DOCSLIB.ORG

Conceptual Impact of Esrc Research: Case Study of Uk Child Poverty Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conceptual Impact of Esrc Research: Case Study of Uk Child Poverty Policy Final Report to Economic and Social Research Council CONCEPTUAL IMPACT OF ESRC RESEARCH: CASE STUDY OF UK CHILD POVERTY POLICY Mark Morrin, Steve Johnson, Laura Heron & Emma Roberts September 2011 CONSULTING INPLACE Final Report to Economic and Social Research Council CONCEPTUAL IMPACT OF ESRC RESEARCH: CASE STUDY OF CHILD POVERTY POLICY Mark Morrin, Steve Johnson, Laura Heron & Emma Roberts September 2011 LONDON OFFICE Gilmoora House 57-61 Mortimer Street London W1W 8HS T: 020 3008 5539 E: [email protected] www.consultinginplace.com BIRMINGHAM BRADFORD Wellington House Bradford Design Exchange 31-34 Waterloo Street 34 Peckover Street Birmingham Little Germany B2 5TJ Bradford BD1 5BD T: 0121 262 5111 T: 01274 743600 CONSULTING INPLACE Contents Contents .................................................................................................... 1 1. Executive Summary ............................................................................ 1 2. Introduction and background ............................................................. 4 3. Evaluation methodology ..................................................................... 6 4. Child poverty policy and its conceptual underpinnings ........................ 9 5. Key developments in social science research on child poverty ............ 18 6. Development of child poverty discourse ............................................ 25 7. Routes of impact of research on child poverty policy ......................... 35 8. Conclusions ....................................................................................... 42 9. Recommendations ............................................................................ 46 Appendix 1: Academics in receipt of ESRC funding ..................................... 47 Appendix 2: Media content analysis 2007/8 .............................................. 51 Conceptual impact of social research on child poverty policy – final report 1. Executive Summary The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) commissioned Consulting Inplace to undertake a study to explore in depth the impact of social research in general, and ESRC supported research in particular, on the development of UK policies in relation to child poverty over the past 10-15 years or so. The aim of this evaluation is to map conceptual developments, including significant changes in thinking, debate, culture and direction, underpinning the development of UK Child Poverty Policy. Our research has highlighted clear evidence that social research has indeed contributed to thought and debate on child poverty issues within the policy making sphere over a long period of time, preceding the last Government’s announcement of its commitment to eradicate child poverty by 2020. Key findings can be summarised as follows: . Conceptual impacts of research on child policy development are extremely difficult to isolate, measure and assess; however there is strong evidence from this study (corroborated by extensive desk research and consultations) that such effects have had an important influence on child poverty policy in the UK . To the extent that it has been possible to trace conceptual developments in relation to child poverty research and policy, it is clear that major shifts in thinking have occurred over a long period of time, dating back to the early 1960s at least . The main conceptual breakthroughs appear to have occurred mainly through a small number of seminal research studies (e.g. Townsend et al) although there has been, particularly since the 1990s, an increasing number of important contributions that have influenced policy thinking, culminating in a period of intense research and policy development between 1999 and 2010. Interaction between researchers and lobby groups has been an important feature of child poverty policy development, and is a relationship that has helped to create a mechanism through which research findings influence the thinking of policy-makers, including opposition political parties, their advisers and supporters . Similarly, think tanks such as the Institute for Public Policy Research and the Centre for Social Justice provide an important conduit for ‘translating’ research findings into viable policy proposals. Such interactions often take place through informal relationships but can also take the form of formal seminars, presentations and/or papers by leading academics . While policy documents cite a relatively small number of key research papers and/or authors, this is only the tip of the iceberg in terms of research impact. Our consultations suggest that formal, semi-formal and informal interactions (including secondments) between academics and government researchers are key mechanisms through which research findings are taken into account in policy development . Conceptual developments have been important in formulating the ideas of leading researchers and thinkers. The commitment made by the Labour Government in 1999 definitely stimulated further interest among some of the UK’s leading economic and social researchers and also provided a source of funding to support further, mainly applied or ‘instrumental’ research, including evaluations . While it is difficult to distinguish conceptual development from other forms of knowledge advancement, it is very clear from our review that many of the earlier CONSULTING INPLACE 1 Conceptual impact of social research on child poverty policy – final report theoretical developments in relation to child poverty laid the basis for further research of a more empirical nature that helped to highlight some of the main issues relating to child poverty in a way that attracted attention from the media and policy- makers . This process was also stimulated by ongoing financial support and dissemination activity by key organisations, notably the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, supporting many of the leading researchers in a set of primarily applied research projects that received high profile attention in policy circles . The role of ESRC in all of this is important, but difficult to disentangle from the above factors. It is clear from our study that policy impact results both from support for individuals and through the outputs produced by these individuals. We have identified a number of leading researchers who have been funded by ESRC. In addition the development of the ESRC research centre network, support for methodological research (such as cohort analysis) and funding for the creation of and access to large-scale datasets has contributed in various ways to child poverty policy development. Our recommendations are as follows: . This study has demonstrated the value of undertaking primarily qualitative research to trace the impact of social research on a broad policy area. It would certainly be worthwhile for ESRC to undertake a similar study of a contrasting policy area, for example one with a stronger economic or business focus . Alternatively, further exploration of the conceptual impact of social research on child poverty policy could be refined to isolate specific policy strands or initiatives. This could enable a deeper, more forensic, investigation of the research-policy interaction . Devoting resources to reviewing media coverage in detail has been less fruitful. We recommend that future studies should exclude this element, or undertake only ‘light touch’ media reviews . On the other hand, speaking in depth to researchers, policy-makers and other stakeholders has resulted in a great deal of insight into the policy development process that could be usefully repeated in future impact evaluation studies . The ‘academic panel’ provided very helpful support to the study team and is a model that might be usefully replicated for other studies . In principle it should be possible to gather some of the necessary information by asking researchers to record more systematically activities such as attending government-sponsored seminars, sitting on advisory groups, providing informal advice etc. It is recognised that this has its challenges, but it would be helpful to explore what might usefully done to capture activities beyond formal publication. ESRC should publicise the findings of this and other studies to highlight the contribution of social research in general and ESRC in particular to wider society. It would be very useful to be able to use case studies such as the Welsh Government example, and engage researchers, policy-makers, lobby groups, think tanks and other stakeholders in the process . Finally, this study and others have illustrated the conceptual and practical difficulties of undertaking evaluation exercises such as this. ESRC may wish to consider making CONSULTING INPLACE 2 Conceptual impact of social research on child poverty policy – final report modest investments in research into conceptual and methodological developments in relation to assessing research impact. It would also be helpful, resources permitting, to undertake at least one policy case study each year; our suggestion is that each case study should attempt to bring together conceptual, instrumental and capacity-building impacts rather than treating them separately CONSULTING INPLACE 3 Conceptual impact of social research on child poverty policy – final report 2. Introduction and background The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) commissioned Consulting Inplace to undertake a study to explore in depth the conceptual impact of social research in general, and ESRC-supported research in particular, on the development of UK
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sure Start Children's Centresps) and Sure Start Children's Buildings for Early Capital Funding Sslps Ranged from £700,000 to Over £1M
    House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee Sure Start Children’s Centres Fifth Report of Session 2009–10 Volume I HC 130-I House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee Sure Start Children’s Centres Fifth Report of Session 2009–10 Volume I Report, together with formal minutes Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 15 March 2010 HC 130-I [Incorporating HC 799-i and -ii, Session 2008–09] Published on 29 March 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Children, Schools and Families Committee The Children, Schools and Families Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Department for Children, Schools and Families and its associated public bodies. Membership at time Report agreed Mr Barry Sheerman MP (Labour, Huddersfield) (Chair) Annette Brooke MP (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset & Poole North) Ms Karen Buck MP (Labour, Regent’s Park & Kensington North) Mr Douglas Carswell MP (Conservative, Harwich) Mr David Chaytor MP (Labour, Bury North) Mrs Sharon Hodgson MP (Labour, Gateshead East & Washington West) Paul Holmes MP (Liberal Democrat, Chesterfield) Fiona Mactaggart MP (Labour, Slough) Mr Andrew Pelling MP (Independent, Croydon Central) Helen Southworth MP (Labour, Warrington South) Mr Graham Stuart MP (Conservative, Beverley & Holderness) Mr Edward Timpson MP (Conservative, Crewe & Nantwich) Derek Twigg MP (Labour, Halton) Lynda Waltho MP (Labour, Stourbridge) The following member was also a member of the Committee during the inquiry: Mr Andy Slaughter MP (Labour, Ealing, Acton and Shepherd’s Bush) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • Foster Carer Handbook and at the Rates Determined by the Council
    1 2 The copyright in the material in this Handbook is owned by the City of Cardiff Council unless otherwise stated. Brief extracts of the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (Sections 29 and 30) for the purposes of research for non-commercial purposes, private study, criticism, review and news reporting. First published 2006 Revised publication August 2014 3 4 acknowledgements During the preparation of this handbook we have consulted widely with Foster Carers and Children's Services staff in Cardiff and we have also looked at Handbooks produced by other Fostering Services. We would like to say a big thank you to everyone who has helped us. We are especially grateful to Fostering Network (Wales) and to the London Borough of Bexley. We have drawn on publications from Russell House Publishing and Papworth Publishing in developing the Handbook and we appreciate their willingness to give consent for this. We have marked their extracts in the text and provided details of the original work. We would also like to thank Ann Wheal 1, whose book "The Foster Carer's Handbook" (Russell House Publishing) provided inspiration as well as the specific material we have used with her permission in the text. Whilst we have checked the contents for accuracy; policies, procedures, legislation and guidance all change and so we will update the Handbook whenever possible to ensure that it is up to date. 1 Ann Wheal Senior Visiting Research Fellow, Division of Social Work, University of Southampton,
    [Show full text]
  • A Four Nations Perspective 1 and Child Poverty Policies
    Devolution and Child PovertyDevolution Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 1 and Child Poverty Policies A Four Nations Perspective Martin Rogers November 2019 Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 2 Contents Preface 3 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Overview 5 2.1 Definitions 5 2.2 Numbers and trends 5 2.2.1 Absolute low income and absolute poverty 5 2.2.2 Evolution of poverty measures 7 3.0 Mapping UK nations approaches to child poverty 8 3.1 The Child Poverty Act 8 3.2 England 9 3.3 Wales 9 3.4 Scotland 10 3.5 Northern Ireland 11 4.0 Analysing poverty figures and policies 12 4.1 UK figures 12 4.2 England 13 4.3 Wales 15 4.4 Scotland 16 4.5 Northern Ireland 17 5.0 Discussion 19 6.0 Conclusion 20 7.0 Bibliography 21 Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 3 Preface The British Academy has undertaken a programme of work that seeks to re-frame debates around childhood in both the public and policy spaces and break down academic, policy and professional silos in order to explore new conceptualisations of children in policymaking. The purpose of the policy case studies is to explore differences in approaches to policymaking around childhood taken by the governments of the four UK nations over the past 30 years. The subjects of the case studies (Young People Leaving Care and Child Poverty) have been selected because they exemplify some of the differences in the drivers of policy development across the four UK nations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Foundation Years: Preventing Poor Children Becoming Poor Adults
    The Foundation Years: preventing poor children becoming poor adults The report of the Independent Review on Poverty and Life Chances Frank Field Cabinet Office 22 Whitehall London SW1A 2WH Publication date: December 2010 © Crown copyright 2010 This document/publication can also be viewed on You may re-use this information (not including logos) our website at www.frankfield.co.uk free of charge in any format or medium, under the Any enquiries regarding this document/publication terms of the Open Government Licence. should be sent to us at: To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ [email protected] doc/open-government-licence/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The material used in this publication is constituted The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, from 75% post consumer waste and 25% virgin fibre. or e-mail: [email protected]. Ref: 403244 /1210 December 2010 1 Contents Acknowledgements 3 IntroductionandRecommendations 5 Chapter1 APersonalCommentary 11 Chapter2 PovertyandLifeChances 27 Chapter3 TheInfluencesonChildren’sLifeChances 37 Chapter4 BuildingFoundationYearsServices 53 Chapter5 ANewFrameworkforMeasuringPovertyandLifeChances 71 Chapter6 OverviewoftheConsultationProcessandSummaryofFormalSubmissions 85 AnnexA LifeChancesIndicators–RecommendedMeasures 93 AnnexB OptionsforanewMeasureofServiceQuality 95 AnnexC ConsultationDetails 98 AnnexD FrankField’sPublicStatements 104 2 TheFoundationYears Acknowledgements 3 Acknowledgements AsthebulkoftheReview’sworkhasbeen IwishalsotothanktheteamofSeniorOfficials
    [Show full text]
  • Child Poverty in the UK (Target for Reduction) Bill, 2016-17
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 7891, 1 February 2017 Child Poverty in the UK By Feargal McGuinness (Target for Reduction) Bill, 2016-17 Contents: 1. The Bill 2. Policy developments since 2010 3. Statistics on child poverty www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary 2 Child Poverty in the UK (Target for Reduction) Bill, 2016-17 Contents Summary 3 1. The Bill 4 2. Policy developments since 2010 5 2.1 The Child Poverty Act 2010 5 2.2 The Child Poverty Strategy 2011-14 and consultation on Measuring Child Poverty 6 2.3 Child Poverty Strategy 2014-17 7 2.4 The Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 and ‘life chances’ 8 2.5 Life chances strategy 9 3. Statistics on child poverty 11 3.1 What do the measures used in the Bill mean? 11 3.2 Recent trends and projections 12 Relative and absolute low income 12 Low income and material deprivation 14 Persistent poverty 14 Projections for child poverty 15 3.3 ‘Life chances’ indicators 17 Children in workless households 17 Educational attainment 18 Cover page image copyright: After school play by Nella2010. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. 3 Commons Library Briefing, 1 February 2017 Summary This briefing has been prepared ahead of second reading on the Child Poverty in the UK (Target for Reduction) Bill 2016-17, scheduled to occur on 3 February 2017. This Bill is a Private Members’ Bill (Ballot Bill), sponsored by Dan Jarvis MP. The Bill places a duty on the Secretary of State to meet four targets for child poverty by some target date (to be specified).
    [Show full text]
  • Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 NECPC Briefing Note (June 2016)
    Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 NECPC Briefing Note (June 2016) 1. Background The Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 passed into law on 16th March 2016.1 It holds significant implications for how the Government seeks to define, measure and address child poverty in the UK. The Act marks a policy movement away from income-based measures of poverty and removes statutory obligations on local authorities to reduce child poverty. Instead, it emphasises tackling worklessness, improving educational attainment and supporting ‘troubled’ families as the most effective ways to address what the Government considers to be the ‘root causes’ of poverty. Later this year the Government will introduce its Life Chances Strategy, which will put forward a plan to, ‘tackle poverty and the causes of deprivation, including family instability, addiction and debt.’2 As part of this, the Government will introduce a new set of indicators for measuring life chances. This briefing summarises some key changes arising from the introduction of the Act, and outlines emerging areas of concern shared by the North East Child Poverty Commission (NECPC) and other commentators. 2. Provisions of the Act - Child poverty policy and measurement Key elements which impact on child poverty policy and accountability are as follows: i. The Act repeals sections 1-11, 15, 17 and 19-25 of the Child Poverty Act 2010. This effectively abolishes all legal targets to reduce child poverty, and removes the requirement for the Government to produce a Child Poverty Strategy. It also removes all Local Duties for local authorities to produce child poverty strategies and needs assessments.
    [Show full text]
  • FULLY COMMITTED? How a Government Could Reverse Family Breakdown
    Breakthrough Britain 2015 FULLY COMMITTED? How a Government could reverse family breakdown July 2014 contents Contents About the Centre for Social Justice 3 Director’s preface 4 Members of the CSJ Working Group 6 Special thanks 9 Chairman’s foreword 10 Breakthrough Britain 2015 12 Executive summary 14 Introduction 23 Key principles 25 A Cabinet-level Minister for Families 34 Summary of recommendations 36 Part one: Laying foundations for safe, stable and nurturing relationships 1 Relationship education in schools 39 Introduction 39 Rising to the challenge of teenage relationship abuse 40 Going beyond sex education 41 Role of non-school providers and parents 43 Summary of recommendations 45 Part two: Forming and maintaining healthy relationships 2 Family Hubs 47 Introduction 47 A new vision for Sure Start – Family Hubs 48 The ‘go to’ place for both parents to access services or information about all family-related matters 49 Maximise impact and reduce costs of statutory services 52 Link local activities provided by volunteers through VCS, faith and parent groups 57 Summary of recommendations 57 3 Fathers and Family Hubs 59 Introduction 59 Improving father involvement in perinatal services 61 Payment and inspection to drive father involvement 63 Birth registration 64 Summary of recommendations 66 Fully Committed? | Contents 1 4 Supporting couple relationships 67 Introduction 67 Relationship breakdown is not inevitable 69 Financial support for couples 76 Addressing couple penalties 77 Summary of recommendations 78 5 Father involvement from
    [Show full text]
  • Child Poverty Act 2010: a Short Guide
    Child Poverty Act 2010: a short guide Standard Note: SN/SP/5585 Last updated: 4 July 2014 Author: Steven Kennedy Section Social Policy Section In March 1999 Tony Blair announced a commitment to “eradicate” child poverty in the United Kingdom by 2020. Gordon Brown announced Labour’s intention to enshrine in law the 2020 child poverty target in a speech to the Labour Party Conference on 23 September 2008. The Child Poverty Act 2010, which received Royal Assent in March 2010, fulfilled the commitment to enshrine the child poverty target in legislation. It established four separate child poverty targets to be met by 2020/21, requires the UK Government to publish a regular UK child poverty strategy, requires the Scottish and Northern Irish Ministers to publish child poverty strategies, paved the way for a Child Poverty Commission to provide advice, requires the UK Government to publish annual progress reports, and places new duties on local authorities and other “delivery partners” in England to work together to tackle child poverty. The Child Poverty Bill received cross-party support but the Conservatives argued that the child poverty targets should focus on the underlying causes of poverty. The current Government amended the 2010 Act to expand the remit of the Commission to also provide advice on, and monitor progress towards improving, social mobility. The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission, chaired by Alan Milburn, published its first annual State of the Nation report in October 2013. It concluded that the 2020 child poverty target was likely to be missed by a considerable margin, and that progress on social mobility could be undermined by the twin problems of youth unemployment and falling living standards.
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Modern Studies Advanced Higher Finalised Marking Instructions
    National Qualifications 2017 2017 Modern Studies Advanced Higher Finalised Marking Instructions Scottish Qualifications Authority 2017 The information in this publication may be reproduced to support SQA qualifications only on a non- commercial basis. If it is reproduced, SQA should be clearly acknowledged as the source. If it is to be used for any other purpose, written permission must be obtained from [email protected]. Where the publication includes materials from sources other than SQA (secondary copyright), this material should only be reproduced for the purposes of examination or assessment. If it needs to be reproduced for any other purpose it is the centre’s responsibility to obtain the necessary copyright clearance. SQA’s NQ Assessment team may be able to direct you to the secondary sources. These marking instructions have been prepared by examination teams for use by SQA appointed markers when marking external course assessments. This publication must not be reproduced for commercial or trade purposes. © General marking principles for Advanced Higher Modern Studies This information is provided to help you understand the general principles you must apply when marking candidate responses to questions in this paper. These principles must be read in conjunction with the detailed marking instructions, which identify the key features required in candidate responses. (a) Marks for each candidate response must always be assigned in line with these general marking principles and the detailed marking instructions for this assessment. (b) Marking should always be positive. This means that, for each candidate response, marks are accumulated for the demonstration of relevant skills, knowledge and understanding: they are not deducted from a maximum on the basis of errors or omissions.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Support for the Downgrading of Income-Based Poverty Measures
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by LSE Research Online Soc Indic Res https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1880-9 Child Poverty Measurement in the UK: Assessing Support for the Downgrading of Income‑Based Poverty Measures Kitty Stewart1 · Nick Roberts2 Accepted: 14 March 2018 © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract In 2016 the UK’s Conservative Government radically changed the ofcial approach to child poverty measurement, scrapping targets for income poverty and material deprivation and introducing instead indicators of household ‘worklessness’ and children’s educational attainment at age 16. This paper seeks to assess the extent of support for this move among a range of national experts. The paper briefy reviews the way that poverty has been conceptualized by researchers going back to Booth and Rowntree, before going on to examine 251 responses to a 2012–2013 UK government consultation on child pov- erty measurement. By drawing on the consultation, the paper is able to consider the views of those working in local authorities, children’s charities and frontline services as well as academic researchers. In doing so, it seeks to contribute to the literature on poverty meas- urement by considering a wider set of voices than are often heard. The paper identifes very clear and broad-based support for an approach to poverty measurement that has income and material deprivation at its heart. Out of 251 responses, just two advocate removing income from poverty measurement. Responses also overwhelmingly refect a relative understanding of poverty. There is fairly limited support for a multidimensional approach, and the paper refects on why this might be, given a shift to more multidimensional think- ing about poverty globally.
    [Show full text]
  • Child Poverty Act 2010
    Status: Point in time view as at 16/01/2012. Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Child Poverty Act 2010. (See end of Document for details) Child Poverty Act 2010 2010 CHAPTER 9 An Act to set targets relating to the eradication of child poverty, and to make other provision about child poverty. [25th March 2010] BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— PART 1 NATIONAL TARGETS, STRATEGIES AND REPORTS Targets relating to child poverty 1 The 2010 target (1) The Secretary of State must, as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of the 2010 target year and in any event not later than 30 June 2012, lay before Parliament a report on whether the 2010 target has been met. (2) The 2010 target is that in the financial year beginning with 1 April 2010, 1.7 million children or fewer live in qualifying households in the United Kingdom that fell within the relevant income group for the purposes of section 3 (the relative low income target). (3) The report must be based on statistics that the Statistics Board has designated under section 12 of the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 (assessment) as National Statistics. (4) Whether the target has been met in relation to the 2010 target year is to be determined by reference to the statistics. (5) If the target has not been met, the report must explain why it has not been met.
    [Show full text]
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
    SUBMISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS’ COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS Parallel Report on the Sixth Periodic Report of the United Kingdom under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights September 2015 Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission Temple Court, 39 North Street Belfast BT1 1NA Tel: +44 (0) 28 9024 3987 Fax: +44 (0) 28 9024 7844 Textphone: +44 (0) 28 9024 9066 SMS Text: +44 (0) 7786 202075 Email: [email protected] Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 11 Ratification of Optional Protocol ........................................................................................................... 11 Involvement of NI Executive in treaty reporting .................................................................................... 12 Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission ........................................................................................ 12 Constitutional and legal framework .......................................................................................................... 13 Incorporation of economic, social and cultural rights ............................................................................ 13 Human Rights Act and proposed repeal ....................................................................................... 13 Relationship of Human Rights Act to NI peace agreements .........................................................
    [Show full text]