SocialistAction 1983–88

The paper of the Socialist League, formerly the International Marxist Group, 1983–88

Tories throw out Sex Equality Bill

· Socialist Action No. 38, 16 December 1983 · p. 12 of the scan · 476 words

The scan: 038-dec-16-1983-SA-UK.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Apple Vision OCR) from a scan of a newspaper page, and the page was cut into articles by machine, at the headlines found by their type size. Nothing has been corrected: expect misread words, text from a neighbouring article, and titles that are the machine reading of the headline, some of them only fragments. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: headline found by type size in the OCR geometry (split_tabloid.py); 4-7 of 7; machine-segmented newspaper page; uncorrected Vision OCR.

page 12 of the scan

The atmosphere became round: 'be as noisy as possible'.

The scenes of women bringing down the fence, while the police and army watched helplessly, Special free book offer! Take out a years inland subscription and we will send you free one of these books:

Thatcher and Friends by John Ross Hard Times by Bob Sutcliffe or Over our Dead Bodies -Women Against the Bomb Introductory offer for new readers: Eight issues for just f2! SEXUAL equality answer given by the MP for Barking The vote was 118 for and 191 against.

The Bill's intention was to simplify existing equality legislation combining the Equal Pay and Sex Discrimination Acts into one and to sharpen up the law in areas where these ACES have Deer SOURC to be weak. If passed the Bill would have: • allowed workers to claim a pro rata rate of pay with full time workers • outlawed sexual harassment discrimination against homosexuals work • given fathers the right to paternity leave • introduced stronger must be subordinated to the needs of the employing class. That was the Victorian Tories to Jo Richardson, and Labour's new measures positive action at schoo and at work • ended discrimination against women in occupational pension schemes • outlawed discriminanon against women i ex cluding them from private pointed out that he supporters were not limited committed feminists, she had also won the backing of the Institute for these measures After detailed ex planation of the measures of the Bill, she ended attacking the ridiculous prejudices that fuelled discrimination against women in our society. Some men, she said, felt that women should not be allowed on snooker tables because nev would m up the cloth. How absurd this was when compared it to the clumsiness of men in the home.

mw many mes have I had to wipe up beer rings home just because men find it impossible to use a mat?' she asked to a barrage of laughter.

But Minister Alan Clarke's reply for the government wasn't so amusing. After a patronising introduction he embarked on nit-picking reply that highlighted legal minutiae that could easily have been ironed out in the committee stage. Then he just managed to mention that he didn't agree with positive discrimination on Coulds 'merit should decide policy. besides. the Bill was impractical because employers would not be able to afford it.... Nutshell Put in a nutshell, the Tories' opposition to the Bill is that they are against women's equality in prin ciple and it would cost too much anyway.

If you ever had any COUNTS that Margaret One MIster Was Hold advance for women, the massed ranks of lories ir the 'no' lobby should dispel your illusions once and for all!

----- pull-quotes -----

spokesperson for women's rights, when she moved her private members Bill in the Commons on Friday.

← Reflections on GreenhamTory assault on the unions →

Something wrong on this page?