Law to insist those impacted are consulted

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

Why is it that it’s impossible to insist that those impacted by proposed legal / policy / business changes are consulted in all sectors (government, commercial and NFP)?

What needs to be introduced legally to ensure that an independent risk assessment is carried out and then affected parties consulted in a transparent process?

What will it take for half of the population to be consulted effectively on anything proposed to be introduced that probably will affect them?

Why are women wilfully and systemically discounted?

Because the ‘women’ that matter have already been consulted, handmaidens next in line to be heard and the rest of us appear to be meaningless.

It seems to me the impact is larger than WPUK’s 5 demands encompass- this is a wider issue than just self id, for example Universal Credit.

Impact assessments are already required. There are multiple examples in this mess where either (looking at you Scotland) they're compromised to to a truly appalling level to avoid gathering inconvenient information, or just not carried out. There have been a number of occasions where FoI requests have been made or questions asked (FPFW is good at this) as to can the impact assessment be shared, and the answer has been a red faced admission that one wasn't done. Due process wasn't followed. Due diligence is frequently and glaringly absent.

It's less needing a law to compel it than some kind of accountability for due process and required procedure not being properly followed. Particularly in situations where it has been intentionally avoided in order to avoid having to deal with or recognise inconvenient information. Such as the government failing to properly advertise the GRC consultation taking place, despite it directly impacting 52% of the population, and hoping it just slid quietly under the radar.

Interesting Knicknack - so who is auditing the law and policy makers? No one it seems. The more I discover the more I think our current frameworks underpinning so called democracy are unfit for purpose. Whatever checks and balances are/ were supposed to be in place aren’t working.

Lisa M is right about a crisis

Any organisation that falls within the public sector - government, schools, NHS, local authorities ... and any private or third sector organisations they commission to fulfill their public duties, is bound by the Public Sector Equality Duty which is part of the Equality Act. This says that they must have 'due regard to the need to' -

(a) eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

(b) advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(c) foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

My understanding (IANAL) is that an equality impact assessment is not a legal requirement in itself, it's just evolved as the best way for organisations to show they're meeting this duty. So if they're not doing an impact assessment at all, how else are they addressing the PSED?

There have been some shockingly bad equality impact assessments, notably the Scottish GRA consultation (Annex N in the consultation paper - see pic.

I saw a worse one. The equality impact assessment for the Scottish census bill can be found here (save the link, it's bloody hard to find). Sex is lumped in under the heading 'Sex and gender reassignment' and then not mentioned again aside from consideration of how trans and NB people could answer the sex question.

The private sector do not have to meet the PSED unless contracted to carry out public functions.

Is anyone carrying out Equality Impact Assessments on the guidelines for schools which have been put forward by various organisations that say that boys can use the girls' toilets if they feel like girls?

I asked the Welsh Government if equality impact assessments had been carried out before they endorsed the TransForm Cymru Toolkit which they had also funded. They replied that because Youth Cymru is a company and registered charity, they are under no obligation to undertake Equality Impact Assessments. I assume this would also apply to organisations such as Mermaids.

Welsh Government also appeared to endorse the use of the Transgender Guidance for Wrexham Schools. When I asked them about this document, they denied that they endorsed its use, although the information on the Welsh Government website is fairly ambiguous on this point, and schools in other areas in Wales are using it as a model for their own guidance. They said that it was up to Wrexham LEA to undertake the Equality Impact Assessment, and they had no idea whether this had been carried out. Maybe a FOI is in order on this one.

I'm fairly sure I remember posts on here to the effect of Scotland FoI request showing that no impact assessment for girls was carried out on their advice that girls must be expected to change/toilet alongside any male that identifies into their spaces.

Also that while there are extensive assessments for transwomen in female prisons there has been no impact assessment on the women locked up with them and forced to share showers with them, and at boards discussing transfer of a TW prisoner into the female estate, there is no representative for the other women prisoners.

Anyone remember the sources?

It's not making me very popular in some of my committee work but I'm increasingly asking people what they mean and what they considered when they decided that an impact assessment was not necessary or no conflicts were found.

It's tedious, but we need a checklist to make sure basics have been covered before making such a decision. We need explicit, "No issues identified" from relevant individuals/bodies.

I see a lot of Equality Impact assessments which are basically lip service. If sex is considered at all, it’s only in relation to trans people. But as stated above, no one is compelling organisations to do it properly. Often it’s down to a lack of imagination or supreme incompetence.

Thx to all - the insight is helpful if horrifying

So is there no centralised oversight /audit function,or if there is has it been reduced to ineffectiveness by austerity?

Can someone for my benefit provide a made case study to do with child safeguarding where say acswrvicel

Oophs figure slip on mobike

Can anyone provide a made up example to starkly illustrate the lack of oversight in detail, perhaps concerning child safeguarding where a service is contracted out- the Scottish schools example may be a helpful and also one concerning individual child welfare. I’m unfamiliar with the public sector checks and balances and curious whether the envisaged audit framework isn’t working or was never there in the first place. So is this austerity at play or flawed oversight or both?

And who assesses whether a risk assessment is needed, what category of impact it is and the risk if one isn’t carried out properly - and who audits this?

And is risk assessment in child safety conflated with adherence to policy? Does no one take a child/citizen safety centred perspective of risk against predators eg paedophiles/ sex offenders?

I’m going to @Langcleg for her expertise in this area