Equality Bill: Making it work

ILEX Response

Introduction:

ILEX welcomes the opportunity of responding to the above consultation in respect of the shaping of the proposals for a set of specific duties under the Equality Bill.

ILEX welcomes the Equality Bill and the proposal to consolidate and harmonise existing legislation, together with bringing forward additional measures "to strengthen the law to support progress on equality".   ILEX broadly welcomes the provisions in the Bill relating to the socio-economic duty, direct discrimination, disability provisions in schools, and the public sector equality duty.

ILEX has, in anticipation of the Equality Act, created a Single Equality and Diversity Action Plan and Scheme having regard to the eight protected strands, but more specifically addressing our obligations under the disability, race and gender duties.

However ILEX is of the belief that in order to create a coherent and clear set of Specific duties there needs to be greater clarity about the purpose and focus of the General Duty.   ILEX supports the Government's intention to improve equality outcomes, but we believe that there should be more clarity on the face of the Bill as to how the outcomes will be achieved. This requires the outcomes to be more clearly defined.  The Specific duties should, therefore, be aimed at achieving the equality outcomes rather than processes.

The success or otherwise of the Bill will largely depend on the extent to which the public authorities understand how it works and the extent to which they can use it effectively.   A measure of success will be how public authorities are improving access to the provision of services and also making clear progress in ironing out inequalities of outcome. 

The changes will not happen overnight. It needs to be recognised by the Government that a realistic progressive approach may be required by requiring public bodies to initiate steps to eliminate discrimination and achieve equality, rather than 'just pay due regard to do so'.  It recognises the need for the public authority to take positive action to achieve the goals. 

General Comments to Specific Questions:

Questions 1 - 2

The general equality duty confers on public bodies a statutory duty to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited under the Bill, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations across all of these characteristics.  However, ILEX is of the view that the Equality Bill should clarify what is expected of local authorities in meeting the general duty.  This requires further amplification of the general duty.

Questions 3 - 6

ILEX is of the view that one size does not fit all. It is important that the specific duties are sufficiently elastic not to impose unnecessary burdens on the many different types of public bodies that will fall within the remit of the Bill.  The specific duty therefore needs to be proportionate to the size and the resources of the myriad of pubic bodies carrying out many different and diverse functions.

For example, it is important for reviews to take place.  However, for more resource rich or bigger departments, the reviews could be supplemented by annual progress reports.  This may not need be a requirement for smaller public bodies.

Questions 7 - 8

Public authorities should set out the equality objectives having regards to the nature of their duties, their composition of staff and their service users. It should be for public authorities subject to the duty to determine which socio-economic inequalities they are in a position to influence, not any Secretary of State.   In any event, it is not made clear which Secretary of State would set the relevant priority areas.  Would this be determined by the relevant Secretary of State? For example, if the Police are setting equality objectives, would they need to have regard to the priorities set out by the Home Secretary?

ILEX agrees with the proposal not to require public authorities to set equality objectives in respect of each protected characteristic. 

Question 9

See above (Questions 3 - 6)

Questions 10 - 12

No comment

Questions 12 -13

ILEX does not have data to comment on question 12.

As regards question 13, ILEX agrees with the proposal not to require public bodies to report employment data in relation to the other characteristics protected under the duty. 

Question 14

ILEX agrees that, unlike the existing duties, the specific duties should not simply include a requirement to set out a process, but require public authorities to actively access the impact of their polices. That said, ILEX is of the view that it should be a general rule based on proportionality.

Question 15

ILEX already complies with this as a matter of good practice. ILEX therefore supports the inclusion of a specific duty to consult staff, services users and other relevant stakeholders in the development of priorities.

Questions 16 - 24

No comments