header-logo header-logo

06 September 2007 / Christopher Mccrudden
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Buying equality?

Do government proposals to expand the use of public procurement do enough to promote equality of opportunity? asks Christopher McCrudden

In an important but largely overlooked move, the Department of Communities and Local Government published its consultation, A Framework for Fairness: Proposals for a Single Equality Bill for Great Britain, on 12 June. The proposals, resulting from the work of the Discrimination Law Review (DLR), look to initiate wide-ranging debate during the autumn and beyond about how far governments should go in legislating to promote equality of opportunity.

A significant element in the government’s proposed strategy is to step up the use of public procurement to achieve change in the private sector, as part of the existing statutory equality duties in the areas of race, disability, and gender. The consultation paper says:

“We are keen to ensure that public
authorities build equality considerations into their procurement processes, within the overarching legal and policy framework for public procurement, where this will contribute to the achievement of their equality objectives.”

POLICY SHIFT

This statement may appear anodyne,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
back-to-top-scroll