On 19 November 2012, the government announced that it was “calling time” on equality impact assessments. We understand the Government's view is that equality issues can be properly considered as part of decision making processes without the need for a full impact assessment being undertaken every time. The intention, therefore, behind scrapping the use of impact assessments is to enable policy makers to use their judgement in equality issues, saving necessary time and costs.
However, given that there is no formal legal requirement to produce equality impact assessments in the first place, Cameron’s remarks do not deliver the peace of mind and relief that he had intended. Despite the alleged scrapping of a non-mandatory step, how far will this have any real impact?
There had already been a change in approach by many Local Authorities when assessing equality issues moving from ‘equality impact assessment’ to an ‘analysis of equality’ (under the Equality Act 2010). This was intended to focus attention more on the quality of the analysis and how it is used in decision making, rather than on the production of a tick box impact assessment. Equality analysis is a way of considering the effect on different groups protected from discrimination by the Equality Act. It involves using equality information, and the results of engagement with protected groups and others, to understand the actual effect or the potential effect of functions, policies or decisions. It can help to identify practical steps to tackle any negative effects or discrimination, to advance equality and to foster good relations.
The issue with scrapping the use of Equality Impact Assessments is that public bodies still need to be able to evidence their compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act. In addition, we are aware that quite often, the outcomes from such assessments are filtered through to key policies in order to achieve ‘joined up’ thinking. If there is no equality impact assessment we consider Local Authorities will still need to document evidence to demonstrate that they have had “due regard” to the relevant duties to ensure they can defend any judicial review applications made relating to their public sector duties.
For further information on the impact of the announcement on you or your organisation, please contact Kate Watkins on 0121 212 7494 or kate.watkins@anthonycollins.com.
We summarise the outcome of the High Court case ruling against Kingston-upon-Thames RBC and which landlords may need to take action and when, regarding compensation for overcharging water bills.
It is important to remember that when it comes to selling services, you must deliver on your promises.
Under section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act (HSWA) 1974, organisations are obligated to avoid public health and safety risks through the conduct of their business.
How does a media-savvy employer ensure a season of festive cheer but without mishap, damage to their reputation or harassment and bullying claims?
Providers need to be alive to the risk of contractors becoming insolvent and how to limit the resulting inevitable disruption.
Housing associations must continue to deliver core functions effectively and compliantly notwithstanding the uncertainty over the standards to which you will be held in the future.
Over the last few years the meaning of “asset management” has changed from being all about repairs to understanding that assets might not stay in an organisation forever.
The Grenfell Tower tragedy has understandably prompted a fundamental reconsideration of how building safety is approached for High-Rise Residential Buildings.
Results from the latest three-yearly valuation of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) are starting to trickle through.
The potential for Brexit with or without a deal causes uncertainty, and credit rating agencies do not like uncertainty.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.