.’

Deputy Carl Meerveld was also concerned that Guernsey was introducing legislation ‘with bells on’ and that it was an example of a ‘woke, nanny state’ approach.

‘What is the local problem in Guernsey we’re trying to address? Where are the examples of discrimination that have to be legislated against in Guernsey today? Unless there is a real problem in Guernsey, why are we introducing more legislation?’

Alderney representative Steve Roberts lamented that the BBC had stopped showing Morecambe and Wise and he said that was an example of ‘a step too far’.

States members were meant to be discussing just a small part of the discrimination package, but the debate became much broader than that.

The fear from some was that they were opening a Pandora’s box where people could make legal claims based on hurt feelings and whether their boss provided a vegan option at the Christmas dinner.

Deputy Heidi Soulsby thought her colleagues had been reading certain UK tabloids.

‘I do really feel that we’re in danger of believing that the world is as seen on the pages of the Daily Mail. With a population of approaching 70m. of course the odd quirky case will come up in the UK.

‘We’ve seen stupid things, it’s rubbish and the world’s going to hell in a handcart, but this completely ignores the hundreds of thousands for whom that law serves well.’

Deputy Soulsby disputed the suggestions that discrimination did not exist in Guernsey.

‘It would be lovely if we didn’t have to have a discrimination law and that we knew that people were being treated fairly and correctly throughout their lives, but we know that’s not the case, history has shown that.’

Employment & Social Security lost the argument on secular belief, but its main proposition, which was amended, sailed through.

n Yesterday's report quoting Deputy Mark Helyar on a 'little gold mine' for local lawyers should have said on grounds of 'religion or belief', not religious belief.