Equality Standards for the MPA

Report: 13
Date: 16 July 2009
By: Chief Executive

Summary

The MPA has for the past several years followed the Equality Standard for Local Government (ESLG). The ESLG is a voluntary best value performance indicator designed to assist councils recognise the importance of fair equal treatment by providing a framework to enable local authorities to mainstream age, disability, gender, race, religion &/or belief and sexual orientation into council policy and practice at all levels. This report examines whether the ESLG, and its successor, the Equality Framework for Local Government (EFLG), is still the best mechanism for the MPA to mainstream equality or if alternative measures should be explored in the form of its own Generic Equality Scheme (GNES) and the Association of Police Authorities (APA) Minimum/Gold Standard for equalities compliance.

A. Recommendation

That

1. The MPA looks to its own GNES and the APA ‘Minimum/Gold Standard for equalities compliance’ to provide a framework within which to mainstream equality and diversity, rather than continue with the ESLG [or EFLG].

B. Supporting information

Background

1. The Equality Standard for Local Government (ESLG) was first introduced in October 2001 by the Improvement & Development Agency (IDEA). The ESLG aimed to provide a framework for ensuring that ‘a comprehensive and systematic approach’ was taken towards equality in local authorities.

2. It was hoped through the ESLG that disadvantage associated with age, disability, gender, religion &/or belief, race and sexual orientation could be identified and action taken to eliminate these barriers.

3. As part of the “Equalities for All” Best Value Review conducted in 2001/02 the Greater London Authority (GLA) agreed that all members of the GLA family group London Development Agency (LDA); London Fire & Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA); Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) and Transport for London (TfL) would work towards level 5 of the ESLG. The Metropolitan Police Service was also expected to meet the ESLG.

4. The purpose of the ESLG was to integrate equality at the heart of an organisation’s policy-making, service delivery, employment and community engagement (i.e. ‘mainstreaming equality’) using a framework of continuous performance management cycle of review, assessment & consultation, action and monitoring, within which are five levels of achievement, Level 1: Commitment to comprehensive equality policy, Level 2: Assessment and consultation, Level 3: Setting equality objectives and targets, Level 4: Information systems and monitoring against targets and Level 5: Achieving and reviewing outcomes.

5. The MPA self assessed at Level 2 some years ago but has found it difficult to make significant progress further against the ESLG formal framework, though it has of course developed and implemented equality schemes.

6. The main difficulty the MPA faces is that it is simply not the type of organisation for which the ESLG was designed. As its name implies the ESLG is primarily a vehicle for mainstreaming equality within local authorities. Other public organisations, such as police authorities that are not service delivery bodies first and foremost have difficulties in fully adapting and meeting all the elements of the ESLG.

7. There is also the issue of organisation size. Compared to the size of local authorities, the MPA is very small indeed; this often means that the volume and range of evidence produced against all the indicators contained within the ESLG is more challenging and labour-intensive. This problem is compounded by overall assessments being made at the ‘lowest common denominator’ within an organisation and not at the ‘highest common factor’.

8. The ESLG has also seen numerous changes over the years, expanding the number of indicators (in its last iteration there were 168) that must be met and requiring external validation for achievement of levels 3 and 5. This ‘moving of goalposts’ and the crude fit between the MPA and the ESLG template are the primary reasons why progress has stalled.

Current position

9. Earlier this year, following lengthy consultation, the IDEA launched a successor to the ESLG under the name of the Equality Framework for Local Government (EFLG). The EFLG intends to build on the work councils achieved under the old standard, but aims to be simpler, smarter, proportional and relevant. The EFLG has only 3 Levels and has reduced the number of indicators to 88. However, for the MPA the fundamental difficulty remains the same: although we are a local authority in law, our day to day functions do not match those of a standard local authority.

10. It is important to remember that the ESLG, and its successor the EFLG, is simply a framework – it is a process, not an end in itself, which is intended to make it easier for organisations to carry out their duties with regards to equality and diversity. Having taken the decision to further mainstream equality, through the restructuring of its equality officers, its utilisation of a Generic Equality Scheme and the new Communities, Equalities and People Committee (CEP), with its Equality and Diversity Sub-committee, the MPA needs to consider whether the ESLG [now EFLG] really is the best framework for achieving its commitments and aims around equality or if it should look to other means to achieve the same end more expediently and efficiently.

Future options

11. The MPA could pursue the EFLG, but as stated above this is not a preferred option.

12. An Equality Standard for Police Services is also being developed, the field trials of which are currently in progress, coinciding with the new EFLG. The Policing Standard will follow in a similar vein to the EFLG and will centre on operational delivery, people and culture and organisational processes. The Policing Standard may provide a useful framework for assisting the MPA scrutinise and support the MPS but its value to the MPAs own internal drive to mainstream equality is not so clear – the MPA is no more in practical terms a police service than it is a local authority. The MPS will be reporting on its experience with the Policing Standard field trial to the Equality & Diversity Subcommittee on 31 July 2009.

13. The Association of Police Authorities (APA) has long recognised that police authorities have struggled with the ESLG as a suitable framework. It was hoped the APA might produce an equality standard specifically for police authorities but, at this time at least, they have no plans to do so. However, in 2008 the APA published ‘An equalities guide for police authorities’. This guidance includes a table for minimum and gold standard equalities compliance and therefore provides a broad structure that the MPA can adopt. A copy of this table has been attached at Appendix 1.

14. For more specific actions and objectives relating to equality and diversity it is recommended that the MPA look to its own GNES, which contains numerous actions across all six diversity strands (age, disability, gender, race, religion &/or belief and sexual orientation) for each MPA unit.

15. The MPA GNES and APA Minimum/Gold Standard can be further supported by the MPA’s work on the recommendations provided by various inquiry reports such as Macpherson, Morris and MPA scrutinies - including the soon to be published MPA Race & Faith Inquiry.

C. Race and equality impact

16. As part of the MPA’s drive to mainstream equality and diversity the standards adopted will have an impact on all six diversity strands. Combined with the MPA GNES; the APA Minimum/Gold Standard will allow the MPA to apply a series of standards that are consistent but flexible enough to recognise the differences, similarities and conflicts that exist within the equality and diversity arena.

17. The APA Minimum/Gold Standard will be more flexible and specific to the MPA’s role than the previous ESLG and will assist the MPA exceed accepted best practice in terms of employment, community engagement and service delivery and will allow learning to be applied in its scrutiny, oversight and review of the MPS.

D. Financial implications

18. There are no additional financial implications to adopting the APA Minimum/Gold Standard. However to pursue EFLG would require periodic external evaluation which will involve some cost.

E. Background papers

• “Equalities for All” Best Value Review 2001/02
• The Equality Standard for Local Government, Local Government Agency, I&DEA, October 2007.
• An Equalities Guide for Police Authorities – meeting the Police and Justice Act 2006 Equalities Duty, APA, June 2008
• Generic Equality Scheme, MPA, September 2008
• Key Principles – Equality Framework for Local Government, IDEA, March 2009

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Michael Wadham, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback