header-logo header-logo

02 June 2011 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7468 / Categories: Features , Public , Discrimination , Human rights , Employment
printer mail-detail

Signs of retreat

Is the government backtracking on equality duties, asks Charles Pigott

IN BRIEF

  • The latest version of the “quick start” guide to the public sector equality duty has been issued, six weeks after the government’s policy review paper.
  • They signal that the specific duties imposed on public sector bodies in England under the Equality Act 2010 will be less onerous than under previous legislation.

One of the most significant changes introduced by the Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) was the introduction of a public sector equality duty which embraced not only the three strands where such a duty already applied (race, sex and disability) but five additional protected characteristics: age, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, religion or belief, and sexual orientation. The duty is set out in s 149 of EqA 2010 and came into effect on 5 April 2011.

Section 149 spells out the matters to which a public authority must have “due regard” in the exercise of its functions, and also makes it clear that the same duty applies

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
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
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’
back-to-top-scroll