Specific sectors- in housing, at school or college and on transport
In housing
The Equality Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against, harass or victimise someone when buying, selling, letting or managing premises.
The Act mainly brings together what was in previous law. In addition, it enables Parliament to require landlords of rented residential housing to make reasonable adjustments to common parts such as hallways, for disabled tenants.
At school or college
The Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against, harass or victimise pupils or students at schools, colleges and universities.
The Act mainly brings together what was in previous law. It also bans discrimination against pregnant schoolgirls;
In addition, the Act requires schools and local authorities to provide equipment to help disabled school pupils.
On transport
The Act contains particular rules for making various forms of transport (such as taxis, buses and trains) accessible to disabled people
The Act mainly brings together what was in previous law. In addition it:
- requires drivers of taxis and minicabs to help passengers who are wheelchair users, unless they are physically unable to help;
- limits local authorities’ ability to refuse to licence a taxi if it is wheelchair accessible.
Tell us what you think should happen to these measures and why, being specific where possible
- Should we scrap them altogether?
- Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?
- Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?
- Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?
- Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?
- Should they be left as they are?
No change required
I comment on my own behalf as a long-retired Hospital Consultant. I have a hearing problem.
In particular I comment on Part 12, chapters 2&3 in respect of accessibility for the disabled especially in sections 174 and 182 where no wheelchair or extremity support or orthosis or prosthesis are needed. Vision and hearing deficits do not seem to have any clear enough mention or definition or any inclusion where they are so often responsible for reduced accessibility to, from and within such vehicles.
Homophobia and Transphobia is proven to be epidemic in schools. More should be done to protect LGBT students and staff members.
For LGB&T people, full statutory protections especially with regard to housing and in education must be kept in place. Homophobia and transphobia remain endemic with schools and colleges in the UK. An NUT report found 99% of teachers had witnessed homophobic abuse on a termly basis and many reported much higher levels and more serious incidences. The law must be absolutely explicit that schools and colleges have a clear and explicit duty to tackle homophobia and transphobia.
Housing is also an important for LGB&T people who are more likely to live alone and due to related issues of being disproportionately affected by issue such as poor mental health and alcohol/drug dependency can have many issues with housing. It is essential therefore that LGB&T people have all the protections possible in law with regard to housing.
Should we scrap them altogether?:
No. No aspect of the Act should be scrapped. We all fall within one or more of the protected characteristics and therefore, could experience inequality and discrimination. The Act offers us a means by which we can be treated fairly and equally. Unlike other areas for review on the Red Tape Challenge website, the Equality Act is not a regulation but a piece of primary legislation which aims to support the rights and improve the life outcomes of all individuals, with a focus on the nine protected characteristics.
Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?:
No. In order for groups to be able to challenge inequality and discrimination there needs to be basic principles they can draw upon which are enshrined in law. Before the Equality Act 2010 (and previous equality legislation) we were reliant on the voluntary actions of public authorities and organisations. The real experiences of inequality and discrimination during this voluntary period clearly demonstrate why a voluntary code does not work. A voluntary code does not give basic rights as understood by all parties but is reliant on the good will of those deeming to offer it. This is totally unacceptable.
Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?:
No. The Equality Act 2010 is already a very recent simplification of past equalities legislation, such as the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 (RR(A)A) and Disability Discrimination Act 2005 (DDA), as well as around 100 statutory instruments. The Act has been developed in extensive consultation with key partners from business and a wide range of communities. Given the amount of time, including the extensive consultation spent on it and the very short time for which it has been implemented it seems extraordinary that it is being reviewed. It has also broadly gained cross party support. The provisions have been developed for all members of civil society, and provide rights and protections from discrimination. The Equality Act 2010 should not be reformed, simplified or merged. If we want a fair and equal society, then we need to enshrine that right in law.
Can we reduce their bureaucracy through better implementation? How?:
No. The term bureaucracy is not helpful and implies that for a public authority to know its community is a dogmatic paper process, when in fact it can inform the policy and practice more effectively and can play a part in eliminating inequality and discrimination. If public authorities are to be held to account by the community they serve, then there need to be clear, demonstrable measures that local communities can access.
Can we make their enforcement less burdensome? How?:
It is no doubt a ‘burden’ on local communities and to civil society when communities face disadvantage and discrimination; this can lead to health and social inequalities, education and criminal justice inequalities and so on. For communities to be active and participative, then public authorities must be transparent and accountable for their actions. Far from being seen as burdensome, the enforcement of the Act is crucial in establishing a fully engaged civic society. Equal rights are not a burden, for example, do we consider it a burden when we say every child should have access to education?
Should they be left as they are?:
Yes. Given the Act has been developed by extensive working across government departments, with cross-party support and with significant input from a diverse range of communities and businesses, any dilution of the Act will be seen as a regression. For equality and fairness to be reflected in our society the Act is essential. In fact the Act should be strengthened and enforced fully. Government must not and should not consider the rights of society as a ‘burden’.
It is about time that children were properly covered by the equality legislation, particularly gay and lesbian schoolchildren who can suffer harassment and distress at school.
All too often we hear of young people being bullied and harrassed at school and college because they may be different. Suicide rates have risen in young people who see no other way out but to take their lives if they experienced homophobic, biphobic or transphobic bullying. If these protections are whittled away then what else will protect these young people
Extend protection against harassment to include gender variant schoolchildren
[text deleted]
All aspects should be strengthened and extended – and a ban of Public Schools would be a good idea to stop people with money having and exercising an illicit advantage over not so rich parents and families – now that’s an extension of this law I would love to see.
This aspect of the legislation contributes significantly to ensure fair treatment for all and should be left as it is.
The Equality Act should be left as it is. Additional protections should be extended to cover all trans and gender variant youth.
Red Tape Challenge: Web-submission
The Equal Rights Trust
The Equal Rights Trust has consistently supported the Equality Act and the unified approach to equality it seeks to secure: we believe that the Act is a necessary step towards combating discrimination and reducing inequality in Great Britain. We support and endorse those other organisations arguing, inter alia, that the Act is necessary to ensure effective protection of vulnerable groups; that the Act harmonises and streamlines the law in this area, in a way which improves protection and provides clarity for both business and public bodies; and that there is a strong business case for promoting equality. Bearing in mind the quality and quantity of submissions made by other supporters of the Act, we would like to address two issues: (i) the role which the Equality Act plays in ensuring the UK’s compliance with its legal obligations under international human rights conventions to which the state is party; (ii) the impact which repeal or emasculation of the Act would have outside of the UK.
1. The Act is the key mechanism through which the UK complies with its international legal obligations to respect, protect, fulfil and promote the rights to equality and non-discrimination
The United Kingdom is obliged by a number of international conventions to provide effective protection against discrimination and promote equality on a range of grounds. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), to which the UK is a party, require states parties to ensure that persons can enjoy the rights provided therein “without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” The European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) contain similar provisions. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) contain specific provisions to ensure that persons enjoy equality irrespective of race, sex or disability.
Crucially, these conventions require not only that the state should itself refrain from discrimination, but that it should protect people within its jurisdiction against the discriminatory acts of other private individuals and organisations. In the UK, this protection is found in the Equality Act. Most of these treaties also specifically require the state to put in place legislation to prohibit discrimination in the public and private spheres. For example, the ICCPR requires states to ensure that “the law prohibits discrimination and to guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” Similar obligations are enshrined also in CERD, CEDAW and CRPD in respect of race, sex and disability respectively. Without the Equality Act and its protections, the UK government would fail to meet its obligation to ensure that persons have effective legal protection from discrimination, as required by these instruments.
These conventions do not simply oblige the state to refrain from, and to prohibit, discrimination. In addition, they require measures aimed at addressing de facto inequality to fulfil the right to substantive equality. They also require that legal protections against discrimination are made effective through appropriate enforcement mechanisms and remedies. Therefore, even those provisions found in the Equality Act which go beyond what is required by the EU directives may be necessary if the UK is to comply with its obligations under the international human rights conventions. A number of the treaty bodies responsible for interpreting the scope and effect of these conventions have clearly stated that the obligation to fulfil the right to non-discrimination requires states to take steps to address problems of substantive inequality. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural rights stressed this point repeatedly in its recent General Comment on the application of the right to non-discrimination under CESCR, stating that “States parties must therefore immediately adopt the necessary measures to prevent, diminish and eliminate the conditions and attitudes which cause or perpetuate substantive or de facto discrimination.” The Committee goes on to state that “States parties should ensure that strategies, policies, and plans of action are in place and implemented in order to address both formal and substantive discrimination”.
Examining the range of measures which states parties are required to adopt and implement in order to fulfil this obligation, the Committee refers to economic policies, teaching and education policies and the need for public and private institutions to be required by law to adopt action plans to address discrimination. Thus, it can be seen that in addition to being necessary to meet the obligation to respect and protect the right to non-discrimination as provided in these instruments, the Equality Act is an essential tool for meeting the obligation to fulfil the right.
2. The Act is an important symbol of the United Kingdom’s commitment to human rights, and is considered an exemplar by those campaigning for improved equality law around the world
ERT is an international equality organization based in London. As such, we believe we are able to offer a particular insight into the perception of the UK equality legislation around the world, and the impact which repeal of the Act, or any of its protections, would have internationally. The Equality Act represents a laudable attempt to provide comprehensive protection from discrimination within a unified framework. While ERT and others have proposed – and continue to support – amendments to the legislation which we believe would ensure that the Act is better able to achieve its express purpose, we believe that the present Act is a progressive, modern equality law which stands as an exemplar to other states. Working with civil society, the media and governments in 15 different states to promote the adoption of equality legislation, ERT has repeatedly drawn on the Equality Act as a best practice example. In recent months, a number of our partners in civil society organizations have expressed their surprise and disappointment that while they are campaigning to improve protection from discrimination – often in challenging and dangerous environments – the UK is considering measures which would reduce the protection from discrimination provided by the Equality Act. ERT believes that the repeal or emasculation of the Equality Act would not only damage the UK’s reputation on the international stage as a state committed to human rights, but would also undermine the efforts of those campaigning for equality in other jurisdictions.
The Equality Act is an important symbol of the UK’s commitment to human rights generally, and equality in particular, values which underpin the country’s reputation abroad, and its ability to speak authoritatively about human rights with foreign governments. ERT would submit that the UK should be proud of the fact that its legislation is widely perceived as a leading example of effective equality law, and further that it is being relied upon as an example by those working to combat discrimination. We believe that any attempt to revise or amend the Act to reduce the level or scope of protection found therein would seem inconsistent to those governments where the UK is – directly or indirectly – seeking to promote the protection of human rights.
3. Measures to improve the Act
If the Act is to be amended at all, ERT would urge the government to strengthen, rather than weaken, the Act’s provisions. The Act could be strengthened by including an open, rather than a closed list of protected characteristics, extending and implementing provisions relating to multiple discrimination, extending positive duties to the private sector, making positive action mandatory in appropriate circumstances, providing protection against harassment related to religion and belief and sexual orientation experienced outside of work and against harassment related to gender reassignment in schools, improving access to justice by allowing representative actions, improving the procedures for bringing an equal pay claim, allowing non-employment cases to follow a simpler, less expensive procedure, and ensuring remedies have a broad impact, by extending the circumstances in which a court or tribunal can make recommendations, and making recommendations enforceable. To amend the Act other than to strengthen the protection it provides would, we submit, both place the UK at risk of violating its international legal obligations, and serve to undermine the UK’s reputation for protecting fundamental human rights.
For these reasons, in addition to those made by others, we submit that repeal of the Act, or amendment of its provisions in such a way as to reduce the scope of its protections or the measures pertaining to its enforcement, would be a serious error.
This is so important and vital that we protect everyone and especially those who are venerable. School is one of the main places (also at home) we learn how to be part of society by having these strict guidelines it ensures that our children grow up experiencing difference and are therefore more able to except and respect difference’s as an adult. We must continue to educate and except each other the idea that society would discriminate against a pregnant school girl is appalling. Our behaviours towards each other are so important and can in fact make or break someone. Bullying of any type towards anyone is not acceptable this is why this Act is so very important and necessary.
The Equality Act 2010 is not red tape. It is an important beacon to society and UK PLC that as a nation we are tolerant, progressive and committed to creating a fairer and more equal country and world. It is a reactionary and negative step to even think about inserting it on this website.
The further measures outlined have all been positive additions to the Act, and it should remain in its current form.
The equalities act is a vital peice of legislation protecting the most vulnerable in our society and as such should be feircly protected by a civilized nation. It should be enshrined in everyones everyday life and if abused or ignored the culprate should be treated with the contempt they obviously deserve, if that involves legal action so be it!
Having worked in the field of student support services since 1996 I feel I am in a position to comment on how influential anti discrimination legislation has been in opening up universities to a wider diversity of students and protecting individuals from harassment and discrimination in these settings. It is not always “convenient ” to need to consider making courses and campuses accessible to disabled people for example but to confuse legislative imperatives to open up society and make it fairer as red tape is a very twisted view on things.
There are still many points of conflict between students of different religious, ethnic and sexual orientation backgrounds. This legislation provides a civil society context in which universities can help promote good campus relations between students and staff. This legislation is not about discouraging free speech and the debating of ideas which Universities above all else should encourage. The Equalities Act does allow universities to protect its minority groups from harassment and intimidation and charges them with the duty to be inclusive of all its members.
I think you should leave it just as it is. You will create more work and distraction by amending it than any possible advantage gained in simplification. Furthermore every time you chagne things it creates unforseen consequences. And lastly as a member of the LGBT community, I value the protections of the Equality Act and having fought hard to get protection against discrimination for sexual orientation I am appalled that anybody is now thinking of changing that in any way. Businesses and landlords are finally getting used to respecting members of the LGBT community and treating them equally and we should not now dilute or amend this.
It is very positive that the Act could cover landlords having to make reasonable adjustments for communal areas and Parliament should implement this . Disabled people need to be able to get in and out of their accommodation through communal areas and use any facilities in those areas, as well as being able to live in their accommodation.! It is welcome that the aspects in relation to schools, colleges and transport (taxis) as covered in the Red Tape consultation are included in the Act.
Leave the Equality Act exactly how it is.