Darryl,
I was tempted to reply yesterday but it was early when I read your
response!
I tend to always write "require" in relation to EIA's because I think in
practice they are a requirement. As a vehicle for the assessment of a
policy etc they can take whatever form you like and don't need to follow
a rigid pro forma.
I personally think the government are playing politics with all of this
and say one thing to create an anti bureaucracy impression, but behind
the scenes do another and are quite deliberately not always acting out
their words.
Regards
Anthony Rylands
Access Officer for Disabled People
Corporate Services Directorate
North Somerset Council
Tel: 01934 63 4989
Fax: 01934 634 517
Web: www.n-somerset.gov.uk/community/equalities
-----Original Message-----
From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Darryl Smith
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 4:38 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Diversity and Equality in Planning
There is a key misunderstanding around the role of EIAs. There is no
"requirement" to produce EIAs but there is a requirement for bodies
covered by the general duty to have "due regard" to the need to:
* eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and
other conduct
* advance equality of opportunity between people from different groups;
* foster good relations between people from different groups.
Many Public bodies have chosen to use the EIA process as a way of
demonstrating "due regard" as this is a structured way of demonstrating
this. However, this is done in a climate of mixed messages from DCLG and
other departments who on the one hand are discouraging the use of EIAs
without coming up with an efficient alternative that ensures that the
general duty is adequately considered in all the core business of public
bodies.
EIAs, when used properly and owned by the organisation are a very useful
and efficient tool in the policy/decision making process. Over the last
few years EIAs tend to be used most often in the process of managing
budget reductions. There are a couple of "problems" with this: Once you
know what you know it makes it even more difficult to make decisions
that you know will disproportionately effect protected characteristics
(a case of eyes wide open) and the second is that lack of consistency
both inside and between organisations with each organisation ploughing
its own furrow in a field full of uncertainty and insecurity.
Wow! that was was cheerful for a Friday wasn't it! I guess the message
is, as Anthony alludes, if you are in a position to do so, encourage
your organisation to use EIAs as (when used well) they are a very useful
tool to a) mitigate against difficult decisions and b) give meaningful
insight so decisions have a much more sustainable/inclusive outcome.
I wish you all a very sunny weekend!
Darryl Smith
-----Original Message-----
From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Anthony Rylands
Sent: 05 July 2013 15:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Diversity and Equality in Planning
Hi,
So long as EIA's continue to be required then at least new procedures or
policies etc will have some form of assessment but it will not be the
same.
Perhaps it's something professional bodies (Access Association and RTPI)
or voluntary organisations can raise?
It is fundamental, but is not generating much interest.
Anthony
-----Original Message-----
From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Jacquel Runnalls
Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 10:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Diversity and Equality in PLanning
Dear Anthony,
I'm glad you raised this as someone alerted me to this yesterday. It is
on the www.parliament.uk website (see below). I have to say I'm a bit
concerned about the way the it was worded/terminology used. Not sure if
it's just me but surely it goes against what the government say on the
Gov.Uk website page 'Creating a Fairer and More Equal Society'
https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creating-a-fairer-and-more-equal-
society ??
1 July 2013 : Column 25WS
Revoking "Equality and diversity in planning"
Under the last Administration's flawed rules, a sense of unfairness was
embedded in the planning system. Unauthorised developments created
tensions between travellers and the settled population, while some
community groups seemingly were given favoured treatment. That approach
has harmed community cohesion. We want to redress the balance and put
fairness back into local communities.
I appreciate that there is ongoing concern, as reflected by some hon.
Members recently proposing a Private Members' Bill on this issue.
I can announce today that the Government are cancelling the last
Administration's practice guidance "Diversity and Equality in Planning"
which was issued by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2005.
This guidance is outdated, excessive in length (at 186 pages), and sends
unhelpful signals about the planning process. For example, the document:
Fails to strike the correct balance between the spatial impact of a
planning proposal and the background of the applicant in considering a
planning application.
Encourages monitoring of local residents' private lives-such as through
intrusive lifestyle/diversity surveys.
Promotes the excessive use of equality impact assessments, which are an
expensive and bureaucratic burden on the public sector.
Tells councils to translate into foreign language, which undermines
integration by discouraging people from learning English, weakens
community cohesion and a common British identity, and wastes taxpayers'
money.
As part of our wider consolidation of practice guidance, we do not
intend to replace it.
The national planning policy framework makes it clear that councils
should plan to provide wide choice of high-quality homes based on the
needs of their local community. Councils should simply use their common
sense in the light of prevailing legislation, planning policy and
material considerations.
I hope this will send a positive message about treating all members of
the community with respect and with due process, and that this
Government are restoring a proper sense of fairness to the planning
system.
Jacquel Runnalls,
Senior Occupational Therapist in Housing, London Borough of Waltham
Forest, Cedar Wood House, 2d Fulbourne Rd LONDON E17 4GG
Tel: 020 8496 5544 Email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Accessibuilt list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Anthony Rylands
Sent: 05 July 2013 10:44
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Diversity and Equality in PLanning
Hi,
I see this morning that the government have revoked this document as a
part of clamping down on unauthorised developments in the Green Belt and
permissions for Travellers sites.
It seemed to have been slipped in under the radar a little or is it just
me? This document contains some important principles which appear to be
now lost.
Has anyone any other information about its replacement (I'm ever
hopeful...) or the current intentions about what may happen next on the
Planning and equalities front?
Anthony
Anthony Rylands
Access Officer for Disabled People
Corporate Services Directorate
North Somerset Council
Tel: 01934 63 4989
Fax: 01934 634 517
Web: www.n-somerset.gov.uk/community/equalities
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and
consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and
consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
Keeping in touch
Visit www.n-somerset.gov.uk for information about our services Council
Connect: for all streets, open spaces and environmental protection
enquiries visit www.n-somerset.gov.uk/connect Care Connect: for all
adult social services enquiries visit www.n-somerset.gov.uk/careconnect
Out of hours emergencies: 01934 622 669 Privacy and confidentiality
notice:
The information contained in this email transmission is intended by
North Somerset Council for the use of the named individual or entity to
which it is directed and may contain information that is privileged or
otherwise confidential. If you have received this email transmission in
error, please delete it from your system without copying or forwarding
it, and notify the sender of the error by reply email. Any views
expressed within this message or any other associated files are the
views and expressions of the individual and not North Somerset Council.
North Somerset Council takes all reasonable precautions to ensure that
no viruses are transmitted with any electronic communications sent,
however the council can accept no responsibility for any loss or damage
resulting directly or indirectly from the use of this email or any
contents or attachments.
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and
consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and
consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
----------End of Message----------
Run by SURFACE for more information on research, teaching and consultancy:
http://www.surface.salford.ac.uk
Archives for the Accessibuilt discussion list are located at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/accessibuilt.html
|