Question 1
Last year the Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP,
Minister for Women and Equalities wrote to public leaders
reaffirming the Government’s commitment to the protected
characteristics under the Equalities Act.
The 9 protected characteristics in the act are:
• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation
The Minister for Women and Equalities also wrote, in the same
letter, ‘I would like to be clear that there is no
‘hierarchy of rights’ under the act, therefore we
should not hold one protected characteristic in higher regard than
another.’
At the last full council meeting in November, the leader of the
council made the following comment. ‘We were doing that
[Councillors Name] before you left school’.
Does the Leader of the Council regret that the Mayor, nor the Chief
Executive did not intervene to reprimand the Leader for this age
based insult?
Question 2
What plans do the council have over the next year to protect people from age based discrimination in; the council chamber, at work in the council and across the Borough as a whole.
Question 3
Gedling Borough Council often uses the flag poles outside its entrance to mark occasions. Certain flags that the Council have flown fall outside of the Government’s approved list and therefore planning permission is required. Could the Council Leader detail when Gedling Borough Council has sought those permissions and for what flags?
Question 4
Would the leader of the council expect a
member of his cabinet to resign if:
said member of his cabinet made a political attack on another
democratically elected member of the council which was based on
that member's protected characteristics under the equalities
act.
E.g. an attack based on age, disability, gender reassignment,
marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race,
religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.
Minutes:
Four questions were received, and the questioners were not able to attend the meeting to ask them. As such, all questions were asked by the Chief Executive and answered by the relevant councillor, as follows:
Question 1:
Last year the Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP, Minister for Women and Equalities wrote to public leaders reaffirming the Government’s commitment to the protected characteristics under the Equalities Act.
The 9 protected characteristics in the act are:
• age
• disability
• gender reassignment
• marriage and civil partnership
• pregnancy and maternity
• race
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation
The Minister for Women and Equalities also wrote, in the same letter, ‘I would like to be clear that there is no ‘hierarchy of rights’ under the act, therefore we should not hold one protected characteristic in higher regard than another.’
At the last full council meeting in November, the leader of the council made the following comment. ‘We were doing that [Councillors Name] before you left school’.
Does the Leader of the Council regret that the Mayor, nor the Chief Executive did not intervene to reprimand the Leader for this age-based insult?
Answer 1:
At the Council meeting in November 2023, during a debate about funding, I stated in response to comments made about the Shopwatch system that we were doing that, meaning Shopwatch, before Councillor Sam Smith left school.
This comment was not insulting or derogatory and was in fact based on my belief that we have had Shopwatch here at the Council for a number of years.
There was no need for intervention as the comment in itself was not insulting. Moreover, it was made in the context of a robust political debate.
To be clear, this Council is committed to the public sector equality duty and is working hard to improve equality and diversity in the performance of its functions.
Question 2:
What plans do the council have over the next year to protect people from age-based discrimination in the council chamber, at work in the council and across the Borough as a whole.
Answer 2:
At Cabinet next week, approval is being sought for a public consultation on our Equality and Diversity Policy for 2024-27. This consultation is to ensure we obtain resident’s input on how the Council can continue to deliver on its equality objectives from 2024-27. Our Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting this month agreed to establish a working group to feed into this consultation process.
This follows on from our current Equality and Diversity Policy, Framework and Action Plan which expires in March 2024.
Between 2021-2024 the Council has been delivering and continues to deliver against an action plan of 70 actions to improve equality and diversity in the delivery of its functions.
These actions included an equality policy for staff, and customers, the roll out of equality training for all staff and Councillors, the gathering of equality data to inform service delivery, the review of all services to improve inclusivity, and on top of this the Council has agreed several other initiatives including the development of a changing places facility in Arnold, improvement of menopause awareness for staff and the establishment of a staff inclusivity group.
Tonight, on the agenda we have a new Member Code of Conduct which includes within it a requirement that Councillors promote equalities and do not discriminate unlawfully against any person.
We have equality objectives published as part of our Gedling Plan for 2023-27 and officers are already putting in place a new range of equality actions to form part of service planning for the Council in 2024/25 which will be further informed by the public consultation.
This Council takes its responsibilities in relation to equality and diversity very seriously and our Strategic equality and Diversity group, which is a cross party Member group meets regularly to ensure we are delivering on our actions as well as identifying areas for improvement. Our Portfolio Holder for Life Chances and Vulnerability works closely with officers to ensure that equality and diversity is embedded in our service delivery.
In 2024/25 the Council will continue to monitor equality related complaints to identify areas for improvement and training gaps.
As we move into 2024/25 we will have an updated policy and an action plan that is fully integrated within service planning.
These plans are to cover all protected characteristics, including age, as no protected characteristic out ranks another. Each of them are equally important.
Question 3:
Gedling Borough Council often uses the flag poles outside its entrance to mark occasions. Certain flags that the Council have flown fall outside of the Government’s approved list and therefore planning permission is required. Could the Council Leader detail when Gedling Borough Council has sought those permissions and for what flags?
Answer 3:
The regulations governing the flying of flags in England are set out in the Town and Country Planning Control of Advertisements Regulations 2007, as amended in 2012 and 2021. On the traffic island at the entrance to the Civic Centre, we’re currently flying the Gedling Borough Council flag, the Union flag and the Ukraine flag. At the vehicular entrance to Arnot Hill Park, we are proudly flying a flag of the Green Flag Award and a further Union flag.
Theses flags are permitted by the regulations and do not need consent.
In accordance with our Flag Flying Protocol, which covers the Civic Centre complex, we commit to flying other flags at certain dates during the calendar year and these flags are too permitted by the advert regulations and do not need consent.
Question 4:
Would the leader of the council expect a member of his cabinet to resign if:
said member of his cabinet made a political attack on another democratically elected member of the council which was based on that member's protected characteristics under the equalities act.
E.g. an attack based on age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.
Answer 4:
The Council has adopted a Code of Conduct for members together with local arrangements for dealing with complaints about councillors’ conduct. The Code and arrangements for dealing with complaints can be found on the Council’s website.
All complaints about Councillors’ conduct are subject to an initial assessment to determine whether the complaint warrants further action. This assessment is undertaken by the Council’s Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Council’s Independent Person.
Each case is reviewed on its individual merits having regard to the background and circumstances and having regard to a range of criteria which have been adopted by the Council.
The initial assessment may determine that there is no prima facie evidence of a code of conduct breach and that no further action will be taken; that it should be resolved by alternative action such as training, mediation or an apology or that a formal investigation should be undertaken.
If the formal investigation finds that there has been a code of conduct breach, a Hearing Panel will be convened. The Panel will determine its findings of fact, whether there has been a code of conduct breach and, if so, what sanctions should be imposed. The range of sanctions available to the Panel is set out in detail in the local arrangements referred to above. The Panel may recommend to the Leader that a member be removed from Cabinet but cannot require them to do so.
It should be noted that “political attacks” do not necessarily of themselves constitute a code of conduct breach. To constitute a breach, it must amount to a personal attack on the individual concerned. The LGA’s guidance on the interpretation of the Code recognises that on occasion there will be robust political debate in the Council chamber.
Regarding the requirement to treat others with respect, the guidance states as follows: “This provision of the Code is not intended to stand in the way of lively debate in local authorities. Such discussion is a crucial part of the democratic process. Differences of opinion and the defence of those opinions through councillors’ arguments and public debate are an essential part of the cut and thrust of political life. Councillors should be able to express their opinions and concerns in forceful terms”.
It should be noted that the law recognises the right to free speech and that there is a higher level of protection afforded to political speech.
In the case of Heesom v Public Service Ombudsman for Wales, Mr Justice Hickinbottom noted from previous case law, inter alia, that whilst freedom of expression is important for everyone, it is especially so for an elected representative of the people. He represents his electorate, draws attention to their preoccupations and defends their interests. The enhanced protection applies to all levels of politics, including local. Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects not only the substance of what is said, but also the form in which it is conveyed.
Therefore, in the political context, a degree of the immoderate, offensive, shocking, disturbing, exaggerated, provocative, polemical, colourful, emotive, non-rational and aggressive, that would not be acceptable outside that context, is tolerated.
Moreover, he notes that politicians are required to have a thick skin and be tolerant of criticism and other adverse comment. Any comment must therefore be looked at in this context. Moreover, in order to constitute a breach of the Equalities Act there must be direct or indirect discrimination to an individual or group based on their protected characteristics.