Latest news with #PSED
Powys County Times
15-06-2025
- Politics
- Powys County Times
Opinion: Lib Dem led council must not close Powys day centre
They say 'a society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable'. Yet as highlighted in last week's County Times, the future of the Sylfaen centre at Llanidloes is under threat. Sylfaen is a Powys County Council-owned day service in Llanidloes which offers service users aged 19 to 72 a programme of sensory-based activities including soap making, sensory craft, gardening, cooking and day trips. Yet there are fears that it could close under Powys County Council's Liberal Democrat-led cabinet. Bearing in mind that Disability is a Protected Characteristic under the Public Sector Equality Duty, public organisations have to consider the potential impacts fully and share the impact assessment with those affected. With that in mind, we need assurance that a full impact assessment about the closure of Sylfaen has been done and not a mere tick box. The general duty of the Equality Act 2010 (also known as the Public Sector Equality Duty or PSED) sets out that those subject to the duty must have due regard to the need to: Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Act. Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not. In Wales, the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) goes further and contains express provisions about engagement (Regulation 5) and equality impact assessments (Regulation 8) which are not present in the English PSED. Regulation 8 (1) of Equality Act 2010 (Statutory Duties) (Wales) Regulations 2011, states that: a. assessing the likely impact of its proposed policies and practices on its ability to comply with the general duty; b. assessing the impact of any: 1. policy or practice that the authority has decided to review, 2. revision that the authority proposes to make to a policy or practice, on its ability to comply with that duty; c. monitoring the impact of its policies on its ability to comply with that duty. The reality is Lib Dem led Powys expect volunteers and Direct Payments to plug the gap yet as is well known that's merely further pressure on carers and families.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Equality Act is a gift to grifters, and Labour wants to make it worse
As an undergraduate student, I welcomed the passage of the 2010 Equality Act. As a young minority 'progressive' of Bangladeshi Muslim heritage, I championed the fact that ethnicity and religious belief were enshrined as protected characteristics in British law. But times have changed. A new report published by campaign group Don't Divide Us (DDU) has – quite rightly in my view – identified the Equality Act as a piece of legislation which is contributing towards a more divided and fractured Britain. The research has found that over the last decade, there has been an explosion in the number of tribunal cases for racial discrimination – yet, only one in 20 claims were successful. The educationalist and director of DDU, Dr Alka Sehgal-Cuthbert, has labelled the Equality Act the cornerstone of a grievance culture which is all too ready to resort to 'lawfare' to resolve low-level disputes and imagined slights on the grounds of identity. It has become increasingly apparent that the Equality Act – which should have been a shield to protect people from genuine forms of discrimination – has been used as a sword by those who are anything but interested in the equality of opportunity. This accelerated following the emergence of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement in the UK, which was ultimately America-brained radical-progressive activism in a part of the world which had some of the most robust anti-discrimination protections on the grounds of race, ethnicity, and religion. The rise of the unholy trinity of diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) has threatened to undo much of the incredible progress we have made when it comes to race relations. The pendulum has swung so far in the other direction, minorities have increasingly become the beneficiaries of preferential treatment – often at the expense of white-British men. The Equality Act, and its offshoots such as the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) and Positive Action programmes, has not brought us greater fairness, equality, and harmony. In fact, it has been weaponised in a manner which is diametrically opposed to such ideals. While there will be many on the contemporary British Left who remain incredibly protective over the Equality Act, it is perhaps in their interests to be honest over its impact and explore whether certain provisions should be tightened (if not repealed). While the PSED's current provisions state that public authorities have due regard to the need to 'foster good relations between people', this is overly vague and nebulous – there should be an explicit expectation for such bodies and agencies to promote economic, social, and cultural integration. Positive action schemes are supposed to develop the skills of people from 'underrepresented' or 'disadvantaged' groups – but the obsession with race and sexual orientation means that disability is all too often overlooked. To be blunt, it is not viewed as a 'fashionable' protected characteristic by many 'social-justice' activists. The alternative, of course, is doing away with the Equality Act altogether – which is unlikely to happen under a Labour government which wants to bring in a Race Equality Act, doubling down on the original legislation. But it could be a future manifesto pledge for parties of the Right. It could be scrapped in its entirety or replaced with a fresh Equality of Opportunity legislation which has a strong emphasis on regional inequality and seeks to address cultural deprivation in left-behind communities. As currently constituted, the Equality Act's future is far from certain. And so-called 'anti-racists' who have pursued the equality of outcome over opportunity, only have themselves to blame. Dr Rakib Ehsan is the author of Beyond Grievance Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
North Wales Chronicle
30-05-2025
- Politics
- North Wales Chronicle
Liberty in legal action against equalities watchdog over gender consultation
The campaign group said it has submitted legal papers to the High Court alleging the Equality and Human Rights Commission's (EHRC) six-week consultation period on the new guidance is 'unlawful', with anything less than 12 weeks 'wholly insufficient'. The Supreme Court ruled in April that said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The equalities regulator published lengthy draft guidance earlier this month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports. The commission at that stage said it had tripled the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks, 'in light of the level of public interest, as well as representations from stakeholders in Parliament and civil society'. But Liberty is arguing this is not long enough and 'there is no good reason why it should not be' at least 12 weeks. The human rights organisation said it sent a pre-action letter to the EHRC earlier this week and has now submitted legal papers to the High Court and is waiting to see if a judge decides whether to proceed to a hearing based on its arguments. The group said it is also arguing that by having a consultation period shorter than 12 weeks, the commission is 'in breach of the public sector equality duty (PSED)' to 'eliminate unlawful discrimination'. The latest attempted legal challenge comes two weeks after campaign group the Good Law Project (GLP) said it had taken the first step of a legal challenge against the commission over the aspect of the guidance related to trans people's use of toilets, which it is arguing is 'wrong in law'. The interim guidance said trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets, although it added that trans people 'should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use'. More detailed draft guidance earlier this month indicated a birth certificate could be requested by a sports club or hospital if there is 'genuine concern' about what biological sex a person is. It said people can be asked to confirm their birth sex if it is 'necessary and proportionate for a service provider, those exercising public functions or an association to know an individual's birth sex to be able to discharge their legal obligations'. It cautioned that any such question 'should be done in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. The commission added that if there is 'genuine concern about the accuracy of the response to a question about birth sex, then a birth certificate could be requested'. The consultation on the draft guidance runs until June 30, with women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson likely to be presented with the finished guidance for approval in July. Akiko Hart, Liberty's director, said: 'We have taken legal action today because the consultation period set out by the EHRC is unlawful. 'As a public body, the EHRC has a legal duty to conduct a fair and lawful consultation process that allows everyone affected by a decision enough time to respond to it. 'Instead, they have tried to speed through sweeping changes to their guidance, initially giving just two weeks to people to respond to nearly 60 pages of amendments when printed out. Anything less than a minimum of 12 weeks on this issue is wholly insufficient and simply does not comply with the law. 'The EHRC's guidance will have life-changing implications for how all of us access vital services, from jobs, schooling, social clubs we might join, all the way up to how the armed forces operate. In particular, it will fundamentally change the ways in which trans people are able to safely participate in society, as well as how businesses and service providers operate. 'It is a fundamental part of our democracy that we are all given a fair opportunity to make our voices heard about any decision that impacts us. We urge the EHRC to extend the consultation period to at least 12 weeks, just as its previous consultation on this code of practice was. There is no good reason why it should not be.' An EHRC spokesperson said: 'We are unable to comment on any legal action at this stage.'
Leader Live
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Leader Live
Liberty in legal action against equalities watchdog over gender consultation
The campaign group said it has submitted legal papers to the High Court alleging the Equality and Human Rights Commission's (EHRC) six-week consultation period on the new guidance is 'unlawful', with anything less than 12 weeks 'wholly insufficient'. The Supreme Court ruled in April that said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The equalities regulator published lengthy draft guidance earlier this month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports. The commission at that stage said it had tripled the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks, 'in light of the level of public interest, as well as representations from stakeholders in Parliament and civil society'. But Liberty is arguing this is not long enough and 'there is no good reason why it should not be' at least 12 weeks. The human rights organisation said it sent a pre-action letter to the EHRC earlier this week and has now submitted legal papers to the High Court and is waiting to see if a judge decides whether to proceed to a hearing based on its arguments. The group said it is also arguing that by having a consultation period shorter than 12 weeks, the commission is 'in breach of the public sector equality duty (PSED)' to 'eliminate unlawful discrimination'. The latest attempted legal challenge comes two weeks after campaign group the Good Law Project (GLP) said it had taken the first step of a legal challenge against the commission over the aspect of the guidance related to trans people's use of toilets, which it is arguing is 'wrong in law'. The interim guidance said trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets, although it added that trans people 'should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use'. More detailed draft guidance earlier this month indicated a birth certificate could be requested by a sports club or hospital if there is 'genuine concern' about what biological sex a person is. It said people can be asked to confirm their birth sex if it is 'necessary and proportionate for a service provider, those exercising public functions or an association to know an individual's birth sex to be able to discharge their legal obligations'. It cautioned that any such question 'should be done in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. The commission added that if there is 'genuine concern about the accuracy of the response to a question about birth sex, then a birth certificate could be requested'. The consultation on the draft guidance runs until June 30, with women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson likely to be presented with the finished guidance for approval in July. Akiko Hart, Liberty's director, said: 'We have taken legal action today because the consultation period set out by the EHRC is unlawful. 'As a public body, the EHRC has a legal duty to conduct a fair and lawful consultation process that allows everyone affected by a decision enough time to respond to it. 'Instead, they have tried to speed through sweeping changes to their guidance, initially giving just two weeks to people to respond to nearly 60 pages of amendments when printed out. Anything less than a minimum of 12 weeks on this issue is wholly insufficient and simply does not comply with the law. 'The EHRC's guidance will have life-changing implications for how all of us access vital services, from jobs, schooling, social clubs we might join, all the way up to how the armed forces operate. In particular, it will fundamentally change the ways in which trans people are able to safely participate in society, as well as how businesses and service providers operate. 'It is a fundamental part of our democracy that we are all given a fair opportunity to make our voices heard about any decision that impacts us. We urge the EHRC to extend the consultation period to at least 12 weeks, just as its previous consultation on this code of practice was. There is no good reason why it should not be.' An EHRC spokesperson said: 'We are unable to comment on any legal action at this stage.'
Glasgow Times
30-05-2025
- Politics
- Glasgow Times
Liberty in legal action against equalities watchdog over gender consultation
The campaign group said it has submitted legal papers to the High Court alleging the Equality and Human Rights Commission's (EHRC) six-week consultation period on the new guidance is 'unlawful', with anything less than 12 weeks 'wholly insufficient'. The Supreme Court ruled in April that said the words 'woman' and 'sex' in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex, after a challenge against the Scottish Government by campaign group For Women Scotland. The equalities regulator published lengthy draft guidance earlier this month related to trans people's use of certain spaces including toilets and participation in sports. The commission at that stage said it had tripled the length of time for feedback from an original proposal of two weeks, 'in light of the level of public interest, as well as representations from stakeholders in Parliament and civil society'. But Liberty is arguing this is not long enough and 'there is no good reason why it should not be' at least 12 weeks. The human rights organisation said it sent a pre-action letter to the EHRC earlier this week and has now submitted legal papers to the High Court and is waiting to see if a judge decides whether to proceed to a hearing based on its arguments. The group said it is also arguing that by having a consultation period shorter than 12 weeks, the commission is 'in breach of the public sector equality duty (PSED)' to 'eliminate unlawful discrimination'. Women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson will be presented with the guidance for approval (Ben Whitley/PA) The latest attempted legal challenge comes two weeks after campaign group the Good Law Project (GLP) said it had taken the first step of a legal challenge against the commission over the aspect of the guidance related to trans people's use of toilets, which it is arguing is 'wrong in law'. The interim guidance said trans women 'should not be permitted to use the women's facilities' in workplaces or public-facing services like shops and hospitals, with the same applying for trans men using men's toilets, although it added that trans people 'should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use'. More detailed draft guidance earlier this month indicated a birth certificate could be requested by a sports club or hospital if there is 'genuine concern' about what biological sex a person is. It said people can be asked to confirm their birth sex if it is 'necessary and proportionate for a service provider, those exercising public functions or an association to know an individual's birth sex to be able to discharge their legal obligations'. It cautioned that any such question 'should be done in a sensitive way which does not cause discrimination or harassment'. The commission added that if there is 'genuine concern about the accuracy of the response to a question about birth sex, then a birth certificate could be requested'. The consultation on the draft guidance runs until June 30, with women and equalities minister Bridget Phillipson likely to be presented with the finished guidance for approval in July. Akiko Hart, Liberty's director, said: 'We have taken legal action today because the consultation period set out by the EHRC is unlawful. 'As a public body, the EHRC has a legal duty to conduct a fair and lawful consultation process that allows everyone affected by a decision enough time to respond to it. 'Instead, they have tried to speed through sweeping changes to their guidance, initially giving just two weeks to people to respond to nearly 60 pages of amendments when printed out. Anything less than a minimum of 12 weeks on this issue is wholly insufficient and simply does not comply with the law. 'The EHRC's guidance will have life-changing implications for how all of us access vital services, from jobs, schooling, social clubs we might join, all the way up to how the armed forces operate. In particular, it will fundamentally change the ways in which trans people are able to safely participate in society, as well as how businesses and service providers operate. 'It is a fundamental part of our democracy that we are all given a fair opportunity to make our voices heard about any decision that impacts us. We urge the EHRC to extend the consultation period to at least 12 weeks, just as its previous consultation on this code of practice was. There is no good reason why it should not be.' An EHRC spokesperson said: 'We are unable to comment on any legal action at this stage.'
