header-logo header-logo

16 November 2011 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7490 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

Equality off balance

HLE blogger Declan O’Dempsey considers the behaviour of the government over the equality duties under the Equality Act 2010

"Do we consider equality of opportunity to be a fundamental value of our society? Looking at the behaviour of the government in relation to the equality duties under the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010), one might be tempted to think not.

In the recent attempt at dismantling the effectiveness of the public sector equality duties under the EqA 2010, two approaches have been adopted by the government. One is the straightforward use of power. The EqA 2010 permitted a government to make regulations on the approach that certain public authorities would have to adopt in relation to the public sector equality duties. The government decided that authorities should not be “burdened” with the requirement to publish the volume of information that the previous government had required them to produce in order to demonstrate that they were complying with the public sector equality duty.

Instead, the government stated that the emphasis would be on authorities being ‘transparent’ about the way in which they were complying with the duty. A piece of red tape burnt quietly on the bonfire, and the regulations that were produced required these authorities to set an objective but did not require them to take any particular steps in pursuit of that objective. They would be judged, it was argued, on the same basis as any other public authority: had they had due regard to the equality objectives contained in s 149 of EqA 2010?

The second line of attack is rather less straightforward. It is a kind of ‘nudge’ approach to the application of laws by administrative bodies. Thus Eric Pickles’s aphoristic best value guidance suggested that local authorities should not feel obliged to gather diversity data concerning service users...”

Continue reading at www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Issue: 7490 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll