Equalities Review: Panel meeting, 17 November 2005

Review Panel meeting, 17 November 2005 at 2.00pm

22 Whitehall
London

Review Panel
Trevor Phillips (Chair)
Dame Judith Mayhew Jonas
Sir Robert Kerslake

Review Team
Rosie Seymour
Cathy Francis
Stephen Earl
Uma Moorthy
Giovanni Razzu
Sarah Martyn

Nick Pearce
Carol Lake

Trevor reported on some recent meetings he had undertaken:

A presentation to the All Party Parliamentary Group on Equality.
A meeting with Baroness Prosser, Chair of the Women and Work Commission, it was agreed that they would keep in touch particularly ahead of publication of the two reports in January;
Alan Johnson, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, it was agreed that there would be a follow up meeting in early January to discuss the interim report.

Angela gave a presentation on the DLR [PDF 219KB, 4 pages]. The following comments and questions were raised in discussion:

Helpful to have the presentation to ensure that the DLR and the Equalities Review are consistent and harmonised
International research highlighted the different models of legislation in existence, much of the GB legislation has been specific and reactive, although the Human Rights legislation does now set out some clear underpinning principles
Need to consider what is the determining factor for the direction in which we are travelling, or are we stuck where we are
How could the law work to challenge authorities, particularly where the communities it covers are so different
The two reviews need to stand back and think about the wider relationships with central and local government policies in order not to undermine what has already been done, and to ensure that public duties flow from them
Need to consider whether the new CEHR should have powers to review government policies, and ensure government departments are consistent with Human Rights and promoting equality of outcome
A proper public audit that is compelling and transparent is required
The DLR team had talked to business who highlighted the need to tackle attitudes in wider society, rather than just leaving it to employers to challenge issues such as homophobia
Both reviews will need to consider the limitations of law, including around its impact in bringing about cultural change
Angela and Trevor would have a further conversation before Christmas, and Angela would come to talk to the Panel again at a future meeting.

A presentation was given as an update on the possible project looking at persistent disadvantage. This was followed by a discussion:

Findings at this stage are exploratory, to identify the scope of the work
Very preliminary and not robust enough for wider dissemination
The figures around employment gap and penalty would be broken down to show the compensatory effect of education
Panel agreed that this was an area of interest for them and were keen to get further work underway
Rosie and Trevor would have a further conversation, and then discuss further requirements with Richard and Morten.

Tania gave an outline presentation around measuring equality [PDF 79KB, 11 pages]. The following points were made in discussion:

The panel were very interested in exploring the measurement of autonomy, which is currently at an early stage of consideration at LSE
What is the underlying driver of change
What counts, and what doesn't
How to consider the effects of differences in values
Rosie agreed to talk further to Tania.

Trevor introduced his plans for drafting the interim report. The following points were made in discussion:

The report would need to set out how the world is in January 2006
The report would highlight that the Panel is looking fundamentally at equalities
The report will also set out consideration of how public policy can impact on reducing inequalities, though recognising that only so much will be able to be achieved with legislation and policy changes, a more radical attitudinal and cultural shift may be needed
The report will have four key aspects setting out the objective trends, consideration of the effect of public policy, what has changed independently of policy and where we haven't yet found answers
The following points in particular would be considered:
- how much disadvantage happens in the early years
- what are the effects of trigger points or life event changes (such as change of partnership status, leaving institutional life, retirement) on inequalities
- what are the intractables and persistent inequalities.
Rosie agreed to send the ODPM ‘futures’ work to the Panel, and the Panel will need to ensure the report is ‘future-proofed’ as far as possible
The awayday on 6 December would be spent going though some sections of the report; the document would contain what the panel has learnt, although may not always be clear about what it meant.

The Panel asked for papers to be sent by email rather than hard copy.