Today I’m joining fellow chief executives from across the equality and human rights sector in Westminster to mark the fifteenth anniversary of the Equality Act 2010. It’s a moment full of nostalgia for me personally. Working on and towards the 2010 Act, and its predecessor the 2006 Act, was the earliest and probably most formative advocacy work I undertook when I first joined Humanists UK.
Looking back, it was a remarkably positive time for engagement between civil society and government. Under the Blair and Brown administrations, in relation to equality policy, there was a genuine bridge between expert NGOs like ours and the corridors of power. There were open channels for policy discussion; departments seemed to actually care what organisations representing affected individuals thought. I remember ministers of that era in meetings and roundtables to do with the Bills, proactively stating that they saw it as the role and the duty of our sector to speak truth to power, to challenge, and to propose solutions.
It was an environment where a young advocate could not only draft detailed briefings but could actually write clauses that ended up in the final text of the legislation (yes, Section 85, I’m thinking of you!). Of course, many more clauses and arguments didn’t succeed, but the process itself – the engagement, the debates, the peek into the workings of government – was invaluable. It’s an experience, sadly, that few young people working in progressive NGOs have enjoyed in the years since 2010.
Beyond the nostalgia of the process, I’ll also be celebrating much of the substance today. The 2006 and 2010 Acts represented enormous strides forward. For humanists, the explicit prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of ‘religion or belief’ was momentous. In a country whose history has been so profoundly marked by religious division and religiously motivated discrimination, enshrining non-religious belief alongside religious belief in anti-discrimination law was a landmark achievement, signalling a move towards a more inclusive and fairer society where conscience is respected, whether religious or not. The Acts also solidified protections against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender reassignment, vital steps towards recognising the inherent dignity and equal worth of LGBT people.
The Acts embodied a core humanist value: that every person deserves respect and the opportunity to flourish, regardless of their beliefs or their identity. They moved the legal default significantly closer to that ideal.
The full promise of the Equality Act remains unfulfilled. Fifteen years on, it is clear the legislation has not delivered the transformative change it should have for disabled people, who continue to face significant barriers to the flourishing lives they deserve as a matter of justice. Key sections to tackle structural inequality, such as the socio-economic duty, have never been commenced by UK governments. Likewise, the power to explicitly outlaw caste discrimination remains dormant on the statute book.
Even at the time, humanists warned that the Act contained too many exemptions, particularly for religious organisations, allowing them to discriminate in ways that would be unacceptable for secular bodies – a hangover from a less equal past that undermines the Act’s universalist principles. Compounding all this, the very body established to champion and enforce the Act, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, has faced existential challenges through funding cuts and has too often been buffeted externally and internally by polarising ‘culture war’ politics.
So two cheers in practice. But although there is unfinished business, we shouldn’t lose sight of the momentous nature of the Equality Act and the aspirational framework it provides. Anti-discrimination laws, imperfect though they are, remain one of the most potent tools we possess in the ongoing struggle to advance human freedom and happiness.
As humanists, we strive for a society where every single person has the fullest possible freedom of choice and agency in shaping their own life, according to their own reason and values. The only legitimate limitations on that individual freedom are those necessary to protect the equal rights and freedoms of others, ensuring a fair and equitable society for all. No one should have their potential constrained or their choices limited by irrational discrimination, ingrained prejudice, or the undue pressures of religious dogma, inherited tradition, or outmoded laws.
Discrimination is a fundamental barrier to the enjoyment of human rights and human flourishing. Laws like the Equality Act are essential shields against that harm. We must continue to campaign tirelessly to close the gaps, strengthen protections, and ensure proper enforcement. But the Equality Act itself, alongside the broader framework of human rights, still holds out the promise of a better world through the implementation of human law.