Jump to content

Recommended Posts

hello people


did anyone else receive the DULWICH STREETSPACE REVIEW UPDATE FEBRUARY 2022

today ?

i was reading through it and then read the following bit and it says

Engage with specific protected groups e.g disabled , elderly, black, asian, and minority ethnic communities as well as bus users ... im confused about the protected groups black , asian , and minority ethnic communities part of it not sure why they have included that on the leaflet and also what about white people do they not matter ? its not a race thing so dont put messages on here that im racist etc as that has nothing to do with it iam just confused on why those specific groups of people are mentioned and not white people..

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/303346-dulwich-streetspace-review/
Share on other sites

I think it is probably because it refers to "specific protected groups". Under discrimination legislation, groups such as the elderly and disabled must be considered. White people are included in groups of the disabled and elderly.


The council need to consider minority ethnic communities under the Equalities legislation. It's their legal obligation which one hopes would also be recognised as a moral and ethical obligation.

They?re protected characteristics rather than groups I believe:


https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/equality-act/protected-characteristics


So the protected characteristic of ?age? would capture children as well as old people. ?Race? is also capable of capturing ?white British? in particular circumstances but generally it?s the interests of minority groups that are likely to be overlooked and require specific attention.


From a quick scan of the EHRC webpage, ?There are no express requirements to undertake engagement under the specific duties for England (and non devolved bodies in Scotland and Wales). However, case law states that consultation/involvement/engagement may still be important in ensuring public authorities understand the impacts of some types of decisions on different people.?


More info about this and impact assessment type stuff here https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance-faq/specific-duties-faqs-england-only.

> They?re protected characteristics rather than groups I believe.


Indeed. Part 2 of the Equality Act 2010. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/2


It's possible that the leaflet is also bearing in mind the "public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities" in Part 1 of the Act. Whatever, I do find its apparently mangled understanding or representation of the law rather depressing.

I haven?t seen the leaflet. Re socioeconomic equality, as I understand it that part of the Act isn?t in force however Southwark has adopted it as part of its constitution. To great fanfare, which is why I?m not impressed that they seem to think that a brief mention of it in decision making reports, rather than a proper analysis, is sufficient. It?s whatever the equalities equivalent of green washing is.


Was disappointed that the LDs didn?t make more of this when they tried to call in the decision tbh.

> as I understand it that part of the Act isn?t in force


Whoops, I hadn't realised that. Thanks. Now you've reminded me of a fruitless hunt through the London Gazette a few months ago, for the publication of something like an old local TMO.


The leaflet came through the letterbox this afternoon. OP's quotation is there, with a (spring 2022) appended to it, in a Next Steps section.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
    • Exactly - a snap election will make things even worse. Jazzer - say you get a 'new' administration tomorrow, you're still left with the same treasury, the same civil servants, the same OBR, the same think-tanks and advisors (many labour advisors are cross-party, Gauke for eg). The options are the same, no matter who's in power. Labour hasn't even changed the Tories' fiscal rules - the parties are virtually economically aligned these days.  But Reeves made a mistake in trying too hard, too early to make some seismic changes in her first budget as a big 'we're here and we're going to fix this mess, Labour to the rescue' kind of thing . They shone such a big light on the black hole that their only option was to try to fix it overnight. It was a comms clusterfuck.  They'd perhaps have done better sticking to Sunak's quiet, cautious approach, but they knew the gullible public was expecting an 24-hour turnaround miracle.  The NIC hikes are a disaster, I think they'll be reversed soon and enough and they'll keep trying till they find something that sticks.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...