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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll