Mr. Niall Crowley:

In terms of legislation we can work with, I have already highlighted the disability ground and the complexity of that. I would also highlight the complexity of the religion ground, which refers to "religious background" and "religious outlook". How clear is that? Have we heard any complaints about the religion ground? No, we have not. How clear is the Traveller community ground? How do I prove that I am a Traveller? Have we heard of any difficulty with that ground? No, we have not.

First, the level of clarity or certainty sought by IBEC seems to be unreasonable. The second point is that the level of clarity and certainty that is provided is quite significant when compared with other European equal treatment legislation which has much more limited definitions. In some cases, the term used is "social origin", while in Belgium "wealth" is used. That legislation, which has much more limited definitions, has been seen to work very effectively once it settles down. It took a year or two to settle down. The same was true with regard to the HAP scheme, for example. It took a year or two for that to settle down for both sides and for cases to begin to emerge and a culture of compliance to build. It is no less certain than at least three of the other grounds in our current legislation. It is more certain and more clear than the way it is dealt with in human rights covenants to which we have signed up and in other European legislation.

In reality, provisions like this do not catch good employers who are concerned about equality and diversity. Good employers who are thus concerned do not deploy irrelevant characteristics, whatever they might mean, in their selection of people. They select them on the basis of clear and necessary characteristics. They do not get caught on issues like family background and not knowing what that means because they choose the candidate who is the best person for the job. I agree with IBEC that many employers have geared up very effectively to the nine ground equality legislation. It is not going to require a change of mindset for them to keep in mind that there is another set of irrelevant characteristics that should not be taken into account. Those characteristics are quite well laid out and are signalled more clearly than in many other European countries. I do not see that there are issues of certainty or clarity in this.

It is hugely important for the people who experience this discrimination to have this ground in the law so that they are empowered to challenge the situation and to be agents of their own destiny. It is also hugely important for society because when we begin to treat different types of discrimination differently we create tensions and divisions in society; tensions and divisions that we can see clearly in other European countries at present. If one looks at Brexit in Britain and the socioeconomic status versus identity status debate that is going on, that is hugely destructive for society because there is a perception that some groups get treated differently from others. It is important for our society that we break that before it begins here and include ten grounds in our legislation.