A significant challenge for the CEHR is to ally diverse regional equalities needs with national equalities goals. How can the two be most effectively integrated/aligned for maximum benefit to both? Furthermore, what structures can be established at the local or regional level to support the work of the CEHR (and vice-versa)?
Despite the best efforts of policymakers and others, not all voices are heard or heard equally loudly in public discussions of equalities and human rights. Which voices are not are still left unheard? If so, how may they be more meaningfully engaged in policy discussions?
Discussions around recent and current equalities-related policy reviews point to the remaining challenges in equalities and discrimination. What factors can be identified as having limited the effectiveness of past approaches to equalities and how may they be addressed and overcome by the CEHR?
The Equalities Review (February 2007) calls for the CEHR to adopt its vision of an equal society as one which “…protects and promotes equal, real freedom and substantive opportunity to live in the ways people value and would choose, so that everyone can flourish. An equal society recognises people’s different needs, situations and goals and removes the barriers that limit what people can do and can be”. How appropriate is this definition for society today and should it become the basis of the CEHR’s approach to equalities?
ippr, in conjunction with the CEHR, held a second roundtable event - this time in Newcastle - to discuss key challenges and opportunities facing the CEHR. More than 20 stakeholders joined the discussion with Simon Underwood, Head of Social Inclusion at Newcastle City Council, David Ogbonna, Legal & Governance Project Lead, CEHR and Sue Stirling, Director of ippr north, who chaired the event.
Participants felt that one of the biggest challenges for the CEHR is the need to challenge the media in order to get the equalities message across. Equality must be seen as liberating and not oppressing - there was acknowledgement that this is very difficult, but vital. How do we manage the media when they constantly portray the Human Rights Act as negative? There is a desperate need to counter negative images and misrepresentation of HR and equality issues. On a local level, it was argued that strategic regional priorities must be set with key drivers from central government and what this means for the North East.
Participants suggested the possibility of regional audit bodies and dissemination although there was understanding that to some extent these would invariably rely upon the same people as around the table. There was a consensus that the dynamic must be changed so that emphasis is not on minorities to ‘fit in’ but rather wider acceptance of difference and the empowerment of individuals so that they have the confidence to use the mechanisms already in place. Participants felt that everything must be mainstreamed through the HR perspective if equality is to be delivered, a new narrative whereby HR is the “7th strand” and works on a horizontal principal underpinning all CEHR work. Lastly participants acknowledged that it is easy for organisations to become very passionate about their own strand of work to the detriment of partnerships and it was felt that CEHR might bring value as a facilitating organisation to bridge and fill knowledge gaps. However, this process should be organic and not imposed from above.
Another important opportunity and challenge that arises from the establishment of the CEHR is the move from strand-based approaches to equalities to a more integrated approach. How do we - and should we - move beyond strand-based approaches to equalities? Is there emerging best practice in this area from which we could be learning?
One of the biggest changes that will occur with the establishment of the CEHR is the combination of equalities and human rights under one legislative and institutional framework. This offers important opportunities but there are also important challenges to be addressed. How should equalities and human rights interact so as to ensure the advancement of both?
The ippr in conjunction with the CEHR hosted a roundtable in London involving more than 20 stakeholders to discuss some of the challenges and opportunities that the CEHR is likely to face when it becomes operational in October 2007. The roundtable heard presentations from Dr Evan Harris MP and Baroness Margaret Prosser, Deputy Chair of the CEHR, and was chaired by Dr Danny Sriskandarajah from ippr. The discussion paid particular attention to the relationship between equalities and human rights, and included a number of suggestions for how the CEHR might approach these issues in the future.
One of the key themes that emerged was the importance of the CEHR being seen as an organisation that was relevant to the lives of all who live in the UK, not just particular people or groups who felt affected by equalities issues. This, it was suggested, could be achieved by engaging with the public on key cross-cutting issues, being accessible to the public, championing important causes and myth-busting where appropriate. This will mean that the CEHR must be both ‘popular’, as in relevant to people’s everyday lives, and ‘brave and bold’, ready to take a stand on tough policy issues. It was also felt by some participants that the CEHR should seek to defend and re-popularise the concept of human rights which has, in recent years, been devalued and even demonised by sections of the UK’s press.
A lot of discussion focused on the various challenges facing the CEHR, ranging from philosophical questions around universal versus particular rights and duties, political issues around prioritising and legislating on certain issues, and operational challenges around service delivery to a diverse group of people.
Several participants highlighted the importance of hearing the views and reflecting the concerns of groups such as the children and carers, whose voices are sometimes not heard in equalities discussions. Others also highlighted the importance of building on the good work that has been done to date and the institutions that have been built to advance particular, strand-based equalities concerns. In this way, the CEHR should strive to recognise the new challenges in contemporary society while simultaneously addressing enduring equalities challenges that have occupied the attention of equalities activists in the past.
