Not really, as the section you have quoted can also be used to discriminate. Eg., lets take for example the following from your quote:
"(b)participation in an activity by persons who share a protected characteristic is disproportionately low."
This is so open ended, that you could ignore a whole range of evidence to get more women into a workplace when there are a shortage of women actually applying.
To put it another way, if you ran say a computer company, of mostly men, and had a round of recruitment, you could pick as many women as you wanted (assuming approx. equal qualifications) and not be accused of discrimination, but to do the reverse would put you at risk, as the men applying would not be considered a protected group, but the women would be. So you could employ said women on the grounds of them being women.
The issue here would be that who's to say that there is a problem? If few from a group wanted to work for said company, they would constantly be trying to employ from that group over others. But it would appear that there is a problem, when it was just that few wanted to work for them.
