Agenda item

1.            Mr Whittle introduced the report and commended the great amount of work undertaken by Laura McPherson in his team in preparing the annual report. He then responded to comments and questions from the committee, including the following:

a)    the fullness and clarity of the annual report were welcomed as it covered all the information Members required and reflected the importance of equality and diversity issues in the work of the Council;

b)    asked to clarify the term ‘ethnic minority’, Mr Whittle advised that definitions of demographic groups used protected characteristics but more work could be done to look at changing demographics;

c)    asked if the staff survey had shown evidence of any marginalisation or exclusion of Eastern European or disabled staff, as staff turnover in those groups was known to be higher, and if any reason for this higher turnover could be given, Mr Whittle agreed that the reasons behind this could be explored;

d)    the section of the report covering young people in care in the justice system was welcomed.  It was important to try to keep young people out of the system by addressing any criminal behaviour before it reached the court stage;

e)    it would be good to be able to analyse the impact on young people of attending single-sex schools and address any unconscious bias in favour of young people who had attended such schools.  Mr Whittle said this had not previously been considered but could be the subject of some further work by the Corporate Equality Group; 

f)     asked how the participation in County Council consultations of all groups could be   supported, Mr Whittle advised that this could be investigated. Mrs Beer added that this was a critical part of such engagement exercises;

g)    use of voter identification would seem to have a discriminatory effect by excluding some groups who tended to use forms of identification which were less favoured.  Mr Watts advised that, as the County Returning Officer and a member of professional body of such officers, he had been part of lobbying Central Government about the use of voter identification and to take more time to ensure that, when implemented, it was done properly and inclusively.  He undertook to provide more information to the questioner outside the meeting;

h)    asked about the accessibility of health services, for example, the difficulties some people would have in accessing local services with a reduced bus service and no car if those services were to be delivered from further afield, Mr Whittle advised that the report had concentrated on County Council-specific services rather than those delivered with partners but accepted that this was something which could be considered.  He undertook to liaise with Integrated Care colleagues to see how best this could be covered. Achieving good access to primary care services was a sizeable national challenge;

i)     concern was expressed about the percentage of key decisions which did not include an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) in their paperwork, despite the completion of an EqIA being a necessary part of the decision process, and a question asked about how this would be addressed. Mr Whittle advised that the use of EqIAs was a County Council policy decision, to demonstrate how the Council was meeting its duty to take account of equality implications in its decision making. Although some decision reports did not include an EqIA, reference was made in the report to consideration having been given to equality implications, with the conclusion that there were none to be recorded. He agreed, however, that officers approving decision paperwork should undertake mandatory training highlighting the importance of considering equalities implications and of completing an EqIA if necessary, as the quality of such assessments produced was the responsibility of managers. Concern was then expressed about how many decisions might previously have been signed off by officers who had not undertaken relevant training. Mr Watts added that EqIAs should be as detailed and accurate as possible and he advised that the key decision process would be reviewed in April 2023, in the light of the internal audit report on SEND Transport issues, to ensure the best possible quality of supporting paperwork; 

j)     asked about consultation with Trade Unions in respect of achieving better Total Contribution Party (TCP) awards for part-time staff, Mr Whittle advised that all staff were considered equally when making TCP assessments.  Mrs Beer added that the point about consultation with Trade Unions was well made and would be given a higher priority in future reports, and advised that DMTs monitored TCP ratings to ensure a consistent approach;  

k)    asked if the Council was expected to achieve beyond Level 2 of the Government’s Disability Confident standard, Mr Whittle advised that he expected Level 3 to be achievable;

l)     although the Council had a duty ‘to consider and mitigate where possible any inequalities’ arising from its services, financial pressures would limit the level of mitigation which could be achieved; 

m)  Mr P Bartlett advised that he was a member of the Integrated Care Partnership and undertook to raise the points made about accessibility at the Partnership’s next meeting; and

n)    with reference to Members’ training, Mr Watts asked Members to express any interest in equality and diversity training via the Member Development Group.

2.            It was RESOLVED that the Annual Equality and Diversity report for 2021-22 be approved.