Home Page | Equality and Human Rights Commission



Equality and Human Rights Commission

Minutes of the Forty Fifth Meeting of the Wales Committee

Wednesday 13 September 2018

Present

June Milligan (Chair)

Alison Parken

Andrew Edwards

Faith Walker

Geraint Hopkins

Martyn Jones

Nicola Williams

Rocio Cifuentes

Sophie Howe

Caroline Waters (EHRC Deputy Chair)

EHRC

Ruth Coombs (Head of Wales)

Melanie Field (Executive Director – Wales, Corporate Strategy & Policy)

Geraint Rees (Senior Associate, Wales)

Melissa Moore (Associate, Wales)

Item 1: Welcome and introductions

WC45/1.1 The Chair welcomed Committee Members, Caroline Waters and Melanie Field to the forty fifth meeting of the Wales Committee. No apologies had been received.

Item 2: Declarations of interest

WC45/2.1 No declarations of interest were made.

Item 3: Reflections on senior stakeholder engagement

WC45/3.1 The Wales Committee members reflected on the learning from the previous evening’s engagement event. Members commented on the positive collaboration that seemed to be occurring in Swansea on human rights and progressive policies. Members noted that there was senior level engagement on this agenda with the Public Service Board and Cabinet Members working together.

WC45/3.2 Members reflected on the learning from the Rights Respecting school approach shared by the Head teacher of Hafod Primary School. That learning provides a challenge to the Commission on how to communicate about Human Rights. Often the Commission speaks about rights in a theoretical and academic way, and its education work was aimed at secondary schools. It is clear from the model used by Hafod and other primary schools in Swansea that its possible to engage children as young as five about rights and build it into the curriculum with demonstrable positive outcomes. Members discussed how could the Commission support the work and spread this practice to schools across Wales. Members highlighted the window of opportunity to engage with the new Youth Parliament and encouraged the Commission to ensure its voice and evidence was prominent in its development.

WC45/3.3 Building on the theme of how to communicate about human rights members noted that the discussion had focussed on wellbeing. Members reflected that whether people spoke about wellbeing, equality or rights they were often speaking about working to similar outcomes but using different language. Members discussed whether it would be possible to bring the narratives together.

WC45/3.4 Finally, members highlighted the discussion on socio-economic inequality. The Commission need to make the moral argument for tackling socio-economic gaps and highlight the link between social policy and the economic policy. Members agreed that the Commission needed to bring forward practical solutions.

Item 4: Tailored Review – verbal update

WC45/4.1 The Committee received an update on the upcoming Tailored Review. The triennial review, commissioned by the UK Government, sought to evaluate the Commission in relation to its effectiveness, its form and its powers. The Committee noted the key findings and recommendations of the report. In response to member’s questions, officers confirmed that the Commission would respond publically to the review once published and develop an action plan to implement recommendations. Members noted that the report was expected to be published in October.

Action A: A paper on the Tailored Review to be tabled at the December meeting

Item 5: Strategic Plan 2019-22 (EHRC WC 45.01)

WC45/5.1 The Committee received a paper, which set out the process for developing the Strategic Plan along with the draft Strategic aims and topics. Members were informed that the Strategic Plan was being developed in the context of a post Brexit Britain. There would be a strong focus on creating a rights respecting society. The Commission would need to consider what its role and focus could be on poverty and how it should work more effectively across GB.

WC45/5.2 The Chair invited members to share their views on the draft Strategic Plan and the implications for Wales. Members agreed that the Commission’s work should be more focussed. Key points that the Committee raised included:

• Poverty and socio economic disadvantage was noticeable by its absence as it is the greatest aspect of inequality in Wales and elsewhere in the UK. Poverty underpins the other inequalities the Commission seeks to address. Therefore, the Commission needs to understand and reflect socio economic inequality in order to tackle other inequalities.

• Linked to poverty the Commission should have a focus on social mobility. Therefore, the focus on entry into the workplace should include an emphasis on progression in work. This was thought to be particularly important in the context in Wales of low pay, low skill employment, not just about entry to the workforce.

• There should be a clear line of sight between how Is Britain Fairer? drives and informs the priorities (as opposed to working the other way around – mapping the link from priorities to IWF / IBF).

• The Committee highlighted that Social Care was an emerging crisis and Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery were growing issues. The Strategic Plan should reflect these.

• Early years was felt to be the most appropriate focus for the education and schools work in order to create a rights respecting society. Prevention and getting upstream of issues to ensure that rights based education helps to prevent bullying and harassment later in school years and beyond.

• The Commission should provide greater clarity on intersectionality. The column, which maps which Protected Characteristics relate to action on each topic, could, by omission, imply that the topic does not affect other groups.

• The Strategic Plan should be flexible in order to deal with emerging opportunities and issues.

• The Commission should focus its activity on its unique powers

• The language around ‘deprioritised topics’ should be messaged sensitively.

Item 6: Is Wales Fairer? (EHRC WC 45.02)

WC45/6.1 The Committee received a paper which set out the draft key messages from Is Wales Fairer?, the engagement plan and the Executive Summary. The Committee were updated on the products of the Is Wales Fairer? report. The full report would be published on the website. A shorter influencing document was being produced. The Committee discussed the draft key messages and were asked to provide feedback to the team by 21 September.

Action B: Committee Members to provide feedback on the draft Is Wales Fairer? key messages

WC45/6.2 The Committee suggested the Commission develop a concertina leaflet as had been done for the 2015 report. Members requested some more focused key messages for media and stakeholder engagement prepared in time for the launch of the report.

WC46/6.3 The Chair requested that Committee Members make themselves available to support the launch of Is Wales Fairer?

Item 7: Update from the Disability Advisory Committee – verbal update

WC46/7.1 The Chair invited Caroline Waters to brief the Committee on the work of the Disability Advisory Committee (DAC) and a roundtable she held with Disabled People’s Organisations in Wales.

WC46/7.2 The Committee heard that the Commission had worked hard to ensure that the new DAC was representative. The DAC aimed to be practical and ensure that it listened to stakeholder’s views. The Committee noted that there was currently no representative from Wales on the DAC. The Committee agreed it was important that information flowed across the Commission’s Committees.

Action C: Circulate latest DAC minutes to Wales Committee

WC46/7.3 The Committee received an update on the meeting with Disabled People’s Organisations in Wales. The Committee heard that the meeting had been interesting and useful with stakeholders sharing intelligence of the key challenges disabled people were facing. Attendees reported disappointment at what they saw as a regression in terms of discrimination that disabled people faced and concern that there was not enough challenge to public bodies and organisations. The group noted stakeholders frustration with what was perceived as an implementation gap between the intention of Welsh legislation, such as the Social Services and Wellbeing (Wales) Act 2014 and practice on the ground. The Committee agreed that the Commission needed to challenge the Welsh Government and public bodies to tackle the implementation gap.

WC46/7.4 The Committee discussed the current gap in its membership of a person with lived experience of disability and suggested that effort was made at outreach and mentoring to identify people who could contribute to the Committee in the future. Members discussed how the Commission was viewed in the disability sector in Wales. Members suggested targeted recruitment in future appointment rounds to the Committee and the use of positive action.

Item 8: Wales Programme Performance report 2018-19 Q1 report (EHRC WC 45.05)

WC46/8.1 The Committee received and noted the Wales Programme Performance report.

Item 9: Head of Wales report (EHRC WC 45.04)

WC46/9.1 The Committee noted the Head of Wales report.

Item 10: Public Sector Equality Duty (EHRC WC 45.03)

WC46/10.1 The Committee received a paper setting out a proposal for a Commission wide approach to the Public Sector Equality Duties (PSED). Members noted that a Committee sub-group had considered this matter in July and the view of the sub-group had informed the paper. The Executive Director set out that the Commission was seeking to develop an organisation wide approach the PSED, specifically looking at how the specific duties should operate, as they have not been seen to deliver the change that had been envisaged. The proposal was the Commission’s view on how the specific duties could be shaped to deliver greater impact.

WC46/10.2 The Committee discussed the proposal in the paper. Members agreed that PSED had not delivered the impact the Commission had hoped for so far. The Committee agreed that the proposal in the paper was an improvement on the paper considered by the sub-group in July. Members noted a number of concerns with the proposal as set out. Members commented whether the proposal narrowed the scope of the duties. Members noted concern about the proposal that would require Welsh Government and public bodies to set objectives based on the evidence from Is Wales Fairer? Members highlighted that unlike Is Britain Fairer? there was no legislative obligation on the Commission to produce the Wales report.

WC46/10.3 The Committee highlighted the approach and culture of policy and legislation that had developed in Wales since devolution. The Committee agreed that an appropriate approach in Wales should not be directive. Members warned that the goals of the proposals should be met by influencing rather than requiring.

WC46/10.4 Members agreed with the principle of reviewing the PSED. The Committee noted that public bodies, by and large were complying with the duty but that it was not having the impact of improving service delivery. However, the Committee advised that this wasn’t the right time for this approach to be taken forward in Wales. Members highlighted the Welsh Government’s Gender Review was still ongoing and the need to consider the opportunities to align the PSED with other regulation in Wales such as the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act.

WC46/10.5 In summarising the discussion the Chair stated that the Wales Committee would require further discussion before agreeing a position on the PSED. Officers should provide clarity to the Committee of the rationale for the proposals. The current solution was not appropriate for Wales and that work would be required to address the Committee’s concerns as well getting to a position that could command the confidence of government.

Action D: Schedule a further discussion on the PSED GB policy at the next Wales Committee meeting

Close of meeting.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download