Equality and Human Rights Commissioners meet the stakholders
I spent the yesterday here at Coombe Abbey Hotel, near Coventry, taking part in an informal meeting between the commissioners of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and the Commission’s “stakeholders” (who thought of this awful term for people who have an interest in the work of a particular organization?). There were 64 of us all told at the conference. I was there with my “Chair of the Religion and Belief Consultative Group on Equality, Diversity and Human Rights” hat on.
The meat of the conference was most interesting. We, the stakeholders, had been invited to share our thoughts and ideas for the future development of the EHRC, which was 150 days old yesterday. The mandate of the EHRC is defined by the Equality Act 2006 and explained on the EHRC’s website:
The Equality and Human Rights Commission acts not only for the disadvantaged, but for everyone in society, and can use its new enforcement powers where necessary to guarantee people’s equality. It also has a mandate to promote understanding of the Human Rights Act.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission is a non-departmental public body (NDPB) established under the Equality Act 2006 – accountable for its public funds, but independent of government.
Setting the scene
Trevor Phillips, Chair of the Commission, set the scene for the day’s discussions by reviewing the big picture in which the Commission finds itself - we’re in an economic downturn and the next general election is beginning to occupy the minds of politicians; both of these factors are making decision-makers less willing to take risks, even though risks need to be taken, if UK society is to become more equal and diversity is to be welcomed as a permanent fact of UK life. He also reviewed the bigger picture: the UK population of 60 million is experiencing unprecedented levels and rates of change; globalization is forcing us to re-examine our competitive advantage in the world; the population is aging; both of these factors will make us look again at who needs to develop skills, what skills they need to develop, and how they will develop them. Many of the newly skilled will have to come from currently marginalized or excluded groups, such as the disabled and minorities.
Patrick Diamond, the EHRC’s Group Director, Strategy gave an excellent presentation on how the EHRC’s change model is shifting from the traditional anti-discrimination approach of much of the older UK anti-discrimination legislation and of the work of the three commissions that existed before the EHRC came into being to a culture-change approach. A culture change model has a vision of the direction in which society should move to become more equal, less discriminatory, to become a setting in which everyone can flourish, and then it uses “soft power” (influence, education, media messages, citizen power) to enhance people’s autonomy and thus their life satisfaction, their well-being and their happiness) as well as the “hard power” of enforcement provided by legislation. It can be argued that an effective culture-change organization needs both “hard” and “soft” (which should not be read as “easy”) power to do its work. Patrick’s vision was that the UK can become a world leader in positive ways of handling diversity and promoting greater equality.
Four questions
After lunch the conference participants were put to work to answer four questions:
- What are the three most important challenges for the Commission and Stakeholders to address?
- What makes an effective partnership?
- How would we know if we are having the impact we seek?
- What are the Equality and Human Rights outcomes we really want public duties to deliver for the 60 million people in Britain?
We were grouped in eights around tables. The eights paired off for discussion about the questions and to write responses on pieces of paper that were then posted on boards, discussed and clustered by theme. After the round-table discussions, we were reassigned to four “super groups” and each super group compiled all the answers given by the tables of eight to one of the questions. I was pleased to be on the same table as Zia Sardar, writer, broadcaster and EHRC Commissioner (he describes himself as a “critical polymath”), whose excellent book, Desperately Seeking Paradise, I’ve previously reviewed here.
In the end we all came back into plenary to share our findings on each of the questions.
Vision for a more just society
So what did we think? Were our discussions helpful? (The people invited to this informal meeting were all senior people in a wide range of equality and human rights organizations, religion and belief groups, senior staff of the EHRC, and Commissioners - so one would expect them to be able to handle a wide range of issues at both strategic and practical levels.)
Zia Sardar’s view was that we’d come up with a vision for the future society we want, not just for the future of the EHRC - and certainly not just about the particularities of the way the EHRC works.
And it was clear to me and others at the informal that our shared vision was one of commitment to a society in which prejudices of all kinds are no longer allowed to be a driver of public policy and action, in which everyone has greater personal autonomy and the opportunity to flourish (although we cannot force people to take the opportunities that are on offer, since to do so would undermine their autonomy), and in which everyone’s human rights are fully accepted and fully supported.
What next?
The findings from the conference represent the latest stage in the strategic conversation between the EHRC and some (if not all) of its stakeholders (there are questions, as always, about who arethe stakeholders, who is included, who is excluded?), a conversation that will continue through a range of consultations and a further stakeholder informal in 6 months time. The findings will go to the Commissioners and the senior officers of the EHRC for their consideration and may (or may not) become part of the EHRC’s policy and strategy for its future work.
Photos © John Barnabas Leith under a Creative Commons licence.
Technorati Tags: EHRC, religion and belief, Zia Sardar, Trevor Phillips, human rights, equality, diversity, Britain
Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite
6 comments
Barney!
Thanks very much for delightfully sharing your experience as a “stakeholder”. They could perhaps have supplied you all with stakes and taken your picture.
In all seriousness as a man from ‘Nordn Ireland’ I have a comment and two questions.
From what I can gather, EHRC now is charged with promoting equality and human rights in Britain [read Great Britain], albeit Scotland has a Human Rights Commission in its own right which, I believe, is charged with such matters in their “devolved” aspects. Am not sure how the devolved aspects are dealt with in Wales, while in England I guess there are no devolved aspects.
My first question: What is the relationship between the EHRC and its counterparts in Northern Ireland - the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and the Northern Ireland Equality Commission?
My second question: Who represents the United Kingdom on the UN Human Rights Council, of which the UK is currently a member through, I believe, 2008?
Any attempt at clarification will be much appreciated.
Good comments and good questions, Jim. I’m not sure if I’m any kind of authority on the EHRC, but here goes anyway!
The remit of the EHRC runs in the whole of Great Britain (i.e. England, Scotland and Wales), but not in Norn Irn. The EHRC has two regional committees: the Scotland Committee and the Wales Committee. However, the EHRC only deals with non-devolved issues in Scotland. About the relationship between the two Commissions (GB and Scottish), I found this on the Scottish Executive Website:
“The Scottish Executive has been closely involved with UK Government departments in development of the CEHR proposals, with the aim of ensuring that the division of responsibilities between the SCHR and the GB Commission is clearly defined and that there will be appropriate arrangements for co-operation between the two bodies on matters of mutual interest. In particular, the two Commissions are expected to enter into a memorandum of understanding understanding setting out their respective roles, to be supported by close ongoing co-operation. The Executive and the UK Government will be closely involved in the drafting of that memorandum.”
This is from a year or two back, so I don’t know how things have developed since then. Nobody mentioned the Scottish Commission yesterday (at least, not in my hearing).
I assume there must be a memorandum of understanding or something of the kind between the EHRC and the NI bodies. Again, I haven’t heard anything said about that.
The answer to your second question is, at one level, easy to answer. It is the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The UK delegation to the UNHRC consists of an Ambassador (as Head of Delegation) and a number of FCO officials. I can tell you the name of the Ambassador; it is Nick Thorne. But the officials rotate year by year. So your question is very difficult to answer at the level of detail.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for your interesting write up, it’s good to get such detail. As a point of information, the term ‘the disabled’ is rather outdated and can be somewhat offensive, can I recommend you switch to using ‘disabled people’?
Also - I expect the NI Commission and the EHRC work closely together, as their predecessors learned from the experiences of the NI Commission on a regular basis.
- C
Barney
Many thanks for taking time to give your useful input in reply to my questions.
And Colleen, thanks so much for your recognition of the work of the NI Commission. I truly hope that your expectations of collaboration between EHRC and the NI Human Rights Commission become a consolidated reality as time goes by.
Nearly two years ago I had the privilege of attending a reception welcoming to Northern Ireland human rights representatives from more than 30 nations. At that time each of these nations was experiencing a major conflict situation within its boundaries. The visit had been organised by the NI Human Rights Commission, headed by Prof Monica McWilliams, Chief Commissioner at behest of the Geneva office of the then UN Human Rights Commission. The UN Commission considered Northern Ireland as a model to emulate and build upon in the field of conflict resolution and wanted representatives of these nations to witness first hand Northern Ireland’s achievements.
It was pure joy to see the smiling faces of these representatives and to converse with them. Virtually all of them were happy to be in one another’s company, to share experiences and to witness the major strides towards conflict resolution which have taken place in Northern Ireland.
I cannot praise enough the work of Prof. McWilliams, her fellow Commissioners and their staff. Equal praise goes to all those organisations and endeavours who have contributed over the years to resolving the conflict in this land, especially to the women. It is a credit to the entire UK.
Yes, I am blowing the horn of Northern Ireland, but I am sure that the other regions of the UK have made equally gigantic strides in meeting their particular human rights challenges.
As we move ahead in the 21st century I so hope to see the UK move forward as a united front in the promotion of human rights. Will this not require the collaboration and coordination of all the fine regional endeavours that are taking place?
As ever, Jim
Thank you both for your comments. There is much to be learned from the Northern Ireland experience, although I feel sure NI still has much to learn - as have we all.
Some years ago I was involved in organizing an interfaith conference in Armagh where people of faith involved in conflict resolution and peace building in various conflict-riven parts of the world shared their experiences, as did some courageous NI speakers. However, one Protestant minister who spoke at the conference did so in fear of his life, and we were advised that we couldn’t have our customary period of silence together at the beginning of the conference, since there were those amongst the participants who would feel that they had somehow “sold out” by sitting down in a spiritual silence with people from “the other side” of the religious divide.
The conference was a good one and brought much understanding and sharing of experience and feelings. However, I’m sure that things have moved on greatly in NI since then - it is good to see what is possible by way of public reconciliation even between inveterate enemies.
It is my reading that things have truly moved on greatly in NI since the time of your Armagh experience, Barney. I don’t think anyone at such an event today would fear for his/her life by speaking up. And I dare say that “a customary period of silence together” would not be seen as a “sell out” by anyone attending an interfaith conference.
Having said that, I cannot be so sure that all religious groupings in NI would be receptive of such a group meditative moment together. Yes, without a doubt there is still much to be learned by us all.
Leave a Comment