http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
Runnymede Trust Email: [email protected]
7 March 2021
Dear Sir/Madam
Re: Caste based discrimination, hate and harassment
1. Please find the Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance’s (ACDA) response to the Runnymede Trust’s call for evidence on the Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) on behalf of civil society organisations. This submission by the ACDA, and our recommendations to UN’s CERD, are in respect of Caste Discrimination law and hate crime and hate speech. ACDA is supported by numerous Dalit organisations in the UK we work closely with. Amongst these are the Federation of Ambedkarites and Buddhist Organisations UK, Shri Guru Ravidass Sabha UK, and the Bhagwan Valmik Sabhas.
2. The ACDA was formed in 2008 to monitor and oppose Caste-based discrimination (CBD) in the UK and abroad. We are registered with the Charity Commission (Charity No: 1138012) and an organisation of unpaid volunteers. We support victims and those who suffer from CBD and challenge discriminatory practices in organisations.
3. We request that CERD, in line with its Concluding Observations on the twenty-first to twenty-third periodic reports of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, on 26 August 2016 (paragraphs 7 and 8); and its prior recommendations on the issue, strongly recommends to the UK Government that it implements the law agreed by the UK Parliament on 23 April 2013 and implements Section 9(5) a of the Equality Act 2010 (EA2010). This would make Caste an aspect of Race as one of the protected characteristics. This clarity in the law will raise awareness of Caste-base discrimination (CBD) in employment, provision of services and education and prevent suffering of those who are subjected to CBD.
4. We request that CERD questions the UK Government’s continued stance that the it would rather monitor litigation in the UK courts that may test or support the Tirkey v Chandhok Employment Tribunal Judgment (September 2015) than provide the clarification in the law.
1 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012
http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
The Tirkey Judgment highlighted the need for clarification of the law. ACDA’s assessment of the law needs to be implemented is set out in this submission. Furthermore, we have first-hand experience of CBD related legal cases that have been settled out of court with Non- Disclosure Agreements (NDA. These are preventing the monitoring of litigation that may not end up in the courts allowing Government NGOs to make an assessment of the scale of the problem.
5. CERD in its 2016 Concluding Observations also expressed serious concerns about the sharp increase in racist hate speech and hate crimes. We request that CERD calls on the UK Government to make specific, Caste-related hate speech and crimes within its Hate Crime laws. We have already called on the UK Government to include Caste as a factor in hate crimes and hate speeches. Our submission to them has been based on evidence of those who have lived experience of Caste domination, Caste-based discrimination and Caste-related hatred, threats, violence and abuse and how it affects communities here in Britain.
6. We are deeply disappointed the Government has not implemented section 9(5)a of the Equality Act 2010 despite an implementation timetable. Instead it carried out a flawed consultation exercise asking responders to choose between a legislative solution or case law on a piece of legislation that had already been passed by parliament. The process brushed aside the sovereignty of parliament. Our voices, and that of the victims and sufferers we represent, have fallen on deaf ears.
7. The Government has failed to implement the recommendations from UNCERD in relation to CBD in the UK. Instead it has disappointingly sought to repeal the power on Caste in the EA2010 arguing CBD can be dealt with under existing legislation covering ethnic origin. This is a direction that ACDA and some other organisations representing Dalit groups in the UK are opposed to and does not adequately cover all cases of caste-based discrimination.
8. In addition to the UN CERD’s calls for implementation of the law on CBD, the law is supported by:
i. Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). In its response in July 2018 to the Government’s decision to repeal the law, the EHRC said “Victims of caste discrimination will continue to have limited legal protection by the government ruling out a change in the law and restricting the scope of protection to what can be interpreted through case law. The
2 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012
http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
government has missed a crucial opportunity to improve legal clarity and has taken a step back by looking to repeal the duty to include caste as an aspect of race in the Equality Act 2010….”1. EHRC expert opinion and position on the issue is significant and the omission of this is worrying;
ii. Dozens of organisations like the ACDA and others, in Britain who have been supporting sufferers of Caste discrimination and harassment and calling for legal protection for victims and clarity in the law;
iii. The Joint Committee of Human Rights (JCHR). In June 2019, the Chair of JCHR, Harriet Harman wrote to Ms Penny Mordaunt, Minister for Women and Equalities, asking her to implement the caste discrimination law agreed in April 2013 (see attached)
9. Internationally, Twitter2 and YouTube3 and Facebook4 recognise in their guidance Caste hate speech as being unacceptable. Here in the UK, the Crown Prosecution Service has recognised Caste as a factor in Honour-based Violence and Forced Marriage5.
10. The Shadow Justice Secretary, David Lammy published a review in 20176, into the treatment and outcomes of BAME individuals in the criminal justice system. This must now be implemented to ensure that people regardless of their racial background are treated equally. Recent figures show that 9 out of 10 children on remand in London are from a BAME background. It would appear that inherent bias already exists in the criminal justice system. The absence of Caste within the hate crime law would further disadvantage victims by compounding its effects.
11. The Government made the decision to repeal the law based on responses to its delayed 2017 public consultation (promised in July 2013). This was a flawed consultation that should have been about
1 https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/caste-consultation-our-response- government-statement 2 https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy 3 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801939?hl=en-GB 4 https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech 5 https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/honour-based-violence-and-forced-marriage
6 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/21/nine-out-of-10-children-on-remand-in-london- come-from-bame-background? CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other 3 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012
http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
how best to implement the law as previously promised – not about whether to implement it. The Government said they wanted to consult the communities likely to be affected by the legislation. By that they didn’t mean just the Dalits who were the main sufferers of the discrimination. They meant the whole of the Hindu and Sikh communities who had been lobbying against the law using the argument, in spite of evidence to the contrary, that there was no Caste- based discrimination in the UK. By accepting the views of these groups, it is like the Government is saying, “We’re not going to introduce legislation on race discrimination because white or blue folk might object to it.” Or, “We’re not going to have legislation on gender because men didn’t like it.” But that’s what the UK Government did. Additionally, the limited legal protection and context the Tirkey judgement provides is brushed aside. When asked about a preferred option, a very significant majority - 2,879 – came out in support of implementation of the law in the consultation responses. Only 94 said they supported case law, and 4,722 said they didn’t know.
12. The Tirkey v Chandok Employment Appeal Tribunal December 2014 Judgment - may allow victims to pursue their legal cases under existing law. In our view, the Tirkey case provides only limited legal protection on ‘ethnic’ grounds and the principles of that specific case law could be overturned anytime. Furthermore, seeking redress on ‘ethnic origins’ makes it difficult to cover CBD because many people who have arrived and settled in Britain come from the same geographical region e.g. Punjab, Gujarat, and Maharashtra etc. India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan. These groups have several common languages (e.g. Punjabi, Marathi, Gujarati, Urdu); belong to a common religion; have similar eating habits; have common dress and similar colour of skin. To a non-South Asian employer or teacher, these groups look racially and culturally identical. But evidence shows some still face discrimination on the basis of Caste from each other.
13. Caste and CBD and harassment are social and cultural issues that cannot be ignored in the UK or by the law. It must be tackled with legislation as has Female Genital Mutilation, Forced Marriages, and Honour Based Violence. There are nearly 4 million (2011 census figures) people from the South Asian diaspora [India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka] in Great Britain. Caste and CBD impacts on these citizens. The Government has said no one should suffer discrimination and harassment because of their Caste. Evidence of Caste-based discrimination (CBD) has been established in numerous Government-commissioned and independent reports including by the Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA). CBD occurs in:
4 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012
http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
• Education (pupil on pupil bullying) • Employment and enterprise (bullying, recruitment, promotion, task allocation) • Health (treatment by healthcare professionals) • Crime and policing (where Caste discrimination and harassment is not understood by the police)
300 people inputted into ACDA’s research the findings of which were set out in our 2009 report A Hidden Apartheid. ACDA’s research included nine focus groups held around the country. Of the 100 who took part in the on-line survey: - 9% said they had missed promotion at work - 9% said they had experienced verbal abuse - 7% under 12 year olds – said they had faced threatening behaviour and 16% verbal abuse; - 10% of perpetrators of under 12 year olds were teachers and 42% fellow pupils
14. .In the past year alone we have supported many sufferers and victims subjected to CBD, Caste related hate and harassment. Below are a few examples:
i. A man made and posted on his TikTok account a video of himself speaking in Punjabi in which he verbally abused and used Casteist language in the vilest and disgusting way. He insulted Guru Ravidass who is the spiritual figurehead / Guru for millions of his followers across the world, including over 200,000 here in the UK. This matter was reported extensively to the Police as a hate crime.
ii. A 14 year-old boy from the Ravidassia community was subjected to sustained Caste-related bullying at a school in West London by so- called higher Caste Sikh boys. This bullying continued outside where he was physically attacked. There was also verbal abuse of a sexual nature against his mother.
iii. An Indian woman was subjected to Caste-based harassment and taunts in the workplace by a so-called high Caste man. When she complained to her Human Resources department who took little action until she approached the ACDA. In the meantime, the perpetrator threated to ‘get her’ outside the factory. She was scared to go to work.
iv. A family of a Dalit man who wanted to marry his girlfriend, who was from a so-called higher Caste, faced verbal threats from girl’s family. The girl’s family agreed to the wedding only if it would take place in
5 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012
http://www.acdauk.org.uk Email: [email protected] Patron: Miss Joanna Lumley
India. The boy’s family feared their son might be assaulted or killed in India for marrying above his Caste status
v. A Caste-related neighbours’ dispute in Kent resulted in years of misery for the neighbour being harassed and victimised.
15. Only by specifically adding Caste as a protected characteristic and adding Caste as a factor to Hate Crime Law can victims know there are procedures and legal protections in place to help them. It will also help the police to understand the nuances of the language used and threats made in cases reported to them and allow them to ask the right questions. Caste-related hate and harassment is no less offensive than if somebody had made anti-Jewish, anti-Islam or anti-Christian taunts, threats or assaults.
16. In conclusion, the UK Government has been woefully inadequate in implementing its obligations to UN CERD in relation to CBD law. We urge the Runnymede Trust to explicitly portray this failure, and to urge the UK Government to fulfil its obligations so that victims of CBD, hate and harassment are protected.
Yours faithfully
Dr Raj Chand Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance 00447710888424
6 Anti Caste Discrimination Alliance (ACDA), c/o Dr R Chand, Garden City Surgery, 57-59 Station Rd, Letchworth, Herts, SG6 3BJ Charity Number – 1138012 Anti-Tribalism Movement Culture House, 5A Uxbridge Road Shepherd’s Bush W12 8LJ Tell: 02035881880 [email protected] Act Today For A Better Tomorrow Web: www.theatm.org
At Anti -Tribalism Movement (ATM), we believe Housing is a more than Home, a sense of stability, belonging, quality of health and well-being. Housing is human right that cuts across the life and choices of citizens everywhere, an indication of one’s position in a given society.
Over the course of ten years of service to the Somali community, ATM has observed the challenges existing and new Somali immigrants experience. Through our work our clients have reported living in poor housing conditions, restricted choices and lack of security of tenure. These are experiences shared with similar other disadvantaged groups within the housing system (in particular, homeless people.
Housing Overcrowding:
The issue of housing overcrowding has become a common issue that has been reported to ATM for a number of years. This common prevalence is unique to the Somali community due to the composition of large households within a family home setting and the general national and local housing policies have failed to respond adequately to this acute issue to Somali families. The policy making focus has been to build 1,2,3-bedroom properties for professional families, often categorised as affordable housing beyond the reach and scope of our communities. This is a lopsided approach to housing policy making that discriminates against vulnerable communities. Communities such as the Somali community cannot muster the lobbing tactics and networks that can influence government policy making at the national and local level. What matters to policy makers are those that shout the loudest in practice and have representation in the media, hence the general housing policy focus on professionals through small sized family and individual homes.
The only policy instrument that has been utilised by the community is to present themselves in the Local Government’s housing waiting list. Large number of the community has been languishing in this waiting list for more than 10 -15 years without any joy. This is in effect gate-keeping measure that is intended to manage finite housing resources. This national and local making housing failure that has weakened the structural safety net of the community and this has been brought to bear by the COVID19 pandemic which gave the community no space or capacity to isolate and help tackle the spread of the virus across multi-generational families living in cramp overcrowded homes settings. Under this context, it is fair to say historical structural policy failures has been further exacerbated by the impact of COVID19 on poorer communities who are already starting from a very low position economically and politically. This is the result of the untended consequences of policy making that has created housing underclass and social exclusion in the Somali community.
Company limited by grantee Registration No. 07002550. Charity number: 1168836
Anti-Tribalism Movement Culture House, 5A Uxbridge Road Shepherd’s Bush W12 8LJ Tell: 02035881880 [email protected] Act Today For A Better Tomorrow Web: www.theatm.org
Sub-standard housing:
Many in the community has reported living in bad housing conditions with many health and quality hazards, including damp, roach infestations, general long-standing disrepairs with the heating and the hot water boiler system. This is further compounded by exploitation and discriminatory practices by private landlords. At ATM, we have also observed tenants are at times unwilling to report such predatory landlords for fear of losing their homes, leaving landlords to overcharge rents and ignore maintenance request. In our experience we have also observed the problem is far more complex as local authorities are unwilling to punish private landlords for fear of losing housing supply from the market as the nature of housing shortages has created uneven power relationship between private landlords and local authorities. This has created the conditions and environment where the tenants are always the losers in the struggle. The Somali community struggle under the power dynamics and unintended tacit negotiated settlement between local authorities and private landlords. This is another discrimination that violates the rights of the individual and families to live in a dignified housing condition.
Housing Displacement:
The Localism Act 2011 gave local authorities powers to interpret housing need and design local housing policies based on their interest and resources available to them. Our work and experience have observed such legal move has caused upheaval and suffering among the Somali community as families has been moved away across the country and in different boroughs within London. This has caused displacement from local schools, employment, social and family networks.
To compound matters, if a family refuses to take an offer of property away from their locality, housing departments often issue formal decisions threatening families with evictions and end of duty to housing from the local authorities. The councils refer such cases to Children Social Service where parents fear their children would be taken away by authorities and feel compelled to accept housing tenancies that are not in their best interest.
When you are already vulnerable such move has caused emotional, stress and health problems. The community is also already vulnerable to homelessness and evictions and this policy change nationally and locally has disproportionately impacted on them, creating a form of social exclusion and disruptions in children’s education at early stage. This instability in housing further exacerbates settling for substandard housing.
Company limited by grantee Registration No. 07002550. Charity number: 1168836
Anti-Tribalism Movement Culture House, 5A Uxbridge Road Shepherd’s Bush W12 8LJ Tell: 02035881880 [email protected] Act Today For A Better Tomorrow Web: www.theatm.org
Recommendations:
• Housing authorities and building contractors to build more houses and apartments to accommodate larger household sizes as a matter of policy. • Help enforce a fairer housing market. The key bottom line is to make the housing market fair by not making it a private landlord only-run market. • Increase the enforcement of and regulations surrounding housing maintenance and landlord practices. There should a workable robust regulatory measure to discourage landlord exploitation around rents and property disrepair. • Provide more culturally sensitive housing programs and services. Time after time, the community has reported that having culturally sensitive housing services is key to addressing culturally nuanced housing matters faced by the community. • Help facilitate more grassroots efforts that encourage Somali community to be involved in the political process where housing decisions are made. Community should be invited to share their stories with those who are in power and make their narratives more transparent at the decision-making level. • Expand housing capacity by changing tenant requirements or restrictions to accommodate more diverse tenants and families. This strategy would help to ensure that multi-generational and non-traditional families are able to find and secure housing. • Provide resources to community organisations that already offer housing services to Somali communities. This financial support can support organisational capacity, which will strengthen community resilience and empowerment in housing services. • Create more economic opportunity for Somali families to be able to secure and maintain employment. One of the biggest housing obstacles, as reported by many in the community, is the increasing rents and loss or lack of jobs. Providing economic means for families is one key strategy to mitigate housing barriers and discriminations. • Promote and provide more educational workshops for Somali families. The most important thing is to educate the Somali community on what affordable rent means, so they know what kind of housing is available to them. This is critical because it allows them to advocate for themselves – to know when to make requests to their landlords if they find themselves living in poor housing conditions.
Company limited by grantee Registration No. 07002550. Charity number: 1168836
Anti-Tribalism Movement Culture House, 5A Uxbridge Road Shepherd’s Bush W12 8LJ Tell: 02035881880 [email protected] Act Today For A Better Tomorrow Web: www.theatm.org
Summary:
In our community work and experience, we found many key housing challenges faced by the Somali community. The housing issues commonly reported by communities are lack of affordable housing, substandard housing, and overcrowding. The system of housing allocation and provision is broken and unnecessarily discriminates against vulnerable communities who are already structurally facing many economic, social and political challenges at grassroots level.
Sources:
Aden, H., Osman, K., Robinson, D., (2007). The Housing Pathways of Somali New Immigrants in Sheffield. Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research.
Cole, Ian & Robinson, David. (2003). Somali Housing Experiences in England.
Homeless Link, (2018). Implementing the Homelessness Reduction Act Learning from Homeless Link’s regional events. [online]. London: [Viewed 5th March 2020]. Available from: https://www.homeless.org.uk/sites/default/files/site- attachments/Implementing%20the%20Homelessness%20Reduction%20Act.pdf
Osman, I., Samota, N,. Mohamed, M., Nur, A. (2015) Somali Community and the state of Housing, Council of Somali Organisations briefing paper.
Company limited by grantee Registration No. 07002550. Charity number: 1168836
Wayne Reid
Anti-racism in Social Work 2021
Wayne Reid Professional Officer, Social Worker & Anti-Racism Visionary BASW England [email protected] @wayne_reid79 @BASW_UK What to expect
• My Social Work background
• The British Association of Social Workers
• George Floyd’s murder
• Black Lives Matter & why it’s relevant to Social Work
• Barriers to anti-racism in Social Work & organisational responses
• Implementing anti-racism reforms in Social Work
• Questions?
*NO NEED TO TAKE NOTES My Social Work background
• Professional Officer & Social Worker (BASW)
• Supervising Social Worker (private fostering Social Work)
• Young Person’s Advisor (supporting care leavers)
• Duty & Assessment Officer (child protection)
• Adult Mental Health (community support / intervention)
• Youth Offending Service (court work and community intervention)
• Probation Services Officer (intensive supervision & surveillance)
• Placements Officer (private fostering administration) The British Association of Social Workers (BASW)
• BASW is the professional association for Social Workers in the UK (established in 1970).
• We are a member-led organisation which promotes Social Work, the interests of those working within the profession and people who use services.
• We have over 21,000 members and we have teams in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
• We are the strong independent voice of Social Work and Social Workers. The BASW mandate • Strong – We build strength and unity through vision and purpose, increasing our membership, developing our services, and influencing across the nations of the UK, in Europe and globally.
• Independent – We maintain our independence from governments and employers in order to be able to act in the best interests of the profession and Social Work professionals.
• Voice – We ensure a strong and positive voice in the media, with governments and working with their agencies, in order to speak up for Social Work and Social Workers, for people who use services. We campaign and lobby in order to have the best possible influence on policy, legislation and practice.
• Social work – We promote ownership of Social Work values, ethics, knowledge, education and practice. We defend, develop and strengthen Social Work as a unique profession rooted in social justice and respect for human dignity and worth.
• Social workers – We provide professional advice, support for practice, training and development opportunities. We also represent and defend Social Workers individually and collectively. What we do for Social Work & Social Workers • Code of Ethics for Social Work
• The Professional Capabilities Framework (PCF)
• Collaboration with employers, education providers, service-user groups and other stakeholders
• Specialist national groups (children & families; adults; mental health; criminal justice; students and NQSW’s and professional development)
• An established network of BASW branches nationwide
• Events, conferences & webinars
• Policy & research activities
• Liaison with the regulator Social Work England BASW quick weblinks
• Promo video
• Membership types are listed here
• BASW events webpage
• Join BASW online here • Parliamentary work with MP’s and civil servants
• Training, CPD and career development
• Social Workers’ Union (trade union advice and representation)
• National consultation responses, campaigns and lobbying activities
• Black & Ethnic Minority Professionals Symposium (BPS)
• Raising the profile of social work on various media platforms (TV, radio, print, online etc)
• Promote ‘collective professional identity’ Wayne Reid
Anti-racism in Social Work 2021 My perspective on anti-racism in Social Work
• Personal and professional
• Very few black male Social Workers
• My opinions do not represent all Black and Ethnic Minority people’s opinions. We are not a homogenous group.
• I refuse to be the tokenistic ‘Black voice’ of BASW. I’m one of many Black voices in Social Work.
• I’m not an expert in organisational development/leadership. However, I am an ‘expert with lived experience’ of personal and professional racism in life and in Social Work. These are purely my opinions.
• This presentation focuses on Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers NOT service-users Why was George Floyd’s murder such a catalyst?
George Floyd was murdered by a Police Officer and the world has seen the evidence. His murder was the latest in a long line of atrocities, brutalities and calamities endured by Black and other Ethnic Majority Communities. This has a long history. Longer than is sometimes convenient for honest acknowledgement. Some commentators refer to George’s ‘death’, which is a dilution of what occurred – he was brutally murdered.
The context to George’s murder is emotive and cumulative: the Amy Cooper ‘race grenade’; endless examples of police brutality cases in the US (and UK); modern-day systems of oppression and the historic and ongoing suppression of the effects of slavery and colonialism in mainstream education. These factors can accumulate and create an acute sense of anger and rage. These emotions sometimes manifest into civil disorder and protests. However, anarchic extremists are known to infiltrate protests and covertly fuel acts of looting and violence, which are used to discredit legitimate protesters. This detracts from the causal factors that trigger protests. Interestingly, little is reported about the longstanding looting of Africa’s natural resources… #blacklivesmatter
• Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a global movement demanding for Black lives to be valued equal to White lives. There is a long and enduring history of this not being the case.
• The retort of ‘White’ or ‘all lives matter’ in response to BLM is not comparable or relevant. This is like asking: “What about colon cancer?” during a discussion about breast cancer? Or advising a bereaved mother that ‘all lives matter’ at her child’s funeral. “Save the whales” does not mean other sea life is unimportant.
• White lives have always mattered. So, to keep proclaiming ‘White lives matter’ adds excessive value to them, tilting us further towards white supremacy.
BLM has its critics, but it is unclear why a movement that promotes equality is demonised by some people who vehemently claim they are not ‘a’ racist and advocate for freedom of speech. 2020 chronology
Since George’s Floyd’s killing and the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement, BASW has been at the forefront of anti-racist Social Work activism. We have championed anti-racism in Social Work on a scale unrivalled by any other organisation within the profession.
May 2020 • The Amy Cooper ‘race grenade’ goes viral on Twitter • The George Floyd murder goes viral on Twitter
June 2020 • WR tweets: “It’s very revealing to observe the indifference, silence and tokenism from some Social Work leaders, prominent Social Workers and Social Work organisations during these times of serious racial violations... I see you... We all see you…” • WR anti-racism and #blacklivesmatter Twitter campaign commences • BASW issues a statement condemning the racist murder of George Floyd • BASW condemned all forms of racism on Twitter • Global #Blacklivesmatter protests (including many peaceful #BLM protests in the UK) • ‘Counter-protests’ by far-right groups and major clashes with Police • BASW EDI Advisory Group issues a position statement • Counter protests in the UK from far-right groups • BASW supports campaign for black person's statue in Bristol Chronology (continued)
• WR Community Care article: ‘Black Lives Matter: Social Work must respond with action – not platitudes’
• WR ‘Revolution’ poem
• The KCMG campaign and BASW open letter to the Queen
• How to promote an anti-racist culture in Social Work (online article)
• Podcast interviews with: David Niven; BASW NI; Jason Liosatos & Social Work Connect
• BASW Black & Ethnic Minority Professionals Symposium (BPS)
• BASW Equality, Diversity & Inclusion Advisory Group
• Black & Ethnic Minority Social Workers anthology - OUTLANDERS
• Anti-racism presentations, webinars & workshops
• View the BASW anti-racism in Social Work portfolio Current position
The KCMG campaign is ongoing. We have received an acknowledgement from Buckingham Palace and our letter has been redirected to the Cabinet office. However, in a bizarre twist, the original tweet (which went viral) has now been deleted from Twitter. We have asked Twitter to explain this, but no response has been received. We know silence on racism is complicity with the oppressors. Silence can also be construed as blatant racism in some scenarios. It seems when our oppressors choose not to attack us, the wall of silence is their other favoured tactic. Open dialogue has remained a prominent source of conflict resolution for good reason – it works! It helps to positively undermine any covert or overt power imbalance.
BASW England will continue to educate, equip and empower Social Workers of colour and allies. As an organisation, we realise that we are not immune to the perils of white supremacy and ‘whiteness’. However, BASW has shown a willingness to address and tackle these issues internally and within the profession more broadly. We will consider all anti-racist proposals from partnership organisations and specialist collaborators that will potentially benefit Social Work. Examples of my activism on anti-racism in Social Work
Guardian Social Lives 2020
An event with David Olusoga & Isabelle Trowler Anthology project The BASW England Black & Ethnic Minority Professionals Symposium
Several articles published by major Social Work outlets Various online events, podcasts & webinars An event with Gurnam Singh & Kish Bhatti-Sinclair Politics with a small ‘p’
It’s a bad state of affairs when those in power use the media to corrupt our societal world view, so that to be 'woke' or to 'do-good' is considered something to sneer at. Accusations of ‘virtue signalling’ and ‘victimhood’ do not evoke compassion or humanity, but does provide an insightful measure of their sensibilities.
For politicians of colour who deny 'White privilege' and denounce critical race theory, “Skin folk ain't always kinfolk” is an apt mantra from my upbringing.
Let’s be clear, these people are cleverly disguised gatekeepers and handlers. White supremacy is often more palatable when it is communicated by people from Black and Ethnic Minority backgrounds. Of course, the incentives of money and power are enough to seduce most human beings regardless of their ethnic background. What is anti-racism?
‘Anti-racism’ is a belief that all races and ethnic groups are equal and deserving of the same opportunities. But the most important part of anti- racism is the next step, which is to do something about the existing inequality.
Anti-racism is the active dismantling of systems, privileges, and everyday practices that reinforce and normalize the contemporary dimensions of white dominance. This, of course, also involves a critical understanding of the history of ‘whiteness’.”
Ibram X. Kendi, How to Be an Antiracist How is ‘anti-racism’ relevant to Social Work? • Social Work England’s professional standards state all Social Worker’s must:
1.5 Recognise differences across diverse communities and challenge the impact of disadvantage and discrimination on people and their families and communities
1.6 Promote social justice, helping to confront and resolve issues of inequality and inclusion
5.1 Not abuse, neglect, discriminate, exploit or harm anyone, or condone this by others
6.1 Report allegations of harm and challenge and report exploitation and any dangerous, abusive or discriminatory behaviour or practice
• BASW’s Code of Ethics
• The bedrock of social justice: anti-oppressive, anti-discriminatory and anti-racist practice values and ethics
• BASW’s position statements condemning George Floyd’s murder and promoting anti-racism in Social Work
• Confronting the White Elephant: White Privilege in Social Services
• ‘Cultural competence’ in Social Work practice
• Decolonising Social Work education and policy How much of a priority is anti-racism in Social Work? Really?!
Anti-racism in Social Work must be fully considered and dismantled through collaboration with Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers in roles as ‘experts with (personal and professional) lived experience’.
This is the only way that Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers’ basic needs can be properly met and their wide- ranging expertise fully utilised. Of course, this approach can only improve the experiences of Black and Ethnic Minority service-users too. It really is just a question of how much of a priority is anti-racism in Social Work? Anti-racism… so what? Blah, blah. Yawn…
If the news of police officers taking ‘selfies’ beside the bodies of 2 murdered black sisters; the recent far-right violent protests in London or the racist comments by Suffolk councillors do not outrage you or alert you to the fact that racism is thriving in this country right now – then you really must consider whether you have sleepwalked into being an opponent of anti-racism. At the very least, we must be self-aware and honest (with ourselves and others) when our boredom threshold is reached. Boredom can be subliminal and counterproductive to anti-racism at every level. Everyday micro-aggressions (including ‘banter’ in the workplace) can fuel violent racist incidents.
• “In a [multifaceted] racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist. We must be anti-racist.” – Angela Davis
• 'Being an ally doesn’t necessarily mean you fully understand what it feels like to be oppressed. It means you are taking on the struggle as your own.’
• “The burden of ending racism should not be on those subjected to it, but on those who uphold and benefit from it.”
• “Racism isn’t getting worse, it’s getting filmed” - Will Smith
• “Injustice is telling us education is the key while you keep changing the locks.” - Donovan Livingstone Workplace racism (pigmentocracy vs meritocracy)
The covert, entrenched and everyday racism in the workplace sometimes indicates the lack of quality cultural diversity and multicultural education and training available (to all staff). Surprisingly, it is rarely acknowledged in Social Work that race is simply a socially constructed idea with no scientific validity - invented and refined principally to oppress POC. This has modern and everyday ramifications in the working environment.
Black and Ethnic Minority practitioners have reported to the British Association of Social Workers (BASW) that Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) has clearly been prioritised/withheld on occasions for their white colleagues. Others explained they were made/ordered to visit service-users with suspected COVID-19 (with no PPE and no guidance/support), whilst white managers stayed at the office with ‘their’ supply of PPE and engaged in racist banter.
These perverse experiences can be impossible for victims of ‘naked and slippery’ everyday racism to articulate to others or reconcile internally themselves. Furthermore, these incidents are normalised and subsumed in many workplace cultures, with limited opportunities to ‘professionally offload’.
Professional responsibilities
It is imperative that Social Workers evaluate their roles and (moral and regulatory) responsibilities. Current race relations require Social Workers to be proactive and do our homework to stay contemporarily astute as allies to Black and Ethnic Minority colleagues and service-users.
Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers cannot and should not be expected to ‘fix’ the racism in their workplace. However, those of us who are confident and capable enough (with the right support) can have a crucial role in educating, empowering and equipping ourselves and (potential) allies and influencers to enhance and shape anti-racism initiatives in our workplace settings.
EVERYONE has a duty to combat racism (and other forms of discrimination) in the spaces they occupy. This includes reporting racist incidents when they occur; forming like-minded alliances with peers to tackle key issues; raising awareness and making suggestions for positive reform.
Barriers to meaningful organisational change
Before any meaningful change can be achieved, Social Work educators and employers must acknowledge the inherent and intrinsic nature of ‘whiteness’, ‘White fragility’, ‘White privilege’ and white supremacy as unconscious bias in most (if not all) institutions, structures and organisational cultures. Individual and organisational awareness is an imperative first step for Social Workers, employers and educators to address workplace racism effectively. Social Work is institutionally racist
Social Work is institutionally racist – but so are many institutions, organisations and professions (not just the Police) when you consider Sir William MacPherson’s definition from the 1999 report of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. There is evidently a “collective failure to provide an appropriate and professional service to Social Workers of colour based on their colour, culture or ethnic origin”. This is visible in “processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage Ethnic Minority people ”. This correlates with the over-representation of Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers in ‘fitness to practice’ cases; reports from the Social Workers Union of Black Social Workers being failed on their assessed and supported year in employment (ASYE) and various other detrimental career outcomes.
Many prominent Social Work leaders ask the same old tired questions, then promise another exploration of the long and gruelling wilderness we meandered through in previous decades. Just like another government enquiry into, well… take your pick! The ongoing Windrush scandal? Stephen Lawrence? Stop and search?! The tactics generally deployed by our oppressors generally involve seek and destroy; smokescreens and mirrors or deafening silence.
We must now ask, is there really the appetite for real change? Is there the actual commitment, intention and motivation? Because if not, why not? Financial investment is not necessarily a major hurdle here – it comes down to the priorities and values of the existing leadership. I’d rather have some meaningful action, even if it is not perfect, as long as it is genuine - rather than this never-ending paralysis of fear and/or indifference. Let’s have more clarity about what your change looks like and the timescales for implementation. If not, it’s all just performative window-dressing and pitiful. No more questions – just meaningful actions please.
You can’t read yourself into activism
Anti-racism in Social Work risks being perceived as radical activism or anarchic ideology. Our social leaders must reverse this flawed belief system. Hopefully Social Work policy, practice and education will now begin to properly recognise and reflect that ‘race’ is a socially constructed idea with no scientific validity – invented and refined principally to oppress Black people. Race remains an unstable concept because it is superficially based on physical appearance. When race was constructed people knew very little about DNA, genetics and human origins. It is an outdated colonial invention that still permeates modern society. Intellectually and morally, as a profession and as a society, we must see beyond what was pre-determined for us centuries ago.
So, if society is built on plantations of racism, still celebrates racist history and traditions and reminds us daily of the inescapability of White supremacy, it’s not enough for Social Workers (and Social Work organisations) to be ‘colour-blind’ or ‘non-racist’. We must be PROACTIVELY anti-racist – otherwise anything else is just tiresome lip-service.
If anti-racism in Social Work does not exist for Social Workers, can it ever truly exist for service-users? Anti- racism is absolutely integral to Social Work, so when will it be given the credence it deserves? Without standing up for our defining values and ethics, what is to stop us succumbing to the pervasive and pernicious post-modern sleaze?
Dr Muna Abdi (a leading anti-racism educator) states: “The work of anti-racism is to fight racism wherever you see it… even in yourself. The struggle cannot be found in the pages of a book. You can’t read yourself into activism. Sooner or later, you’ll have to make a choice… Do what is safe or do what is right.”
3 typical responses to anti-racism from Social Work organisations
From my cultured social work experience, the responses below generally indicate an organisation’s prioritisation and level of commitment (or not) to anti-racism.
1. Keep silent, keep things the same and “hope all this Black Lives Matter (BLM) ‘stuff’ just blows over”. This kind of inaction and paralysis of fear correlates with and reinforces perceptions of ‘White fragility’, ‘White privilege’ and white supremacy for some POC. This type of organisational response usually commends staff for being resilient and deflects attention away from the essential redesign of systems that routinely make people suffer.
2. Publish lukewarm organisational statements that recycle and regurgitate previous rhetoric on workforce unity with predictable (and borderline offensive) platitudes – often proposing only superficial changes. For example, publishing a sympathetic, but non-committal kneejerk brief statement; possibly delegating responsibilities to an already overworked Equalities Officer or proposing minor changes to already vague policies/procedures on ‘valuing diversity’ with little or no accountability. Approaches at this level are usually well-intended, but tokenistic and overlook the nuanced obstacles and pitfalls POC face every day. Unfortunately, this response is common.
3. Publish an authentic anti-racism action plan outlining significant reforms that commit to specific, measurable, achievable and realistic targets (suggestions below). For example, publishing a strong mission/position statement condemning George Floyd’s murder and racism in all its forms and committing to BASW’s Code of Ethics, anti- oppressive, anti-discriminatory and anti-racist practice. This approach interlinks with the ‘Anti-Racist commitment framework’ (below).
The acid test is to share this presentation with your social work leaders and see what response you get.
ANTI-RACIST COMMITMENT FRAMEWORK ACTIONS FOR CHANGE ACCELERATING DIVERSITY Build a workforce more reflective of the A fast-track scheme for high potential people WITHIN communities we serve by promoting from Ethnic Minority backgrounds, fuelled by opportunities for Black and Ethnic Minority targeted recruitment for senior leadership and people to enter and advance within work with partners to help grow diverse talent organisations. pools. Selected staff will be mentored by a member of the Senior Leadership Team as they progress through different opportunities designed to build their career foundations. This will be maintained by ensuring there are diverse shortlists for every senior management role across the organisation. EDUCATING, EMPOWERING and Transform the working culture to zero tolerance Race and culture awareness training will be EQUIPPING PEOPLE of discrimination. Introduce new immersive mandatory for everyone. This will go beyond training to enhance awareness and support, to routine online training by: offering guidance; peer underpin inclusive management approaches and support groups; recognising local issues; meet various learning styles. providing support to equip managers to champion diversity and utilising external specialist advice/support as/when necessary. LEADING BY EXAMPLE Ensure that every senior leader has a greater Every senior leader will commit to either a) to understanding of the issues faced by Ethnic have an Ethnic Minority reverse mentor or Minority communities and are equipped to lead provide professional support to a community the fight for equality. organisation serving Ethnic Minority groups. BUILDING TRANSPARENCY Any gaps in data collection will be addressed, Staff are encouraged to self-declare their identity, ensuring that senior leaders can be held to enabling a rich profile of the workforce’s diverse account for the progress made in tackling both needs to be built. This will underpin the discrimination and equality of opportunity. introduction of an annual ethnicity pay audit, backed by any immediate action required. An ‘ethnicity dashboard’ will help to track progress across the colleague lifecycle and set targets for senior leaders. This will be published internally annually.
What needs to happen nationally?
The existing national frameworks and initiatives to support social workers of colour are fragmented and optional. This creates confusion and dilution in their coherence and implementation in practice. Social work has a long history of committing to anti-discriminatory practice, but less in the way of practical mandatory implementation or robust challenge on these issues. Now is the time for social work leaders to properly address this by meaningfully and purposefully moving this agenda forward by establishing a mandatory ‘anti-discriminatory national framework’ that is universal across social work.
An important first step, would be to explicitly reintroduce anti- discriminatory, anti-oppressive practices and anti-racist values and ethics into the professional and qualifying education and training standards. This should also involve partnership working between key stakeholders to enforce these values and ethics across the professional landscape. Key aims/objectives should be to: ensure consistency, introduce mandatory requirements, emphasise ‘anti-racist’ values and be universally applicable to all social workers like the Professional Capabilities Framework and the professional standards.
We all know that organisations can sometimes be avoidant of anti- racism, but as social workers we must recognise that silence (or inaction) on racism is complicity with the oppressors. Unfortunately, as a profession we have been complacent and have much more to do to cultivate equality, diversity and inclusion in the workplace and society. The ‘BAME’ conundrum
Labels/terms such as Commonwealth, ‘hostile environment’, EDI and ‘BAME’ need to be re- examined. BAME does not describe who I am. BAME is a clumsy, cluttered and incoherent acronym that is opportune for categorising people of colour as a homogenous group - when we quite clearly are not. Of course, I cannot speak for all people of colour. I understand that ‘BAME’ can be operationally helpful when exploring the overarching effects of all things racist. However, it misses so much nuance and subtlety, that it can be seized upon by those who wish to deny racism as a white problem. Routinely, I hear people comfortably stating that BAME people “can’t even agree amongst themselves”. This sloppy reductivism, leads to terms being invented such as ‘Black on Black’ crime. I have not heard about “White on White” crime – ever. What might an anti-racist working environment look like? What can social work employers do to promote anti-racism in the workplace? What would the experience be like for Black and Ethnic Minority social workers?
Recruitment Anti-racist recruitment targets are set to employ Black and Ethnic Minority senior leaders and educators to better reflect local communities and the workforce (where necessary/possible).
The ‘Rooney Rule’ is adopted, similar to senior recruitment in American National Football League. This involves at least one POC candidate being interviewed for each senior leader vacancy. What might an anti-racist working environment look like? What can social work employers do to promote anti-racism in the workplace? What would the experience be like for Black and Ethnic Minority social workers?
The workforce
Anti-racism is: explicitly promoted in mission/position statements (good example here) along with other forms of discrimination; included in relevant polices/procedures and forms part of employees’ employment contracts to underline its importance.
The data on workforce diversity and ‘protected characteristics’ (ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality etc) informs the support available for minority groups; training for all staff and organisational policies and procedures. The workforce is encouraged to self-declare their identity and individual/group wellbeing at work provisions are developed in partnership with them. Creative wellbeing at work provisions are developed for those who have experienced workplace trauma associated with racism (and other types of discrimination). This includes peer-led support groups for members to reflect fully on their personal and professional experiences. Personal wellbeing is a mandatory agenda item for supervision meetings. By using this ‘identity dashboard’ approach, organisational efforts are more focussed and genuine; progress is properly managed through a cycle of reviewing data output and periodic verbal/written feedback from the workforce.
Safe and informal systems are introduced for Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers in the workplace. For example, discriminatory practices or constructive solutions are made anonymously in an ‘honesty box’ to empower POC without fear of reprisals. Arising issues are then explored in supervision, team meetings or with senior leaders (if necessary).
Annual ethnicity pay audits ensure that any anomalies and discrepancies for Black and Ethnic Minority staff are properly reviewed and resolved.
The Covid-19 risk assessment is consistently used for all staff (particularly those from Black and Ethnic Minority groups). What might an anti-racist working environment look like? What can social work employers do to promote anti-racism in the workplace? What would the experience be like for Black and Ethnic Minority social workers?
Education Anti-racist education is recognised as being at the heart of developing a more cultured and inclusive workforce and healthy workplace.
Education providers ‘decolonialise’ social work training programmes with the input of Black and Ethnic Minority academics, social workers and service-users integrated at all stages of programme development and delivery.
ADP, AOP and anti-racist practice form a fundamental and mandatory requirement of social workers professional development and registration. This includes a range of educational tools and training opportunities (for different learning styles) to ensure quality cultural diversity education is prioritised and valued. Staff continuously learn and better understand microaggressions, stereotypes and how they can demonstrate ‘anti-racist practice’.
The expertise of specialist external trainers and consultants is instrumental in shaping effective anti-racist approaches – with no reliance on tokenistic online courses. Here are some additional weblinks to anti-racist education: 1, 2 and 3. What might an anti-racist working environment look like? What can social work employers do to promote anti-racism in the workplace? What would the experience be like for Black and Ethnic Minority social workers?
Allyship
Anti-racist allyship is understood by senior leaders, educators and practitioners to be vital in combating all manifestations of racism. Educating, empowering and equipping allies to actively support colleagues from marginalised and minority groups is common practice.
Allyship actively promotes ways in which managers and staff can become allies or become better allies to support their Black and Ethnic Minority colleagues. Social work employers and educators demonstrate they are willing to keep listening and learning from POC to instigate meaningful change.
What might an anti-racist working environment look like? What can social work employers do to promote anti-racism in the workplace? What would the experience be like for Black and Ethnic Minority social workers?
Reverse mentoring
Anti-racist ‘reverse-mentoring’ enables Black and Ethnic Minority social workers to mentor senior leaders and educators on anti-racism (especially those with identified ‘anti-racist needs’). It is important reverse- mentoring allows mentors some autonomy in their approach. Furthermore, mentoring agreements (considering confidentiality, power dynamics and conflict resolution) are agreed and signed by both parties at the outset.
Leadership programmes
To combat ‘glass ceiling racism’, various professional development opportunities are available designed to provide advice/support colleagues from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds to enhance their career progression.
‘Positive representation’ recognises the disadvantages and obstacles for POC and provides opportunities (mentoring, nominations, secondments, shadowing etc) to support them in reaching their full potential.
Due to the representational imbalance, ring-fenced investment and operational resources to support leadership programmes is in place. This addresses the lack of Black and Ethnic Minority Social Workers in senior roles and provides support for those who are.
Any questions?
Keep in touch
REMEMBER:
Anti-racism in Social Work portfolio
Anti-racism in Social Work repository
Anti-racism in Social Work portfolio
May 2000 – Dec 2000
• 2 BASW statements on the George Floyd murder and Black Lives Matter: https://www.basw.co.uk/media/news/2020/jun/basw-equality-diversity-inclusion-advisory-group- position-statement and https://www.basw.co.uk/media/news/2020/jun/basw-statement-george- floyd.
• BASW COVID 19 Staff Risk Assessment Flow chart (to assist managers and staff with staff risk assessments): https://www.basw.co.uk/resources/covid-19-staff-risk-assessment-flow-chart
• Community Care article on Black Lives Matter: https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2020/06/12/black-lives-matter-social-work-must-respond- action-platitudes/
• Working-Class Academics article on Black Lives Matter: https://workingclass- academics.co.uk/black-lives-matter-then-now-always-by-wayne-reid/#more-2478
• Now Then magazine article on Black Lives Matter: https://nowthenmagazine.com/articles/black- lives-matter-then-now-always
• Black Lives Matter for Diverse Educators: https://www.diverseeducators.co.uk/black-lives-matter- then-now-always/
• 2nd Community Care article on Black Lives Matter (aimed at social work leaders and organisations): https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2020/07/17/promote-anti-racist-culture-social-work/
• Diverse Educators blog: https://www.diverseeducators.co.uk/how-to-promote-an-anti-racist- culture-in-social-work/
• Critical Publishing blog: https://thecriticalblog.wordpress.com/2020/10/01/how-to-promote-an- anti-racist-culture-in-social-work-by-wayne-reid/
• Omnibus article 1 Social Work News magazine:
https://www.mysocialworknews.com/article/why-we-must-commit-to-promoting-an-anti-racist- culture-in-social-work
• Article for Professional Social Work magazine ‘When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression’: https://www.basw.co.uk/resources/psw-magazine/psw-online/%E2%80%98when- you%E2%80%99re-accustomed-privilege-equality-feels-oppression%E2%80%99
• Article for Community Care: ‘Anti-racism in social work: no more questions - just actions please’: https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2020/12/16/anti-racism-social-work-questions-just-actions- please/
• Omnibus article 2 for Social Work News magazine:
https://www.mysocialworknews.com/article/black-history-month-has-passed-but-we-must-not- stop-ringing-the-alarm-on-racism-in-social-work
• Social Work News magazine ‘Author of the Month’ December 2020:
https://www.mysocialworknews.com/article/congratulations-to-our-first-author-of-the-month
• The campaign to change the racist imagery on the KCMG medal: https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1273391715546804225?s=20 and organised a letter to be sent to the Queen from BASW: https://www.basw.co.uk/media/news/2020/jun/basw-writes- royal-family-call-kcmg-medal-which-has-clearly-distressing-racist
• The Black & Ethnic Minority Symposium (BPS): https://www.basw.co.uk/system/files/resources/181151_black_ethnic_minority_professionals_sy mposium_v2.pdf
https://www.mysocialworknews.com/article/discovering-basw-s-black-and-amp-ethnic-minority- professionals-symposium
• The Black & Ethnic Minority Symposium (BPS) & Perrett Laver employment skills ‘SMASHING the glass ceiling’ event:
https://www.basw.co.uk/events/black-ethnic-minority-professionals-symposium-bps-smashing- glass-ceiling-employment-skills
https://www.basw.co.uk/media/news/2020/dec/watch-black-ethnic-minority-professionals- symposium-bps-smashing-glass-ceiling
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTJJuxsZ500
• The Black & Ethnic Minority Social Worker anthology: https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1274014299569246208?s=20
• Poem ‘The revolution (A nod to Gil Scott-Heron)’ based on Black Lives Matter: https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1275830803256217602/photo/1
https://sw2020covid19.group.shef.ac.uk/2020/07/14/the-revolution-a-nod-to-gil-scott-heron/
• Podcast with Dr Jermaine Ravalier (Bath Spa University) & Diana Katoto (Social work student) on ‘Ordinary Black People Doing Extraordinary Things:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgkKJ9o0uMs&feature=youtu.be
https://www.bathspa.ac.uk/news-and-events/events/bhm-wayne-reid/
• Podcast interview with Andy McClenaghan, Narinder Sidhu & I. Black Lives Matters — The Social Work response to challenging racial injustice: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/black-lives- matters-social-work-response-to-challenging/id1511140451?i=1000484050913
https://soundcloud.com/user-750691560-622997630/black-lives-matters-the-social-work- response-to-challenging-racial-injustice-in-the-uk
• Podcast interview with David Niven on Black Lives Matter: https://media.blubrry.com/davidniven/p/content.blubrry.com/davidniven/Social_World_Episode_ 094_MP3.mp3
• Webinar interview with Jason Liosatos Black Lives Matter, Social Work & Everything In-between: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL1vaN-0IwI
• Webinar panel presentation with Social Work Student Connect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkgHLHxP-HY&feature=youtu.be
• The BASW England presentation on ‘Anti-Racism in Social Work’, which is specifically for designed for social work employers and educators (for students, practitioners, managers and academics).
• Developing Together South West Teaching Partnership anti-racism in social work full presentation. The BASW: Anti-Racism in Social Work with Wayne Reid - September 2020 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DapsfbpnMG0&feature=youtu.be
• The Anti-Racism Virtual Summit:
https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1306327852795731969?s=20
• The BASW webpages containing resources to support Black & Ethnic Minority social workers: https://www.basw.co.uk/black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-resources
• BASW's Anthony Dhadwal talks to....Wayne Reid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45dl0rDY9fw
• A wide-ranging podcast with Yohai Hakak and students from Brunel University on WR’s career and his efforts to promote anti-racism in social work: https://anchor.fm/yohai-hakak
• The Mental Health Act, Race and Ethnicity: what are the key issues for AMHPs now? Webinar: https://www.basw.co.uk/mental-health-act-race-and-ethnicity-what-are-key-issues-amhps-now- webinar
• BASW England response to Minister for Equalities report on disparate impact of COVID-19 on Black & Ethnic Minority communities: https://www.basw.co.uk/media/news/2020/oct/basw-englands- response-minister-equalities-report-disparate-impact-covid-19
• The ‘Tackling Racism Across the Leadership Pipeline’ conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvdHUFt04ro&feature=youtu.be
• #IAMNEWHAM Conference alongside Isabelle Trowler (Chief Social Worker – Department for Education), David Olusoga (Historian & Broadcaster) & Sarah Blackmore (Social Work England): https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1334565216479285253?s=20
• Presentation at ExChange Wales & CASCADE webinar event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHOZkadKXKU&feature=youtu.be
• Panel at the Guardian’s Social Lives 2020 event with Colum Conway (CEO - Social Work England), Diane Galpin (Bournemouth University & Guardian), Jennie Hale (Social Worker) & David Brindle (Public Services Editor – Guardian):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogTCmRfz3Kk
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/22/nine-at-night-laptop-still-open-social-work- pandemic
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/28/online-event-whats-it-like-to-be-a-social- worker-in-2020
• Coverage on the BASW in the media webpage: https://www.basw.co.uk/media-centre/basw-media
2021 –
• Omnibus article for Working Class Academics:
https://workingclass-academics.co.uk/black-history-month-has-passed-but-we-must-not-stop- ringing-the-alarm-on-racism-in-social-work-by-wayne-reid/
• Critical Publishing Omnibus blog: https://thecriticalblog.wordpress.com/2021/01/04/anti-racism- in-social-work-2020-omnibus/
• Poem ‘The Lion’s Everyday Flex:
https://twitter.com/wayne_reid79/status/1338759518885457920?s=20
• Liverpool Hope University our 'Race and Anti-Racist Practice' Integration Day event with Anna Rothery (Lord Mayor), Wayne Reid & Maris Stratulis BASW:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBjFyDeMBA&feature=youtu.be
• 'George Floyd's murder was the catalyst for my focus on anti-racist social work'. My interview for Professional Social Work magazine:
https://www.basw.co.uk/resources/psw-magazine/psw-online/george-floyds-murder-was-catalyst- my-focus-anti-racist-social-work
• Article published by Make It Plain & supported by Kehinde Andrews (Professor of Black Studies in the School of Social Sciences at Birmingham City University):
https://make-it-plain.org/2021/02/12/social-work-is-institutionally-racist-heres-how-we-fix-it/
Wayne Reid (Twitter: @wayne_reid79) BMA House Tavistock Square London WC1H 9JP
Runnymede Trust Sent via email to: [email protected]
8 March 2021
UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination: Call for evidence
About the BMA
The BMA (British Medical Association) is a professional association and trade union representing and negotiating on behalf of all doctors and medical students in the UK. It is a leading voice advocating for outstanding health care and a healthy population. It is an association providing members with excellent individual services and support throughout their lives. Summary
We welcome the Runnymede Trust’s co-ordination of a shadow report assessing the government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
Stronger government action, immediate and longer-term, is needed to tackle racial discrimination and inequalities in the UK. Racial disparities are evident within the experiences of the healthcare workforce and health outcomes in the UK.
Most recently we’ve seen the impact of ethnic disparities in health outcomes devastatingly highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis of COVID-19 deaths from the Office for National Statistics accounts found that all ethnic minority groups other than Chinese had a higher mortality rate than the white ethnic population for both males and females during the first wave of the pandemic. 1More recent analysis has found that whilst outcomes have improved for some ethnic minority groups, people from Bangladeshi and Pakistani backgrounds are now at a greater risk of dying from Covid-19 than they were during the first wave. 2
The BMA advocates for a ‘health in all policies’ approach to ensure that all government policies are focused on the impact they have on people’s health. This would help to ensure action is taken to address issues such as overcrowded housing, occupational factors and poverty that negatively
1 Office for National Statistics (October 2020) Updating ethnic contrasts in deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19), England and Wales: deaths occurring 2 March to 28 July 2020 2 Government Equalities Office and Race Disparity Unit (2021) Second quarterly report on progress to address Covid-19 health inequalities.
Chief executive officer: Tom Grinyer
Registered as a Company limited by Guarantee. Registered No. 8848 England. Registered office: BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JP. Listed as a Trade Union under the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974.
impact health outcomes. A fully funded cross-governmental strategy on reducing health inequalities is overdue, and Covid-19 has given us another chance to address health inequity across the UK.
We are deeply concerned by the tragically high, and disproportionate Covid-19 death rate for healthcare workers from ethnic minority backgrounds. We believe that PPE shortages, unequal distribution of PPE, and delays in undertaking risk assessments likely played a part in this tragedy. We are also concerned that workplace culture issues, such as staff not feeling comfortable to raise safety concerns, may have placed some ethnic minority healthcare workers at greater risk.
We believe that urgent action is needed to tackle racial inequalities and ensure that the NHS fosters a diverse and inclusive environment. An inclusive NHS where all staff are valued and treated fairly will allow the NHS to function as best as it can and benefit patient care. Evidence on race, racism and racial inequality
There is growing evidence of the link between experiencing racial discrimination and health outcomes. A recent study found that UK adults belonging to ethnic minority groups who experience racial discrimination experience poorer mental and physical health than those who do not.3
A wealth of evidence, from maternal mortality rates to disparities in access to and experience of mental health treatment, shows us that the experience of health services and chances of a healthy life in the UK are far too often dependent on a person’s ethnicity.
Research has found that between 2016 and 2018 the rate of maternal death in pregnancy was 8 in 4 100 000 white women, compared with 15 in 100 000 Asian women and 34 in 100 000 black women. There are clear inequalities in health related to gender – as well as to socioeconomic status and ethnicity – and these factors are all interlinked. Poorer, migrant women suffer the worst health of all and there are differences in health outcomes between ethnic groups for women. For all these groups poorer women have relatively low health outcomes.5
Systemic racism and inequalities are evident within the NHS from the experiences of the ethnic minority workforce. Despite the numbers of Black, Asian and minority ethnic doctors growing in the medical profession –currently around 2 in 5 doctors currently record their ethnicity as Black, Asian or minority ethnic – inequalities persist about how they are treated.
A BMA survey in 2018 found that only 55% of black and minority ethnic doctors, said there was respect for diversity and a culture of inclusion in their main place of work compared to 75% of white doctors. Black and minority ethnic doctors were also more than twice as likely as white doctors to agree that bullying and harassment is often a problem.6
Data from the NHS England Workforce Race Equality Standard (the WRES) evidences disparities in treatment and experience across the whole workforce. The 2020 WRES found that white applicants were 1.61 times more likely to be appointed from shortlisting compared to ethnic minority
3 Hackett et al. Racial discrimination and health: a prospective study of ethnic minorities in the United Kingdom BMC Public Health (2020) 20:1652 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09792-1 4 MBRRACE-UK (2018) Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’ Care Lessons learned to inform maternity care from the UK and Ireland Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths and Morbidity 2016–18. 5 BMA (2018) Health inequalities and women – addressing unmet needs. 6 BMA (2018) Future vision for the NHS: All member survey (2018)
applicants. 7 It also found that white applicants were 1.14 times more likely to access non-mandatory training and continuous professional development than ethnic minority staff.
Lack of representation at leadership level and fewer career progression opportunities may have also helped foster an environment where ethnic minority healthcare workers experience bullying and harassment more than their white colleagues.
Despite the fact that 21% of staff working for NHS trusts and CCGs in England are from an ethnic minority background, only 6.5% of staff at very senior manager level are from ethnic minority backgrounds. 8 Whilst there has been progress at board level but there is still a lot to be done. In all regions in England, there is a lower proportion of BME people on boards compared to proportion of BME staff.9
We would support a greater focus on intersectional analysis of the experiences of the ethnic minority medical workforce, as well as for the wider population. For instance, the BMA’s recent survey into the experiences of disabled medical students and doctors found that white disabled doctors and medical students reported a more supportive environment than disabled doctors and medical students who are from an ethnic minority background.10
Impact of Covid-19 on the ethnic minority medical workforce
Within the healthcare workforce, as at April 2020, a shocking 61% of 200 healthcare workers who had died from Covid-19 have come from ethnic minority backgrounds. 11 Among doctors, over 85% of those who have died from COVID-19 have been from ethnic minority backgrounds. 12 This is more than double the proportion of ethnic minority doctors in the medical workforce as a whole.
The BMA wrote to Sir Simon Stevens in April 2020 asking that NHS England collect and share data on the mortality of healthcare workers with Covid-19 with consideration of work settings, roles, shift frequency and shift duration, PPE used, and duration of exposure for different groups of doctors. We are not aware that these data have been collected or analysed and we are disappointed to still be reliant on April 2020 data for information about the mortality of all healthcare workers.
The BMA believes PPE shortages, unequal distribution of PPE, and delays in undertaking risk assessments likely played a part in this tragedy.
We are concerned too that workplace culture issues have placed some ethnic minority doctors at greater risk. These are groups who have historically faced discrimination or feel like outsiders in UK workplaces and it can be particularly hard for them to raise concerns about safety or seek help. 13A BMA all-member survey in 2018 found that ethnic minority doctors were twice as likely as white doctors to say they would not feel confident raising concerns.
The BMA’s COVID-19 tracker surveys also consistently found that ethnic minority doctors were much more likely than white doctors to say they felt pressured to see patients without adequate PPE. For
7 NHS England (2021) Workforce Race Equality Standard 2020 report 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 BMA (2020) Disability in the medical profession 11 Health Service Journal Deaths of NHS staff from COVID-19 analysed (April 2020) 12 This is based on information the BMA has been collecting based on media reports and our records. 13 See GMC (2019) Fair to Refer?
example, our April 2020 survey found 64% of ethnic minority doctors in high risk settings feeling pressured compared to 33% of White staff. 14
We welcome the UK-REACH study investigating the risk of Covid-19 to healthcare workers from ethnic minority backgrounds, for which we sit on the stakeholder advisory group. We have urged the government to act swiftly on the findings when published.
Specific recommendations of what action the Government should take to combat racial injustice in education, employment, the criminal justice system, healthcare, and housing
Health in all-policies approach
In the long-term the Government must take coordinated action across departments to tackle ethnic disparities. This should include adopting a “health in all policies” approach to policy development across Government. As a member of the Health Inequalities Alliance, which is made up of some 150 member organisations, we believe this must be in the form of a fully funded cross-governmental strategy on health inequalities, beginning as the first step in the government’s agenda of building back better in the wake of the pandemic.
Improving the reach of health services and information to ethnic minority communities.
The BMA has repeatedly called for the government’s COVID-19 response to engage with and gain the trust and confidence of ethnic minority communities. It is essential that the government works with ethnic minority community leaders and organisations to disseminate public health information.
The findings that outcomes have improved for some ethnic minority groups are encouraging and show that targeted efforts from government make a difference. The government must turn its attention to why people from Bangladeshi and Pakistani backgrounds are now at a greater risk of dying from Covid-19 than they were during the first wave. 15 Black and Asian groups remain overrepresented in Covid-19 intensive care records. However, in a recent survey 72% of Black people in the UK said they were unlikely to be vaccinated, the highest rate of vaccine hesitancy found in the study. 16Among Pakistani and Bangladeshi groups this figure was 42%. Structural racism means marginalised groups have too often had historically negative experiences of health care and are therefore less trusting of their medical professionals.17
Ensuring continued access to online services
At a time when vital public health communications and access to health services are moving online, ONS data shows that around one in ten people in the UK are digitally excluded. 18The NHS recognises 19 that particular groups may be more likely to be digitally excluded, including those in low income groups and people whose first language is not English. Black and ethnic minority populations will be higher represented in those groups. Government and NHS services should ensure alternative
14 BMA (April 2020) BAME doctors hit worse by lack of PPE 15 Government Equalities Office and Race Disparity Unit (2021) Second quarterly report on progress to address Covid-19 health inequalities. 16 Robertson, E et al (2021) Predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the UK Household Longitudinal Study https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.27.20248899 17 BMJ (2021) Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minority groups 372:n513 18 Office for National Statistics (May 2019) Exploring the UK’s digital divide 19 NHS Digital (2021) , What we mean by digital exclusion
methods of communication remain available to these groups, especially if the switch towards digital or online services persists in the longer term, to avoid widening existing health inequalities.
Improved data reporting
There also needs to be better recognition of diversity of the identities, experiences and needs of different ethnic groups. We encourage the government to improve the granularity of its data collection, analysis and reporting on health outcomes as well as the experiences of NHS staff to better recognise the variety of ethnicities in the UK. This is preferable to relying on the categories ‘BAME’ and white as ‘BAME’ is a collective term, not an identity.
More diverse ethnic representation in NHS leadership and management
To truly tackle ethnic disparities within the workforce, a more representative ethnic diversity of medical and organisational leadership is necessary, alongside more transparent recruitment and promotion systems in the all organisations employing doctors and culture change within all organisations. We welcome goals to increase diversity in leadership within the NHS People Plan for 2020-2021. 20
Ensuring that NHS Trust and organisation boards reflect the ethnic make-up of the workforce they manage would help ensure a more inclusive culture from the top-down and ensure there are ethnic minority role models visible to healthcare staff, students and patients.
Developing more inclusive cultures in the NHS
To address creating a culture in which everyone feels included, where diversity is celebrated and there is equality of opportunity and reward, the BMA has recommended: o making inclusivity a core competency for NHS leaders, something they are expected to demonstrate and be held accountable for, and 21 o developing effective training for all doctors, medical students and non-medical managers on the value of diverse teams and the importance of inclusion 22
Medical education
Medical education also has a role to play in helping improve health outcomes and the diversity of the healthcare workforce. It is important that the medical curriculum is diversified to reflect ethnic minority patients and populations in clinical teaching to ensure doctors are able to deliver the best care to every patient. Such changes are also part of creating an inclusive learning environment as students and staff should be able to see themselves and their communities represented in what and how medicine is taught.
School curriculum
The BMA was pleased to feed into Baroness Lawrence’s review, An Avoidable Crisis, on the impact of COVID-19 on ethnic minority communities, which highlighted that societal prejudices are learned from an early age and fester when left unchallenged. 23
20 NHSE (July 2020) We are the NHS: People Plan for 2020-21 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. 23 Baroness Doreen Lawrence (2020) An Avoidable Crisis
The Macpherson Report, published in 1999, called for improved diversity in the school curriculum, and the Windrush ‘Lessons Learned’ Review called for better understanding of Black British history. 24The BMA would support efforts to diversify the national curriculum to reflect the ethnic diversity of the country and ensure the curriculum helps breakdown prejudices early on in life. This would help to ensure that future generations of medical students will begin their medical training with an understanding of the diversity and history of the UK’s population and be able to better relate to the patients they see and treat.
We hope that our submission is useful – please do not hesitate to contact us for more information if required.
Yours sincerely
Stella Dunn Acting director of policy Professional Policy and Activities
24 Sir William Macpherson (Feb 1999) The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry
Runnymede Trust CERD 2021: Call to evidence
Democracy Club is a Community Interest Company whose vision is of a country with the digital foundations to support everyone’s participation in democratic life. We work with local government, The Electoral Commission, and a network of volunteers, to identify areas for improvement in democratic engagement, and to ensure everyone has access to quality information on democratic processes, particularly on elections.
Our fagship services consist of a candidate look- up database and polling station fnder, which together allow voters to discover who they can vote for, and when and where they can vote, based on their postcode.
The following evidence is confned entirely to our speciality area of election information.
Election accessibility and ethnicity There is surprisingly little data on UK ethnic minorities, including recent migrants, and electoral engagement. This is especially true of local elections, which are the most common type of UK election, and the election type with the widest English franchise.1
However, we do know that ethinic minorities and recent migrants are less likely to be registered than the general population, are signifcantly less likely to stand for election, and are slightly less likely to turn out to vote.2 More broadly, it is signifcant that UK ethnic minorities are disproportionately young and urban dwelling.3 We know that young people often face uncertainty and confusion about elections, and are less likely to vote than older generations.4 In terms of electoral geography, urban areas are complex - polling stations are more liable to change than rural areas, while urban dwellers are more likely to move regularly and thereby more likely to live in an unregistered address.
1 See for example R. Dunin-Wasowicz’s observations, ‘London borough elections give voice to migrant voters’, LSE Brexit Blog (30 April 2018) [accessed 4 Mar. 2021]. 2 These issues are surveyed in J. Mitchell, ‘Who's missing, and why? – Underrepresentation in voter registration, candidacy, informedness and turnout ’, Democracy Club (Dec. 2018), 3.2-3.3, 4.2, 6.2, [accessed 4 Mar. 2021]. See also A. Heath and O. Khan, ‘Ethnic Minority British Election Study – Key Findings’, Runnymede Trust (Feb. 2012), [accessed 4 Mar. 2021]. 3 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ‘Rural Population and Migration’ Gov.UK (27 August, 2020) [Accessed 4 Mar. 2021]; Office for National Statistics, ‘Ethnicity Facts and Figures’, Gov.UK, (17 August, 2020) [Accessed 4. Mar. 2021] 4 Mitchell, ‘Who’s missing, and why?’, 6.1
1 Democracy Club CIC
Consequently, ethnic minorities are far more likely to be affected by existing problems in the electoral system than the general population. To take the example of polling station locations, research from the United States, for example, has found that moving the location of a polling station has a greater impact on ethnic minorities, and people from ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to have diffculty fnding allocated polling stations on polling day.5 Although polling stations in the UK are allocated in a far more independent manner than in the US, it remains unknown whether the location of UK polling stations are disadvantageous to ethnic minority voters. This issue may be amplifed in the May 2021 elections across the UK, as a plethora of changes to polling station locations are expected in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many of which will happen with little notice.
Of particular note are recent migrants to the UK. Using Google Analytics data to track non-UK site visitors, Democracy Club believes that our services are of particular interest to migrant communities: the most common non-UK country to visit WhereDoIVote.co.uk on the day of the 2019 local elections was Romania, for example.6 With this in mind, it is crucial that information on upcoming elections is made available in multiple languages and formats - not simply translated information documents, but social media and interactive tools as well.7 With the extension of the franchise in Wales to include foreign nationals, this lack of resource may be more prominent than ever before.
Overall, therefore, we believe that ethnic minorities will derive greater beneft from improvements to the accessibility of UK elections than the population at large.
Actions Democracy Club strongly believes that UK democracy should be updated to refect the digital world in which we all now live. Basic information about upcoming elections, such as what elections are happening, who is standing, and where and when to vote, should be available online in an easy-to-access format. Crucially, this information should be relevant to the individual. At present, this information is largely provided by 380 separate local authorities via diffcult to interpret PDF notices on the elections pages of their websites. Lists of polling stations, for example, are often useless unless the user knows their own poll card number.
5 Z. Roth, ‘Study: North Carolina Polling Site Changes Hurt Blacks’, NBC News, (23 Nov 2015) [Accessed 4 Mar. 2021]; S. Vij, ‘Why Minority Voters Have a Lower Voter Turnout: An Analysis of Current Restrictions’, American Bar Association, (26 June 2020) [Accessed 4 Mar. 2021] 6 P. Keeling, ‘Tracking Democracy Club's International Users ’, Democracy Club, (23 April 2020) [Accessed 4 Mar. 2021] 7 Mitchell, ‘Who’s missing?’, 6.3; See also E. Rosenblatt, ‘Learning to be British by being a Grumpy Voter: Ethnic Minority Turnout’ in P. Cowley and R. Ford, Sex, Lies and the Ballot Box (Biteback: 2014), pp. 197-200. In the United States, the introduction of translated ballots has been found responsible for an 11 point rise in voter turnout in areas of low English language literacy rates: see Vij, ‘Minority Voters’.
2 Democracy Club CIC
In order to address these concerns and build a more equal and accessible electoral system, there are some simple steps the government should take.
1) Local Authority resources are more stretched than ever. The Government should extend support to enable local authorities to move away from publishing election information across 380 separate websites, and instead adopt a publishing model which is centralised, open, and machine-readable.8 This will also allow third parties to build tools and services tailored to offer the information to specifc sections of society - recent migrants, for example.
2) Local Authorities should have a duty to provide, and The Electoral Commission a duty to collect, all data relevant to upcoming elections. This information can then be disseminated from a central portal (such as an API).
3) Ensure all election information is inclusive and accessible to all. Resources should be adapted to suit all abilities, including producing resources in multiple languages.
These suggestions will result in the creation of a centralised database of information - elections, candidates and polling stations - which can be used by both governmental and non-governmental organisations to produce voter information tools tailored to meet different needs. Democracy Club believes that the answer to democratic inaccessibility and exclusion will not come from any single law change or new communication method, but through opening up basic electoral information for groups and individuals to use and interpret as they see ft.
8 This point was recently endorsed by the House of Lords Select Committee on Democracy and Digital Technologies ‘Digital Technology and the Resurrection of Trust’, HL paper 77 (29 June 2020), paragraphs 228-233.
3
The Link, 3 – 5 Palmerston Road, Boscombe, Bournemouth BH1 4HN Tel: (01202) 392 954 Email: [email protected]
About Dorset Race Equality Council
Dorset Race Equality Council (DREC) is an independent race and religion equality body in Dorset (encompassing Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole and Dorset County Council unitary authority areas). We have been operating since the 1990s and became a registered charity in 2004.
Currently, our team is composed of a full-time Chief Officer, four part time community development officers and one part-time race discrimination caseworker.
The observations and recommendations in this report are based upon data from our casework service (see appendix 1 for details) as well as knowledge and understanding obtained through our involvement in diverse partnership initiatives and community projects. Observations and recommendations Intersectionality: race and mental health
There is a very high incidence of mental health problems among the people who access our services for support with race and religious discrimination. This ranges from recent, self- reported anxiety and/or depression as a result of the discrimination they have experienced to long-term, professionally diagnosed conditions that have either been triggered or exacerbated by a hate incident or discrimination. Many of our cases are long and complex and reveal stories of people who have been ground down by a cumulation of discriminatory treatment, racist incidents and micro-aggressions throughout an extended period of time, if not their whole lives. Our contact with clients supports the findings of studies that demonstrate the long-term mental health impact of living with racism as an ethnic minority person in the UK. Often these people are pushed from pillar to post in trying to access support and end up falling between the gaps in services.
We recommend that comprehensive research be undertaken into the impact of racism on ethnic minority communities in the UK and that appropriate services are commissioned accordingly. The Impact of Brexit on the rights of BME communities
We have noted the negative impact of racist rhetoric used by politicians and key public figures during the Leave campaign in the run-up to the Brexit referendum, in particular immediately prior to and after the vote. We were made aware of numerous incidents of verbal abuse and threatening behaviour that took place locally within a few days of the vote.
We recommend that corrective action is taken by the government to address the impact of the divisive rhetoric used throughout the Leave campaign, for example, by publicly celebrating the contributions of EU citizens living in the UK and clamping down on divisive or discriminatory political discourse. We are disappointed by the government’s decision to reject and publicly undermine unconscious bias training and similar initiatives and we recommend that a much more concerted effort is taken to analyse and address personal and institutional bias within its ranks.
A stronger stance also needs to be taken against those who engage in hate speech on social media platforms or participate in groups that incite racial hatred.
Furthermore, since leaving the European Union we have received anecdotal information about people being turned away for benefits and housing because of a lack of understanding about the timeframe in which European citizens are entitled to apply to the Settlement Scheme.
We recommend a centrally-coordinated campaign to inform EU citizens of their rights post-Brexit and encourage application to the EU Settlement Scheme before the 30th June 2021 deadline.
We recommend thorough training within all public institutions on the rights of EU citizens under the settlement scheme and throughout this interim period. The impact of the Covid pandemic on BME communities
In April 2020 we conducted a consultation with representatives of 27 diverse cultural groups across Dorset about the impact of covid on BME communities. Concerns were raised around access to information for Gypsy Roma Traveller communities; the challenges of shielding in large, multigenerational households; difficulty home-schooling for parents with limited literacy/ English; culturally inappropriate food packages; inability to arrange culturally appropriate burials; concerns over contacting family abroad impacted by the pandemic; financial support for self- employed and unregistered workers; access to culturally appropriate/ minority language mental health support and a perceived increase in community tensions over adherence to lockdown rules.
During the pandemic our organisation has witnessed the increase in community tensions reflected in our casework and there have been more reports of racial abuse and harassment from neighbours than usual.
A number of recommendations were made in the report about improving communication with diverse communities, responding to their needs and maintaining community cohesion during the pandemic.
Discussions during our BME Health Ambassador meetings have also revealed a picture of misinformation and confusion in the community with people struggling to identify reliable sources of information about the vaccine programme: as such there appear to be a large number of people from BME communities who are reluctant to receive their vaccination. Dorset REC are working to address this issue by providing reliable information for our health ambassadors to disseminate.
In general terms, it appears that BME communities and individuals who already feel disenfranchised and mistrustful of public institutions have become even more vulnerable during the pandemic because they are less likely to access the support to which they are entitled or accept the offer of a vaccination.
It is worth noting that one positive change we have witnessed during lockdown as a small race equality charity has been an increase in collaboration between organisations and a greater willingness to work in partnership on projects to advance equality between diverse communities in our local area. We feel that this is both as a result of the collapsing of geographical boundaries by meetings being held online and also the awareness of racial inequality brought to the forefront of public awareness by the Black Lives Matter movement in 2020. Hate Crime and discrimination
Since the last periodic review (2016 to date), Dorset Race Equality Council has dealt with 115 cases of race and religious discrimination (please refer to appendix 1). In addition to this, we have also provided one-off advice on matters of race or religious discrimination to a further 31 people (appendix 2). In order of frequency, the most common areas in which discrimination occurs, according to our casework statistics are: housing; access to justice; education and employment. We have also had a considerable number of enquiries relating to immigration and nationality, particularly following Brexit and the introduction of the European Union Settlement Scheme.
Dorset Race Equality Council is also a third-party reporting centre for race hate crime and incidents. During the period 2016 to date we have recorded 74 reports of hate crime and discrimination incidents from members of the community, in addition to our casework (13 of these were reports of multiple/ repeated incidents).
The reporting of incidents increased at certain moments: most noticeably around the time of the Brexit referendum (as discussed above) and also following the 2017 Finsbury Park mosque terrorist attack.
We have also reported 20 discriminatory comments on the Bournemouth Echo website. Due to limited capacity our analysis of the comments section was by no mean comprehensive: these are just the comments that were brought to our attention and usually with reference to the Gypsy and Traveller community.
In 2017 we also reported 13 racist comments in response to a Bournemouth Council e-panel discussion on perceptions of the Boscombe neighbourhood: these were derogatory comments about the greater ethnic diversity in the area. Criminal Justice and access to justice
The Access to Justice project was a 12-month collaboration between Dorset Race Equality Council and Citizens Advice Dorset that commenced in February 2020. The aim of the project was to evaluate and improve access to specialist legal help for our clients. A preliminary analysis of our casework carried out by our discrimination caseworker concluded that much better outcomes would have been achieved had there been access to legal advice in as many as 40- 50% of our cases. Court action may have been appropriate in 10- 15% of cases. Furthermore, our work has been hindered by the late presentation of cases in all areas of discrimination. Our discrimination caseworker is working hard to build relationships with legal professionals who could be approached for pro-bono advice, but access to timely legal advice is still a huge issue for our clients and our recommendation is that a law clinic be established in Dorset.
During the period of 2016 to date, 22 of our cases have involved discrimination in the criminal justice system. There are recurring themes of mistreatment by the police and reports of police not acting or taking cases seriously. Clients have reported instances of racial abuse, miscarriages of justice, racially aggravated assault and hate crime. Abuse from neighbours also featured within this category.
One of our key observations from these cases is the need for better communication and transparency. For example, in one recent case, the client believed that no action had been taken in response to a report of racially abusive language used in the workplace. However, when we enquired further on the client’s behalf, we discovered that the issue had been taken seriously and fully investigated by the police, but because the incident was reported out of time there was not scope for prosecution. Had this been communicated to the client, their level of satisfaction with the police would have been far greater.
We would also like to take this opportunity to note our concern over the lack of implementation of the recommendations detailed in the Lammy Review into the treatment of BME people in the criminal justice system. Employment
During the period 2016 to date, 19 of our cases have related to discrimination in employment. These included unfair treatment by management and racial abuse from colleagues. Many clients raised grievances and the vast majority were not upheld.
An issue we encounter time and again (not only in employment scenarios) is the difficulty of proving race discrimination. The onus is entirely on the victim to prove they have experienced discrimination. ‘Investigations’ often go no further than a review of written records and a conversation with the perpetrator/s. So much more needs to be done, in terms of individuals examining their personal biases and organisations evaluating how their culture, systems and processes may exclude or disadvantage certain groups. In particular, we would like to see a shift towards giving credence to those who report race discrimination and a greater onus on the employer or relevant authority to investigate allegations thoroughly (for example, by considering comparator cases).
We are concerned that the ‘flexibilization’ of the labour market also leaves BME workers particularly vulnerable to race discrimination. For example, we have had two people come forward from a large, local employer reporting unjustified demotion/ termination of contract after experiencing racial discrimination in the workplace. In both instances, the person was not permitted to appeal the decision or submit a formal grievance given their agency worker status. We are told that other BME workers from this organisation have also experienced racism but are afraid to come forward and seek our support due to fear of reprisals.
Education
During the period of 2016 to date, 21 of our discrimination cases related to education. The issue reported was usually other children racially bullying the client’s child/ren. Also, it was often seen that schools were not taking issues seriously or dealing with them inadequately or inappropriately. There needs to be greater oversight and accountability to ensure schools address discrimination concerns appropriately. Housing
During the period of 2016 to date, 31 of our cases have related to housing. The most common themes are racist abuse from neighbours, housing register issues and concerns around temporary accommodation due to homelessness.
It has come to our attention that housing providers are often not effective in addressing racial abuse between tenants. When reported, often such incidents will be logged as ‘neighbour disputes’ rather than racist abuse. This has an impact upon how the cases are handled and we have found that the way in which these situations are coded cannot be changed retrospectively upon our intervention.
All private and social landlords must be compelled to take responsibility for racially abusive tenants and, if necessary, take steps to evict them from their property. Too often it is the victim who is forced to relocate or tolerate ongoing abuse. The Covid-19 emergency measures to protect tenants do not extend to those who commit anti-social behaviour and landlords must not be able to use this as an excuse to delay taking action.
In more general terms, weak tenants’ rights in the UK inevitably leave BME tenants more vulnerable to discriminatory and unfair treatment. We have seen numerous cases in which tenants living in substandard properties feel that they are particularly neglected by landlords who believe that they can get away with it when it comes to non-UK nationals who may not know their rights or how to defend them. Appendices Appendix 1
Race/ religious discrimination cases
Issue 2016/17 2018/19 2020/21 Total consumer 2 2 4 crime/justice 8 7 7 22 debt education 9 10 2 21 employment 6 9 4 19 health/community care 1 1 1 3 housing 9 15 7 31 immigration/nationality 1 1 welfare benefits 1 1 other 4 8 1 13 yearly total 38 53 24 115
Appendix 2
One-off race/ religious discrimination advice
Issue 2016/17 2018/19 2020/21 total consumer crime/justice 1 1 debt education 2 2 employment 1 3 4 health/community care 2 2 4 housing 1 1 immigration/nationality 1 12 13 welfare benefits 2 2 other 2 2 4 yearly total 6 9 16 31
Runnymede Call for Evidence EQUALITY ACT REVIEW SUMMARY This evidence submission from the Equality Act Review calls for an intersectional lens to be applied to calls for racial justice. Drawing on research we have conducted on educational experiences during the pandemic, employment experiences of racialised groups, and the effectiveness of the Equality Act (particularly in reference to section 14), we argue this inquiry should centre intersectional experiences of justice for discrimination, which includes race. We would like to particularly draw your attention to a development in intersectionality theory by Bi (2019), who calls for religion to be seen as a valid intersectional marker of identity, particularly underscored by the Muslim experience who are a racialised minority.
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ‘Dominant conceptions of discrimination [have] condition[ed] us to think about subordination as disadvantage occurring along a single categorical axis’ (Crenshaw, 1989, p.140). In her seminal writing on black women’s experiences of discrimination, Kimberle Crenshaw sought to contest this dominant discourse and cast light on the intersectional operation of discrimination along multiple axes. This enquiry is undermined by its central concern with singular racial discrimination and its relegation of intersectional discrimination to the margins, and in turn is facilitating the reinforcement of this dominant discourse that Crenshaw sought to overcome.
The Equality Act Review’s research has highlighted the intersectional operation of discrimination, with a specific focus on the intersection of race with gender, socioeconomic status and religion, which is not traditionally included in conceptions of intersectionality. In our most recent research, we have drawn attention to the intersectional operation of bias in education and have found that this has been exacerbated by Covid-19. In light of the government’s announcement that GCSE and
1 A level exams would be cancelled on and replaced by a system of teacher predictions and algorithmic adjustment on 18th March 2020, the Equality Act Review undertook a two-part study to understand how discrimination became manifested in the system. Our first report, based on survey data collected in April-May 2020, explored concerns amongst students and parents about the risk of discrimination within the proposed system. In this study, in which ‘80% of all respondents were concerned about their grades being predicted’ (Bi, 2020a, p.67), ‘85.8% of the respondents were BAME (16 groups)’ (Bi, 2020, p.67), suggesting a disproportionate concern amongst BAME students and parents about the potential for bias within the system. Nonetheless, we found that concerns were multifaceted, and related to a number of other factors, including, ‘attitude towards mock exams, learning style, progress made since mock exams, mitigating circumstances, Special Educational Needs (SEN), disrupted schooling [and a] lack of resources’ (Bi, 2020a, p.67), with this last factor operating around the intersection of race/ethnicity and class. Indeed, ‘we found that concerns about bias transcended BAME identity and included favouritism, bad behaviour, Islamophobia and class’ (Bi, 2020a, p.67), ‘with more than half of participants (58.82%)…concerned for two or more reasons’ (Bi, 2020a, p.67). This clearly highlights the concern within the 2020 student body about the potential for bias in the proposed system to operate intersectionally, along multiple axes.
Our second report, Predicting Futures 2.0, examined the experiences of students following the publishing of results in August 2020. The study unveiled a two-tiered system of discrimination, in which ‘77.2% (1614) of respondents…received results that were an under-estimate of their abilities’ (Bi, 2020b, p.13), and 76.7% (1604) (Bi, 2020b, p.13) stated that their final grades were below teacher predictions, testament to the ‘role of regulators in supressing teacher predicted grades’ (Bi, 2020b, p.13). Consequently, ’64.6% (1350) of our cohort missed out on their university offers and 22.1% (462) stated they missed out on sixth form/college offers’ (Bi, 2020b, p.14). Furthermore, 56.5% (1183) of respondents experienced negative impacts on their mental health (Bi, 2020, p.14), and approximately 50% of respondents had either decided against retaking examinations or were still unsure as to whether or not to re- sit at the time of the study, illustrating a devastating loss of talent and aspiration amongst the student cohort. The report concluded that ‘BAME students were indeed
2 impacted more than non-BAME students, as 79.8% of respondents were BAME’ (Bi, 2020b, p.51). Nonetheless, the report ‘illustrated a toxic intersection between racial and ethnic identity, socioeconomic background, gender and inequality’ (Bi, 2020b, p.52), with ‘those with household incomes below the national average income of £28,500 ma[king] up 57.9% of respondents, and female respondents ma[king] up 57% of’ (Bi, 2020b, p.52) the sample. Furthermore, ‘53.6% of respondents belonged to minority religions within which Muslim comprised 40.5%’ (Bi, 2020b, p.52), thereby corroborating concerns uncovered in the first report that bias in the system would operate along a religious axis in addition to a racial axis.
EMPLOYMENT RESEARCH In February 2020, the Equality Act published a report which explored the work and career development experiences of Muslim women (Bi, 2020a). We found that nearly 50% experienced discrimination and islamophobia in the workplace (n = 425), and we were also able to identify that much of their work and career development outcomes after graduating were determined during the period of 14-22years of age. For instance, of 425 women who took part in the survey, 79 wanted to become doctors at aged 14 however, only 1 became a doctor at age 22. The narratives we were able to capture through semi-structured interviews with 50 women included harrowing experiences of discrimination such as, colleagues threatening to burn a Muslim woman’s headscarf, parents asking not to be taught by the Muslim teacher and pulling their child out of school as a result, and patients asking not to be treated by a Muslim doctor. High level of resilience were demonstrated by Muslim women with nearly half being from low income backgrounds below the national average of £28,500 and 41.6% receiving free school meals. Despite these numbers, 48.2% had completed an undergraduate degree and a further 43% had postgraduate qualifications (Bi, 2020a).
The significance of this research for the Runneymede inquiry centres around the way racial justice is a right for groups that are racialised. Particularly post 9/11, Muslims in Britain (and around the globe) have been racialised (see Bi, 2020b). Currently, the law around equality for race and racial justice does not include racialised groups. As (Bi, 2019) argues, her case for race discrimination was dismissed in Employment Tribunals because Muslims are not considered as a race. At the equality act review,
3 we believe that this is significant flaw in the system, which is further exacerbated by the terms of inquiries such as this, that assume racial justice applies only to racial groups. By limiting the terms of the inquiry to exclude racialised groups, we risk practicing epistemological violence.
INTERSECTIONAL DISCRIMINATION IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM The 2010 Equality Act is an historic piece of legislation, consolidating pre-existing anti-discrimination legislation to provide an overarching legal framework for the protection of individuals against discrimination on the grounds of nine key protected characteristics. The Equality Act Review is campaigning for an assessment of this landmark piece of legislation in line with concerns arising from our own research and through evidence obtained through public consultation. Central to these concerns is the issue surrounding the ability of individuals to invoke Section 14 of the Equality Act and launch a case claiming discrimination on multiple grounds (more in our upcoming report). We are concerned that individuals are not able to bring cases of grievance to their employers or the courts which comprise discrimination on multiple grounds. As Bi (2019) demonstrates, discrimination does not always occur in whole sums and percentages. For example, a Black woman in the workplace may have been discriminated 60% due to her race, 20% due to her gender, and 20% due to a disability. Our multiple identities come to surface in the way discrimination occurs, which the current system is not equipped to deal with. By employing singular terms of racial justice, we risk centring justice around race only, reifying the flaws in the system which do not allow for discrimination on multiple grounds to be brought forward.
4
Bibliography
Bi, S. 2019b. More than Multiple Jeopardy: Navigating the Legal System as a Muslim-Woman-Litigant-in-Person. Journals of Muslims in Europe, Vol.8(3), pp. 247- 264. [online] Available at:
Bi, S. 2020a. Empowered Employment: Unlocking the Workplace for Muslim Women. Equality Act Review, pp. 1-60. [online] Available at:
Bi, S., 2020b. Predicting Futures: Examining Student Concerns Amidst Coronavirus Exam Cancellations. Predicting Futures. Equality Act Review, pp.1-77. [online] Available at:
Bi, S., 2020c. Predicting Futures 2.0: Examining Student Experiences of Predicted Grades Amidst Coronavirus Exam Cancellations. Predicting Futures. Equality Act Review, pp.1-59. [online] Available at: https://bf653768-3166-4596-9be6- a084f0452700.filesusr.com/ugd/d09f8e_cd876eb4ec264359955da5cd15671417.pdf [Accessed 2 March 2021].
Crenshaw, K., 1989. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1989(1), pp.139-167.
5
Equity’s Submission to the Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Introduction Equity is the trade union representing over 43,000 people working in the UK’s film, television, theatre, dance, variety and music industries. Our membership includes actors, singers, dancers, stage managers, circus artists, theatre directors and many other performers and creative workers. We also have over 5000 student members who are currently training at accredited drama schools and other recognised higher education institutions.
The union has four equalities committees to support the development of strategy, policy and campaigns. This submission is presented on behalf of Equity’s Race Equality Committee (REC). This submission reflects the priority around employment.
A key concern of the REC in the context of the CERD is around the fair, accurate portrayal and representation of Black and minority ethnic actors and performers on stage, screen and audio. The entertainment industry occupies a unique role in society, and has the potential to play a valuable in addressing racism by, for example, ensuring that characters do not reflect stereotypical or racist assumptions. Similarly, the industry can also place greater importance on addressing racism in both factual and drama content. It is noticeable that Netflix, the US-based subscription video on demand (SVOD) provider is acknowledged as achieving significant commercial success by strategically addressing these issues1.
The REC utilises this submission to identify examples of work to-date in this area, but also where remaining concerns are.
Under-representation on Mainstream Broadcast TV The REC commissioned its own research to confirm that the under-representation of BME artists remained a consistent problem across all of the UK’s mainstream broadcasters. The detailed report is available here: https://www.equity.org.uk/media/4062/equity_diversity_guide_2020-v3-sp.pdf
Key findings from this research are: • East Asians are severely under-represented on broadcast television. • 8% of lead roles were played by actors of African-Caribbean, south Asian, east Asian or Middle Eastern heritage. • The depiction of Middle Eastern and/or south Asian characters continues to reinforce stereotypes by portraying narratives about terrorism. • Stereotypes of African-Caribbeans as criminals persist in scripted narratives. • There is a high level of segregation within peak scripted programming, as productions with a majority minority cast continue to “other” British-born actors of African Caribbean, south Asian and east Asian heritage. These
1 https://digitability.com/wp-content/uploads/Inclusion_in_Netflix_Original_Content_2.26.21.pdf
1 Equity’s Submission to the Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
programmes are situated in Africa, south Asia or east Asia and cast British actors as foreigners. Lack of Definitive Monitoring The UK entertainment industry lacks a definitive means to accurately monitor its workforce. The extent of this problem is particularly profound across the broadcast industry and is routinely cited as problematic by the industry regulator2. It is important to note also that in creating its own monitoring mechanism in the form of Project Diamond, UK broadcasters have failed in (a) creating a mechanism that accurately and definitively monitors the freelance workforce (as noted by Ofcom) and (b) in meeting its own targets to improve on diversity based on race and disability3. Ultimately, we are left in the a situation where both authoritative data commissioned by Equity, and inadequate data generated by Project Diamond, both conclude that the UK’s mainstream broadcasters have been unable to ensure that its workforce meets commonly accepted standards of diversity as determined by the UK regulator. Responding to the Impact of Covid 19 It is clear that the pandemic has had a significant detrimental impact on the diversity of workforce across the creative and cultural industries. Recent data from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) reveals, for example, that at least 44% of Black and minority ethnic (BME) women are identified as having left the sector4. The REC are involved in responding to this damaging shift. This work includes the publication of an open letter to the UK’s leading arts funder, Arts Council England (ACE) to enforce the public sector equality duty. The REC calls for improved measures to ensure fairness and diversity in the allocation of funding, and in monitoring how funded organisations devise and implement strategies to achieve proportionate diversity in their workforce. The open letter and media coverage can be seen here: https://www.equity.org.uk/equalitiesopenletter https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/open-letter-urges-ace-to-make-diversity-criteria-a- funding-condition
Monitoring Racism across the Entertainment Industry
A key role of the REC is help Equity the degree and extent of racism across the entertainment industry. Recent work undertaken by the REC has included listening to the experience of young members and non-members of the union to gain a sound, contemporary sense of how racism is seen and experience by those first coming into the industry, and of how this experience intersects with other dimensions of identity e.g., sexual orientation. This work is of critical importance in aiding the work of the
2 https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/information-for- industry/guidance/diversity/diversity-equal-opportunities-tv-and-radio 3 https://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/home/diamond-bame-representation-goes-into- reverse/5156585.article 4
2 Equity’s Submission to the Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
REC to determine its strategic response to supporting union members who fall under its remit.
The REC welcome the opportunity to supplement its submission further, and looks forward to receiving a copy of the civil society report.
3 Equity’s Submission to the Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Friends Families and Travellers submission to the Runnymede Trust Civil Society Monitoring Report 2021: Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
Victoria Gilmore, Abbie Kirkby, Emma Nuttall, Sarah Sweeney | 5 March 2021
Introduction
The following submission draws on the previous 2016 CERD Committee recommendations on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities in relation to; education, accommodation, race hate and steps taken to address discrimination in these areas. The submission provides evidence on the UK Government’s progress with implementation and makes recommendations to the UK Government.
National Strategy to address the inequalities experienced by Gypsies, Roma and Travellers
Relevant CERD recommendation
The Committee recognised in their 2016 Concluding Observations of the UK review that Gypsies, Roma and Travellers face exclusion and discrimination across key areas of life including, health, education, employment, accommodation and experience widespread discrimination within the media and wider public sphere. The Committee recommended the Government implement a comprehensive strategy to address this wide ranging discrimination faced by Gypsies, Roma and Travellers in the UK1.
Overview of the situation and Government position
In response to the Women and Equalities Parliamentary Select Committee inquiry into inequalities experienced by Gypsies, Roma and Travellers2, the Government announced its commitment to implement a cross-departmental strategy to address this in June 20193. However, to date no visible progress has been made on the Strategy, with no published Plan or Strategy outlining any aims, lines of accountability or timelines.
The Government have failed to implement the Committee’s 2016 recommendation to develop a strategy to address the wide-ranging discrimination and exclusion faced by Gypsies, Roma and Travellers. This lack of action is in conflict with Article 2 of the Convention.
Recommendation
The UK Government should take steps to urgently fulfil their commitment to implement a cross-departmental strategy to tackle entrenched inequality and improve the lives of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities.
1 Para 25 (a) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 2 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/360/full-report.html 3 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-national-strategy-to-tackle-gypsy-roma-and-traveller-inequalities
1
Gypsy and Traveller site provision & eviction powers
Relevant CERD recommendations
The Committee’s 2016 Concluding Observations included a recommendation for the UK Government to prioritise the adequate provision of culturally appropriate accommodation and stopping sites for Gypsies and Travellers4.
The Committee issued a further recommendation in their 2016 review of the UK, instructing the Government to ensure the rights of Gypsies and Travellers are not adversely effected by the 2015 Planning Policy for Traveller Sites change in definition of a Traveller, including those who have ceased to travel permanently5.
Overview of the situation and Government position
Despite the existence of ‘Planning Policy for Traveller Sites’ (PPTS), the policy designed to specifically address the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers, the national shortage of culturally appropriate accommodation for Gypsies and Travellers persists678. Research demonstrates that the majority of local authorities are failing to comply with requirements on land allocation for site provision under PPTS9.
The situation has deteriorated, with a dramatic reduction of assessed need for more pitches based on the revised 2015 planning policy definition of a Gypsy or Traveller. A significant proportion of Gypsies and Travellers are now excluded from the planning policy definition, regardless of ethnic status.
The Government are also proposing hostile legislation which seeks to criminalise Gypsies and Travellers living on encampments10. The proposals seek to criminalise trespass and introduce tougher police powers to evict from encampments and to seize family’s caravans/homes. This poses a direct threat to the rights of Gypsies and Travellers to lead a nomadic way of life.
The Government have failed to implement the Committee’s recommendations to take steps to mitigate the negative impact of the change in the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites definition or to prioritise the provision of Gypsy and Traveller sites and stopping places. This, and the proposals to introduce tougher police powers conflict with Articles 2 and 5 (e) iii of the Convention.
Recommendations
The UK Government should abolish proposals to criminalise trespass and quash plans to strengthen police powers. The UK Government should reintroduce pitch targets and a statutory duty onto local authorities to meet the assessed need for Gypsy and Traveller sites. The UK Government should amend the 2015 Planning Policy for Traveller sites definition of a Traveller to include all Gypsies and Travellers who need a pitch to live on.
4 Para 25 (b) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 5 Para 25 (d) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 6https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/891229/Traveller_caravan_count_2 020_stats_release.pdf 7 https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Lack-of-Increase-in-Affordable-Pitches-Dec-2017-Report.pdf 8 https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Availability-of-pitches-on-Traveller-sites-in-England_FINAL.pdf 9 https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/planning/no-place-to-stop-only-8-of-68-local-authorities-in-south-east-england-have-identified-enough- land-for-travellers-to-live/ 10 https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/strengthening-police-powers-to-tackle-unauthorised-encampments
2
Monitoring /addressing hate crimes & incidents against Gypsies, Roma and Travellers
Relevant CERD recommendation
The 2016 Committee recommendations on hate crime and speech called on the Government to collect disaggregated data on hate crimes, improve monitoring processes and to meaningfully include those groups affected in this process11.
Overview of the situation and Government position
Gypsies, Roma and Travellers face widespread prejudice and race hate1213. However, Government data on hate crimes are not disaggregated sufficiently and not all Police Forces record the ethnicity of victims in line with the Census categories, making the extent of anti-Gypsyism practically invisible.
The independent Gypsy, Roma and Traveller race hate reporting site ‘Report Racism GRT’ was established to address some of the gaps in data and to promote reporting of anti-Gypsyism1415. This project had, for a period of time, been funded by the Government, but in 2020 the funding came to an end with no plan for renewal.
The level of prejudice and hate against Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people is not adequately reflected in the most recent National Hate Crime Action Plan (2016-2020)16.
While the Government made some progress to improve hate crime reporting by funding the Report Racism GRT project, this progress has ground to a halt, with much needed progress to improve monitoring and strategies to tackle anti-Gypsyism in line with the Committee’s 2016 recommendation, and in support of Articles 2, 4 and 6 of the Convention.
Recommendations
The UK Government and Police Forces should disaggregate their data on hate crimes/incidents in line with the 2021 Census ethnic categories. The UK Government should include robust measures to tackle anti-Gypsyism into in the next Hate Crime Action Plan.
Political discourse
Relevant CERD recommendation
The Committee also issued a recommendation in 2016 to tackle xenophobic political discourse and to ensure public officials not only refrain from using such language, but actively condemn it in order to promote a culture of respect and tolerance17.
11 Para 16 (b) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 12 https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/national-barometer-of-prejudice-and-discrimination-in-britain.pdf 13 https://gateherts.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Rain-Report-201211.pdf 14 https://reportracismgrt.com/ 15 https://gateherts.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Annual_Report_14_05_18.pdf 16 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hate-crime-action-plan-2016 17 Para 16 (d) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en
3
Overview of the situation and Government position
Not only do we continue to see discriminatory language used among public officials toward Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities, there is a lack of accountability and absence of effective recourse to challenge this. For example, Friends Families and Travellers submitted 8 complaints regarding discriminatory language used by Conservative Party Members of Parliament between 2018- 2020. Every one of these complaints were dismissed on the following grounds;
“The Code of Conduct states: “In no way should anything in this Code interfere with an elected representative carrying out his or her duties and exercising his or her judgement in relation to his or her work…”
Examples of the nature of language used include;
“These people think the normal rules of civilised society do not apply to them.” “...a big Traveller problem.” “…an expensive menace...” “…people in the UK who repeatedly suffer from being besieged by Gypsy and Traveller communities.” “This year Surrey has been particularly plagued by groups who descend on open land.”
The Government have failed to implement the Committee’s 2016 recommendation to identify or address discriminatory political discourse in conflict with Articles 2, 4 and 6 of the Convention.
Recommendation
The UK Government should take steps to address discriminatory political discourse surrounding Gypsies, Roma and Travellers as part of a wider plan to address race hate against Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities.
Role of the media in fuelling hate speech and crime against Gypsies, Roma and Travellers
Relevant CERD recommendation
The Committee issued a recommendation in 2016 to the UK Government to address racist media coverage and hate speech and to ensure such cases are fully investigated and resolved18.
Overview of the situation and Government position
In 2018, the UK government signed up to the UN Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration which contains a commitment from all signatories to stop, “allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.” However, since signing the Global Compact on Migration, the UK government has continued to invest in newspapers which promote racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, including Roma communities19.
18 Para 16 (e) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 19 Friends Families and Travellers and Gypsy and Traveller Empowerment Hertfordshire written information for the examination of the UK State party's report to the 66th Cycle of the United Nations Committee Against Torture
4
Existing mechanisms for challenging discrimination in print media through the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) are ineffective and lengthy. The discrimination clause in IPSO’s Editors’ Code of Practice is ineffective in tackling most forms of discrimination and even where a breach of the code does take place, the process for addressing this is so lengthy that millions of people are able to read an article before it is amended or taken down.
The issue is reflected in TV and broadcast media also. For example, in April 2020 Channel 4 aired a show, ‘Dispatches: The Truth About Traveller Crime’ which was misleading, encouraged hate towards Gypsy and Traveller people and reinforced false stereotypes. Over 7000 people complained and Ofcom, the UK’s communications regulator, launched an investigation in May 2020 which aimed to be completed within 50 working days20. Over nine months have now passed and the outcome of the investigation is yet to be shared. Information from the show is now quoted by other media outlets as fact, although the content is misleading.
The UK Government have failed to implement the Committees 2016 recommendation to address race hate in the media, in conflict with Articles 2, 4 and 6 of the Convention.
Recommendation
The UK Government should stop allocating public funds to media outlets which promote racism, in line with commitments made in the UN Global Compact for Migration. The UK Government should review and strengthen the IPSO Editor’s Code of Practice and the Ofcom broadcasting code to ensure racist media coverage is addressed in all its forms in a timely manner.
Race hate in education settings
Relevant CERD recommendation
The Committee expressed concern in their 2016 concluding observations with reports of continued racist bullying within schools and the disproportionate rates of exclusion from school of pupils belonging to Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities across the UK21.
Overview of the situation and Government position
The most recent Government Race Disparity Audit (RDA) figures tell us that Gypsies, Roma and Travellers continue to experience the highest rates of temporary and permanent exclusion compared to other ethnic groups in the UK2223. Furthermore, research published in 2020 by Greenfields and Rogers on the effects of hate crime and discrimination on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities revealed;
School bullying was highlighted by 78% of [88] survey respondents as one of the most common forms of hate speech/crime experiences24.
20 https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/campaign/ofcom-launch-investigation-into-channel-4-show-dispatches-the-truth-about-traveller- crime/ 21 Para 34 https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD%2fC%2fGBR%2fCO%2f21- 23&Lang=en 22 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/absence-and-exclusions/pupil-exclusions/latest 23 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/absence-and-exclusions/permanent-exclusions/latest 24 http://bucks.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/54649/Rain-Report.pdf
5
The RDA also highlights the critical inequality between the educational outcomes of Gypsies, Roma and Travellers and the general population. For example, the average score at GCSE attainment 8 level25 is just 19.1 out of a possible score of 90 for Gypsies/Roma and 26.6 for Irish Travellers. This compares to combined average of 46.7 out of 90 for 2018/1926.
Despite these continuing educational inequalities the Government has cut vital funding to local authority Traveller Education Services, which were set up to improve relationships, address exclusion rates and attainment gaps. Due the discontinuation of Government funding, the vast majority of Traveller Education Services no longer exist.
The Government have failed to address the Committee’s 2016 concerns in relation to exclusions and race hate within the school setting, in conflict with Articles 2 and 5 (e) (v) of the Convention.
Recommendations
The UK Government should take steps to create a more inclusive environment for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils. The UK Government should reintroduce ring-fenced funding for Traveller Education Services. The UK Government should take steps to address the high exclusion rates experienced by Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils.
About us
Friends Families and Travellers is a leading national charity that works on behalf of all Gypsies, Roma and Travellers regardless of ethnicity, culture or background. [email protected] | www.gypsy-traveller.org | Twitter: @GypsyTravellers | Facebook: @FriendsFamiliesandTravellers | +44 (0) 1273 234 777
25 Pupils’ average score out of 90, based on the results of 8 GCSE level qualifications 26 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/gcse-results-attainment-8-for- children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest
6
Formal Grievance Form PERSONAL DETAILS
NAME: Sangeeta Chauhan ID NUMBER: 60115
LOCATION: Birmingham Snowhill GRADE: 16
Interface Manager/ U&A Delivery JOB TITLE: TEAM: Strategic Partnerships Manager
CONTACT NO. 07920413900 CONTACT EMAIL [email protected]
CONTACT
ADDRESS
FORMAL GRIEVANCE DETAILS
Please provide full details of your Grievance (attaching any relevant documents or other evidence to support your grievance):
1. I am disputing my evolve interview score (8) which does not make sense to me. As I prepared extensively for my interview (See attached [1] STAR competency answers’). 27th April resulted in my risk of redundancy.
I was deliberately marked low due to the fact that: Interface had no Director role to support transition. The job descriptions for the evolve roles were written in isolation by CSE without input from Interface. The ‘Job Family’ – needed to be broken down into specialisms to be a fair test of competencies especially for Business Manager and Compliance Manager roles (Internal facing roles). The interview questions were all Engagement focused and written by CSE in isolation. The questions did not relate to interface activities such as managing risk, compliance with U&A’s and negotiation of third party agreements with strategic stakeholders. The interview panel did not understand my technical competency responses to the questions they asked. The interview panel did not have Interface representation. The interview panel did not have EDI representation. Post-evolve - All IPT’s roles in CSE now have to manage U&As compliance – these have been added to their Goals & Objectives from Aileen) Strategic Director downwards so that there will be no breach or risk to HS2 programme.
Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01
I have been treated unfairly in the restructure process and this is despite meeting all 2019/2020 objectives as a new Interface Manager (See attached [2] Objectives) where I made significant contributions to getting third party agreements with UGC and SMBC signed and adding value to HS2.
This was acknowledged within the ‘Oakervee Review’ of HS2 and more recently evident in the installation of the bridge at M42 J6. I unblocked issues and concerns from the Highway Authorities SMBC/HE in support of the delivery team to achieve Schedule 17 consents in the absence of my line manager for Earthworks and Utility works at Interchange Station Highways and Schedule 4 Part 3 approval for Laing Murphy - first major highway consent approval in Area North, which meant the contractors could purchase materials and commence EWC highway works.
Whilst on the other hand, the Oakervee report stated - “HS2 Ltd’s stakeholder engagement is not adequate in its performance and strength, as well as not having people who are fully knowledgeable of the local areas affected by HS2”.
It has disheartened me that my contribution was ignored throughout the evolve process.
2. Business Manager Roles To date I have applied for the following:
Business Manager-20000599. – (reject email received 26/08/20) Project Manager (Business Management) 20000575 - 29/07/20 (did not hear anything) Business Manager 20000286 – 29/04/20 (rejected email received) Project Manager (Business Management) 20000285 - 29/04/20 (reject email received after contacting HR shared services) Evolve - Business Partner - MWCC 19001032 - 10-Jan-2020 Evolve - Business Partner - Stations 19001031 - 10-Jan-2020 (Re-advertised – but could not apply) Evolve - Senior Manager Client Services 19001072 – Business 10-Jan-2020 Phase One Business Manager (secondment/development opportunity) - 18000258 21/11/18 – (rejected) 219 Project Manager (Business Management – 02/08/18 (did not hear anything) Business Engagement Manager 35028 – 25/2/18 (did not hear anything)
Apart from a ‘job family’ evolve interview, I have not had any interviews for the above roles, this is despite my evolve CV sift (see attached [3] Business Partner Evolve Sift Scores) showing this role is my strongest match. I would like to know the reasons why I’m not making the interview stage?
3. I am disputing the fact that I was not considered for vacant and unfilled evolve roles, despite having the relevant skills and experience, and this does not make sense to me. As Interface Manager for N3 Curzon and N4 Interchange Stations my role in the new IPT structure equates to 4 roles being created that I could have potentially matched at the same grade: IPT Manager for Curzon, IPT Manager for Interchange IPT Manager for BBV IPT Manager for LM
I have since learnt Ian Pallett who did not apply for the IPT Interchange role – got this. The IPT Manager for Curzon is vacant as Stephen Leigh did not accept this. This role will be re- advertised externally, and I will not be considered due to my poor evolve score. Also, all successful candidates to these roles were white male. 2 Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01
4. Transition Roles – Evolve2 I have been offered the U&A Delivery Manager 20000472 Grade 16. This shows evidence of a more realistic interview score. However, I am still waiting for details of my actual score from Lynne Scot.
My colleagues (North) who were all grade 16 interface managers and white were all offered the grade 18 roles. This is again unfair.
I also applied for the permanent Strategic Partnerships Manager and Senior Strategic Partnerships Manager and have learnt that my application will not be considered as HS2 will not allow individuals at risk of redundancy to re-apply. This does not make sense to me when I have the relevant skills and experience.
What I cannot understand, is that after Royal Assent when the Hybrid team were disbanded, individuals at risk of redundancy were actively supported and job matched. Why has this not been the case this time?
5. Since being put at risk of redundancy, I have applied for the following roles but have never heard back. Can you provide an explanation with sift evidence why my applications have been unsuccessful to progress to interview for each of the following positions:
Project Manager (Business Management) 20000575 - 29/07/20 Supply Chain Manager - College, Innovation, Culture 20000280 – 09/06/20 Business Manager 20000286 – 29/04/20 Project Manager (Business Management) 20000285 - 29/04/20 Third Party Agreements Manager 20000366 – 01/06/20 – this role was re-advertised on the external site Project Managers - London or Birmingham 19001242 – 29/04/20 Project Manager Enabling Works Contracts - Birmingham based (x4)19001431 - 07/07/20 Project Manager – Compliance & Assurance 20000581 28/07/20
6. The culmination of the systems and processes adopted by HS2 in points 1-5 clearly result in women and BAME employees being disproportionately displaced and treated less favourably. Drawing me to conclude that ‘Institutional Racism continues to exist’.
I can count the names of CSE and Interface employees who were put at risk of redundancy.
CSE Interface Joan Gooden (f) BAME Sangeeta Chauhan (f) BAME Emma Gaydon (f) Edward Young (m) Cheryl Snudden (f) Suzanne Crouch (f) Vernon Loo (m) BAME Rachel Onikosi (f) BAME Usha Mepani (f) BAME Carleen McDonald (f) BAME Alison Love (f) Sharon Goodison (f) BAME Catherine Gaywood (f) Caitlin Pickavance (f) Lizzie Gnomes (f) BAME Sophie Abington (f) David Silvey (m) BAME Jo Elmer (f) Mitchell Warburton (f)
3 Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01
Progression of employees impacted by Evolve in CSE and Interface.
Progress Area South – Maddelyn Sutton Luke Nipen (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 South) (m) Kimberley Royer Harris (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 South) Ella Davies (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager, Business Partner – Phase 1 South) (f)
Patricia Thompson (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 OOC station) (f) BAME Grant Blowers (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 OOC station) (m) Nisha Mejer (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 EK) (f) BAME grade 16 to 18
Richard Nuttall (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 EK) (m) grade 18 to 16
Joel Sykes (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 Align) (m) grade 16 to 18 Freda Jesudason (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 Euston) BAME Terry Stafford (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 SCS) (m) Area North - Iain Andrews Jonathan Lord (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 North) (m) Tremaine Herbert (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 North) (f)
Susan Bridges (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 Curzon St) (f) grade 16 to 18 Rachel Johnson (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 Interchange) (f) grade 16 to 18 Ian Pallet (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 Interchange) (m)
Paul Mullins (Senior Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 BBV) (m) grade 16 to 18 Chris Humphries (Community & Stakeholder Manager – Phase 1 BBV) (m) Strategic Partnerships – Donovan Bailey Tracey Bailey - Senior Community & Stakeholder Engagement Manager, Business Partner,
Strategic Partnerships (f) Saeeda Ajaib - Senior Community & Stakeholder Engagement Manager, Strategic Partnerships (f) BAME
Sean Armstrong – Senior Community & Stakeholder Engagement Manager, Strategic Partnerships (m) grade 16 to 18 Peter Axford – Senior Community & Stakeholder Engagement Manager, Strategic Partnerships (m) grade 16 to 18 Ithiktar Abutin – Compliance Manager, Community & Stakeholder Engagement (m) BAME
Kelly Bardwell – Compliance Manager, Community & Stakeholder Engagement (f) Miriam Wolfe – Compliance Manager, Community & Stakeholder Engagement (f) Laura Day – Senior Compliance Manager (f) grade 17 to 18
Stephen Leigh - HE – Senior Strategic partnerships manager (m) grade 16 to 18 Jo Elmer - TFL – Senior Strategic partnerships manager (f) Edward Young – Strategic Partnerships Manager (m) at risk to grade 16 permanent role Caitlin Pickavance - Senior U&A Delivery Manager Stations – (f) (transition) Sangeeta Chauhan – U&A Compliance Manager (transition) (f) BAME
Lizzie Gnomes – U&A Delivery Manager (transition) (f) BAME
4 Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01
What I find difficult to understand is on the one hand HS2 have great initiatives to attract women and BAME workers to the sector. Like the following:
1. ‘HS2 careers’ email – (see attached [4] HS2 Careers) Which states: “……..We are faced with the challenge of an ageing workforce in rail engineering and a significant under representation of women and BAME workers in the UK’s construction sector. It takes a project the size and scale of HS2 to support redressing those balances”.
2. Developing you at HS2 – I found a Persona (See attached [5] Portfolio Personas) that matches mine. This leads me to question, as a BAME employee why I am the only one who is going backwards in my career? From an Interface Manager, a full time HS2 employee into a transition role for 6 months?
3. Working together to get local businesses onboard Look at the image of staff used in this article, is this a reflection of post evolve? Have HS2 removed all employees of colour? How is HS2 therefore representative of the communities and neighbours that it serves?
This reminds me of the Ford Motor Company 1918-1947 which deliberately removed all the BAME faces from their marketing material. It is clearly disappointing to see this in 2020 and does not leave much to say.
Then on the other hand have put women and BAME employees at risk of redundancy or into a 6 month transition role without actively considering them for permanent jobs. This is despite 500+ new roles being available post ‘Notice To Proceed’ and an equal number of unfilled evolve roles, and there is a genuine business need.
7. Holding the business to account. I read with interest an article shared by the Lead for Evolve – Mark Lomas ‘Our commitment to EDI - I put forward a question:
‘Institutional Racism continues to exist What we as HS2 forget are that our own systems and processes are also unfair and do discriminate.
The 'Evolve' change programme is a good example of this. Whilst we have some great initiatives 'STEM' and 'Women into construction' and 'making the sector more attractive' to specific groups. There are a number of us who are still displaced and have uncertainties. The question to ask is where are the impact assessments?, were any undertaken for the number of women and BAME employees who are now at risk?, where are the lessons learnt covering the sifting and interview processes that did not make sense and did not follow our own values 'starting internally'.
ML is yet to supply an actual breakdown of the figures for the 41 people at risk and what this looks like for the Number of Women and Number of BAME employees?
His response remains: A full Equality Impact Assessment has been undertaken on each stage of the Evolve programme. No adverse impact has been identified for women or BAME groups at any stage including at risk populations, recruitment, promotion and at the moment redundancy. (Accepting that 3rd consultation meetings are closing out).
5 Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01 The EqIA will be shared with the workplace forum and updates have been shared with them previously. Clearly more work needs to be done here. There is a gap in senior management accountability and transparency in reporting which could be mitigated for impact on specific groups within the construction sector – this is now lost and an outcome of evolve.
At this time, I also had my first one to one with the North Stations Director TW (Jacobs) the first one since I Joined his team in 2019. Whilst the conversation was amicable, he also told me ‘Evolve is done and to get over it’. The trouble is as a BAME women you always have to get over it and you get thick skinned and used to it like the injustices of slavery and stop and search and there is no where for you to go but to take it on the chin.
What practical steps would you like to see to resolve your grievance?
For my grievance to be upheld. For my risk of redundancy to be revoked. For HS2 to provide assurance of a permanent role at the end of my transition period For HS2 to provide a response to all the questions asked in 1 to 6 above. For HS2 to acknowledge that I have been treated unfairly through no fault of my own. For HS2 to apologise for the stress and anxiety caused. For HS2 to acknowledge that its systems and processes during evolve and recruitment thereafter have been questionable and have resulted in women and BAME employees being treated less favourably. For HS2 to proactively ‘Recolour the landscape and rebalance all inequalities’ - for HS2 senior managers who are predominately white to have the motivation to do the right thing, and not be afraid of challenge, including having honest healthy conversations on how to bring in more diversity into their teams, ultimately to tell better stories and tap into all the BAME talent that is out there still waiting to be realised. For HS2 leadership team to learn from Professor David Olusoga – Presentation on BBC at Edinburgh – https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/aug/24/david-olusoga-his-edinburgh-television-festival- speech-in-full- If HS2 continues like Britain’s historical past in using ‘slave labour’ to build the railways across the world and in the UK – Victorian Railway. Racism will continue and will lead to a ‘lost generation’ of minority ethnic people in the UK rail industry. And the UK Rail industry will never look like the population at large – it’s neighbours and the audience it services.
SIGNATURE: DATE: 26/08/20
6 Formal Grievance Form Document No.: HS2-HS2-HR-FRM-000-000067 Revision: P01
[1] STAR competency answers
1. Example of building collaborative relationships
S – (BIS) Highways construction programme stakeholders SMBC, UGC, AC See HS2 as a catalyst for growth. They have plans for significant growth projects that sit outside HS2 programme. Greenbelt land, HS2 Powers to do this, SMBC is both planning and highways authorities have a lot of clot. 4 landowners and BCC also have plans for growth – set up own Ltd AC - HS2 provides them with opportunity to work collaboratively, and benefit from construction cost efficiencies if schemes run in parallel, and share disruption, minimise impact. They all have U&A’s AC want - Collaborative/Commercial agreements UGC came up with 26 asks – after a lot of discussion we reduced these to 6 outcomes APM, Utility Works, 4th lane RoT, Link Bridge, M6 J4, MSCP – enshrined in Design Funding Agreement dated 4 September 2018 They raised concerns about traffic flow and mitigation at BIS highways do not agree with HS2 mitigation plans or the reliability of the traffic modelling data from hybrid bill 2015. T – I’m tasked to deliver upon 4th lane RoT , and NEC longabout Cut-through – part of BIS Highways scheme.
A – I worked with senior managers, Highway leads, set up fortnightly meetings with Stakeholders
Set up pre-meets to touch base with LM and project team of what was needed by when
Drafted letters on behalf of Head of Programme Interface and Programme Director to stakeholders to provide re-assurance during consents process and acknowledged their request for additional outcomes.
Wrote CIP paper to get Hs2 governance to agree a Funding Agreement with UGC/SMBC for the design for the RoT and cut through
Ensured business continuity during the extended absence of my line manager Summer 2019,
I have supported responses to SMBC/UGC to support their business case and funding application to WMCA. £20m was approved on 08/09/19 for UGC’s Over Trace Roundabout and NEC longabout Cut-Through schemes – part of the overall £100m additional outcomes requested by UGC.
R – Built trusted stakeholder relations with SMBC, UGC WCC, TfWM and HE, Removed blockers to achieve Schedule 17 consents - 18/07 for Earthworks and Utility works at BIS followed by Schedule 4 Part 3 approval which meant the contractors could purchase materials and commence works in parallel without risk to HS2 base scheme programme.
2. Example of prioritising and delivering on time
S – Reburials at Witton Cemetery – BCC Exhumations at Park Street site were completed in August 2019. It was initially thought that a commercial agreement (TPA) with BCC – Witton cemetery would be required for re- internment of bodies from Park Street T – Researched sector plans what they had done at other reburial sites – Old Oak Common, Euston. A – I progressed to Phase 1 CIP and got approval, but this was no longer required. I set up a number of meetings to resolve HS2’s obligations, and finally came to agreement with our commercial team, that the LM (EWC Contractors) contract document with BCC would include the terms to end all future liability upon reburial and to ensure information shared between LM and Witton remained confidential.. R – This satisfied the commercial team, and U&A requirements This has bought works back on track for LM and there was no delay to the re-internment programme which started three weeks ahead of schedule on 04/11/19.
3. Example of using negotiation skills in a complex situation
S – HS2 prog means closing of ‘Park St’ permanently from March 2020. Change to BBV design – meant no impact at Lawley Middleway – no mitigation required and cost saving to HS2. BCC had government grant to improve roads at Lawley Middleway – never completed this BCC wants HS2 funding to help deliver this – as closure of Park Street would trigger the need for traffic signal revalidation on wider network (ring road and along Moor St) – LM had not considered this as a requirement, BCC view is that this should be within HS2 scope (regardless of position on Moor St Q’way impacts and funding) – needs adding to programme
BCC have to implement CAZ – JUNE 2020, and mitigate road closures at New Canal St and Moore St. to ‘Change Behaviours’ in time for the Common Wealth Games in 2022. TfWM are interested in the Cross sector plans and want to minimise the massive impact these schemes will have on highway network highly sensitive, significant reputational risk to HS2 - pressure from Lord Mayor as the closure here will impact upon the wider public bus and transport network.
T – Met with each stakeholder including NX Bus to understand priorities captured this into model, highlighting short, medium long term priorities BCC needed to carry out traffic modelling, consult with stakeholders, put in traffic enforcement. HS2 supported by our traffic modelling leads carrying out study, report ready prior to xmas
A – I presented CIP paper to work through options (what can we deliver, within HS2. Movement was 3 months max. view if we should pay. Mapped out timeline for Contractors getting a Schedule 4 consent - March 2020 – BCC consenting authority Set up strategic meeting with stakeholder at Director level, BCC, shared results from modelling. . R – BCC agreed to lead and pay for mitigation to traffic management. HS2 gave them more time to do this. TfWM – Comms to encourage people to use different modes of transport Curzon Station Mitigation group meeting fortnightly to report on progress, in hind sight should Start negotiations earlier, and taken pro-active approach, not just assumed BCC would lead
4. Example of reputational risk how I managed it? S – Notification of work letters sent to residents in Ferryhill Aberdeen by Fusion our EWC (C2b) to the wrong postcodes (Scotland). Helpdesk taken 250 calls from 8.00am May last year T – Alerted my manager, Comms manager and CE Director Organised for Helpdesk team to be supplied with lines to take: Due to an administrative error, some residents in Ferryhill, Aberdeen have wrongly received information about HS2. This unfortunate technical error happened when generating postcodes for the distribution of these notifications. We are reviewing the processes around this system to ensure this doesn’t happen again and we apologise for any confusion and inconvenience caused. A – Set up Training for Fusion engagement managers on G Viewer training – how to plot area and extract postcodes and check with expert R – Checks in place to ensure postcodes are in shape file – more hand holding required
5. Example when I dealt with sensitive and complex issues
S – BIS Plus Group – set up by LM NEC Area Liaison Meetings – set up by NEC Group Also attended by UGC/SMBC, HE, WCC Stakeholders meetings in public.
T – Presented at 4/5 of these so far, Working closely with engagement teams to present update to stakeholders about HS2, Chairman’s take, Oakervee Review, veg clearance, updates on stations and Phase 1 and 2. responding to their questions. Most sensitive area is Traffic management and signage. A – Road closures from 9pm-6am, avoidance of amber days working well in EWC works l Signage is biggest concern. Temporary signs BPP want SMART. – No U&A advised to apply for BLEF funding for this – not happy. SMBC concerns about ‘wording and symbol’ for Do not like Birmingham as located in Solihull, and we currently have Birmingham International Station Birmingham Interchange Station PM visit on Tues at Curzon Station site - Boris call HS2 Station – Birmingham International Station! R – Take away technical queries and get back to with BPP – currently exploring alternatives for BPP – to e.g. accessing HE Road Safety funding Signage – is really dependent on the naming for the station (Cov CC have U&A) DfT - preference is the network rail logo – even this adds complications to signs and road signs Added this to top of control board for contractors and HS2 to resolve
6. Example of problem solving in challenging situation
S – In ACE role, so much information, I took the lead to capture and record intelligence – ALL IN ONE PLACE - of what we knew about our communities impacted along the line of route – knowing CRM was out of date T – Look at all the different lists and spreadsheet the team were using List of HS2 key designs features on central route, Where were the construction issues and concerns? Who were PC, LA contacts – supportive or opposed Broke these down route into C1, C2 and C3 A – Produced Helpdesk Guide – as a solution for call handlers to quickly get up to speed of patch Set up areacentral inbox so that enquiries went to shared inbox all team could access Replicated this within the folder structure for the team in G Drive. 2017 had completely new team of engagement managers, helped to ensure consistency R – Moved team from reactive to proactive activities, they knew their audience Shared this with CE Director in December and worked with her and Strategic Leads to establish a pan HS2 Stakeholder Managers Group, and Information Manager’s Network to formalise HS2’s community engagement strategy and stakeholder information management systems and processes Replicated this for BIS Highways – adding structure to chaos.
Values Integrity S – Old Curzon Street Station (OCSS) - HS2 have been in discussions with BCC since 2015 on best use for the building. It’s not part of the Station build, not within HS2 Act. - BCC landlord, building will cost £5m to update and make safe. Could only get LEP funding of £2K - HS2 approached DfT (Cabinet) who agreed to fund rest provided could lease and use during construction phase. - Lined up lawyers and funding and aligned - Historic England renting top floor - BCU agreed to fit out and use for STEAM Project for entrepreneurs from university - HS2 would use bottom floor for visitor centre, SEE team walk in - 12 month refurb prog agreed Things that have gone wrong since 2015 - Took more then 2 years to get listed building consent granted to refurb and more then 3 years and over 50 iterations to agree leasehold agreement - LM contractors scheduled to start January 2019 threatened to move onto other jobs - BCC concerns about location of bin store and air-conditioning/heating unit - in design and this impacts on the urban realm - Historic England drop dead dated to move out from current premises by April 2021 - Costs have now increased to £5.6m. HS2’s will need ‘borrowing’ powers from the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, not HS2 Act At least a couple of months delay to signing the agreements. T – Continue talks with stakeholders, found solution via DfT to resolve sunken costs and how these can be recorded in our accounts. A – approached BCU to work to accommodate HE at Millennium Point R – By explaining why we are making the decisions in a certain way, I have been able to reconcile differences, and build genuine commitment to realise potential, - Having honest open and regular comms, and have developed positive relationships where we all laugh and am able to take people together - Fingers crossed expecting approval by end Feb 2020
Respect
S – Creating environments where people can voice their opinion without being shouted down – River Chess, Chilterns Society, concerns about tunneling under 3 rivers • Impact of tunnelling in the chalk aquifer • Misbourne Valley would be heavily faulted and fractured • Why Affinity water got indemnity insurance of XXXX • Impact of putting water from Vent Shafts into the River Misbourne (Flood Risk) • Tunnel Safety,Notification of closures / changes to Public Rights of Way / Traffic congestion T – Listened and gained understanding of their concerns. Set up meeting with support of LA to meet, demonstrated our commitment to resolving. A – Organised for experts from HS2, EWC/ MWCC environment agency and Affinity water to present and have open discussion, on technical questions on TBM design and installation. R – Provide written response to questions from Emma Head – Director of Health Safety and Security and cc local MP’s. Share Engagement plan on how we will keep them informed of programme of works
Safety Risk assessment, help desk support gap in training and cascading info S – CE events – being aware of Protestors and staff safety getting to and out of venue T – Risk assessment and sharing this with all attendees, ensuring all use the Everbridge App’ along with event information A – Set up exclusion zone • Contact asset owners • Communicate incident to senior management • Arrange emergency inspection • Damage repairs effected Record on Horace, new cross sector plans R – for Central – times 100% responses back from Help Desk [2] Objectives
Sangeeta Objectives 2019-2020 Evidence:
1x Interface Team Goal Interface away day task to improve 07/11/19. Part of smaller group of four members, ‘Positive Behaviours’ – TH team tasked to ‘Propose actions in relation to creating positive team behaviours and Trust’. I tested a number of well known theories and worked through activities and shared results with the rest of the Interface team on 16/12/19. This was well received.
1x HSE Goal Get up to speed in my 1. Responding promptly to environment understanding and activities managers ‘ relating to ES and EMR 2. Own and team HSE assurance completed responsibilities for N3 and N4. 3. 2 Observation reporting completed 4. And keeping ES and EMR responsibilities at forefront in discussions with stakeholders so that they are made aware of HS2 obligations.
1. I review and respond with comments to the environment manager’s air quality and noise monthly reports for N4 2. I have completed risk assessment for OCSS site visit to ensure HSE assurance completed for all staff attending 3. I have completed an observation report on HORACE for SMBC, following PT complaint about smoke and dust emitting from the removal of a phone mast near BIS – picked up from TLG meeting 4. I have shared ES and EMR topics shared by H&SS and N3/N4 environmental experts in discussions with stakeholders. Made them relevant to the context of discussion and they have also formed part of my value moment at the start of meetings I set up. This has helped to change the dynamics of the interactions with stakeholders – to make conversations more ‘human’. 1x EDI Goal Helping out and being involved in 1. May 2019 – I attended ‘Unconscious Bias HS2 EDI activities. Training’ – on the concept of unconscious bias and its effect on decision making & how we experience the world around us. 2. I supported HS2’s Birmingham Pride event on 25/05/19 3. I attended HS2 Inclusion Experience on 27/08/19 for teams to discover ways we collaborate better and be more inclusive with one another. 1x Behaviours and Values Actively promote positive My agenda template includes a values moment as Goal behaviours in interactions with a standard item. Stakeholder volunteers are also internal teams, contractors and encouraged to provide theirs. stakeholders e.g.by ensuring all 04/09/19 – I set up Interface yammer group to my stakeholder meetings start with support the team during ‘evolve’ changes and share activities and news stories. a volunteer presenting ‘values I am part of the HS2 Snowhill Choir – and have moment’. performed as part of BBC Live event at New Street Station – 26/09/19 and various Carol Concerts including Birmingham Cathedral. I am also responsible for managing the Choir’s yammer pages and sharing ‘Awesomeness’ across HS2. This has been a huge success with over 35 members of staff seriously supporting and with weekly choir practice scheduled for 2020. On 22nd Nov I volunteered at Plants Brook Nature Reserve, with other staff members to clear up their parking area from overgrown shrubs to increase the biodiversity and accessibility of the area. The reserve is located in north east Birmingham (Erdington/Castle Vale) so the work benefits communities impacted by the construction of the Birmingham spur of HS2. 2-5 Role based goals N3 • BIS Highways Areas A and B (BPP, Roundabout over trace and NEC Longabout - Ensure outstanding stakeholder Cut-Through) design issues are closed out ahead • During the past six months I got up to speed of Schedule 4 application to ensure with Birmingham Interchange Highways planning consent is achieved as per programme. I have set up a structured the programme. approach to manage stakeholder demands - Ensure that TPA’s are in place at and worked with our contractors to find the same time solutions. This has helped to make significant progress, by managing expectations and building good collaborative working we have achieved approval of critical consents: • Schedule 17 - approved 18/07/19 for Earthworks and Utility works at Interchange Station Highways for Areas A and B despite over 30 iterations. I helped to unblock issues and concerns by co-ordinating the comms between HS2, contractors and approving authorities like SMBC/HE. • Schedule 4 Part 3 was approved 30/08/19 by SMBC/HE - This was the ‘big one’ - first major highway consent achieved in Area North, which meant the contractors could purchase materials and commence EWC works. • I worked with senior managers and ensured business continuity for BIS Highways during the extended absence of my line manager from 22/07/19 to 03/09/19. This has included drafting ‘Operational Board Updates for Interchange Station. • I have drafted letters on behalf of Head of Programme Interface and Programme Director to stakeholders to provide re- assurance during consents process and acknowledged their request for additional outcomes. • I have set up a successful commercial meeting with SMBC/UGC on 08/08/19, and supported LMDJV to set up their design meetings to agree the scope for A452/A446 Roundabout over Trace (OTR). This will be replicated for Northern arm realignment and A452/B448 NEC Longabout Cut-Through. The meetings have been specifically designed to reduce additional requests, and ambiguity from stakeholders involved, and fix the parallel outcomes so there is no risk to the HS2 base scheme programme. • I have supported responses to SMBC/UGC to support their business case and funding application to WMCA. £20m was approved on 08/09/19 for UGC’s Over Trace Roundabout and NEC longabout Cut-Through schemes – part of the overall £100m additional outcomes requested by UGC. • In Oct 2019 and again on 19/02/20 (revised paper), I received EWC CIP approval to progress with negotiations and TPA with UGC for funding for the design of the NEC Longabout Cut-Through. This included pushing back on cost estimates (4 times) and resolving queries raised by the assurance, commercial and engineering teams prior to presentation to UGC/SMBC of the final figures (design costs will be higher than actual construction as this is a standalone scheme). I ensured the right people were in the room to aid discussion, defuse escalation and ensure a managed governance process is in place. UGC/SMBC signed the variation agreement on 27/02/20.
N3 1. BIS Highways Areas C (A45 and Stonebridge) - Set up systems and processes that Following concerns raised by the N2 project manager will ensure cost, schedule and risk for highways, I set up a workshop on 21/08/19 to look are captured and managed for BIS at risks and possible solutions at Area C. Stakeholders raised their concerns about the significant impact of their growth development plans increasing and adding to the high volume of traffic that will be in this area once HS2 Interchange Station is live. Whilst HS2 have mitigated their impact here, highway authorities remain unconvinced specifically SMBC. The thoughts and actions of our contractor experts were fed into the Directors Strategic workshop led by HE. Since October, Technical level meetings have been incorporated into BIS fortnightly meetings to look at what else solutions are possible with support by the strategic network authority TfWM also represented.
2. Arden Cross Landowners (AC) Since October 2019 I have picked up on resolving the questions being asked by landowners who want to use the area around the station for commercial and residential development. HS2 have to acquire (GVD) the land before the deadline of its powers. Permanent land acquisition is a concern to AC who want HS2 to also agree to a collaborative and commercial agreement. Despite weekly meetings and many iterations of the agreements, progress has been slow, and the masterplan remains unknown.
3. Interchange Plus Working Group I work closely with engagement teams. To review engagement plans and write presentations to update stakeholders about HS2, including Chairman’s take, Oakervee Review, winter clearance, archaeology and updates on stations and Phase 1 and 2. This was also shared with the wider interface team.
4. Monthly Traffic Liaison Meetings I attend both BCC and SMBC area north traffic management meetings – Stakeholders raise a wide range of issues relating to HS2 programme. I am a natural point of contact covering both N3/N4 during the meeting for directing stakeholder queries to internal experts to close off issues and concerns as they are raised to support the Traffic Teams.
N4 - 5. Reburials at Witton Cemetery – BCC - Negotiate commercial agreement Exhumations at Park Street site were completed in on the 100 year maintenance August 2019. It was initially thought that a commercial required for the re-internment of agreement (TPA) with BCC – Witton cemetery would bodies from Park Street. be required for re-internment of bodies from Park Street. I progressed to Phase 1 CIP and got approval, but this was no longer required. I set up a number of meetings to resolve HS2’s obligations, and finally came to agreement with our commercial team, that the LM (EWC Contractors) contract document with BCC would include the terms to end all future liability upon reburial and to ensure information shared between LM and Witton remained confidential. This satisfied the commercial team, and U&A requirements. This has bought works back on track for LM and there was no delay to the re-internment programme which started three weeks ahead of schedule on 04/11/19.
Assignments across North Sectors 1. To define the permanent pedestrian and cycling and Stakeholders provisions across all North Sectors.
In response to stakeholder (CEO UGC) request for details of ‘HS2s permanent cycling provision along/near the HS2 line of route from Curzon Street Station to Interchange Station. I took responsibility to put together the HS2 response by gathering information from contractor delivery teams and sector leads from N1, N2, N3 and N4 teams and the Lead highway Engineer for cycling.
This is a hot topic for local authorities (SMBC, Warks CC, Cov CC and BCC) who are reviewing their pedestrian and local cycle routes into their LCWIPs and exploring funding opportunities with their Local Enterprise Partnership, and looking for potential funders. Having up to date HS2 design plans on how we will be replacing existing cycling provisions along the HS2 line of route and highways provided them with key information to build pedestrian and cycling connectivity, align to growth plans and meet their obligations in reducing CO2 emissions and implementing ‘clean air zone’ measures to improve the air quality in urban conurbations and town centres.
This was well received by UGC/SMBC in their response back to us.
2. Set up collaboration workshop 18/03/20 with HE to review and define all phases of BIS highways works with contractors and affected authorities.
A Workshop on 18/03/20 was set up to discuss all the planned schemes, in more detail, not just indicative start or end dates (including the traffic management phases necessary and impact on the highway network) with the aim of capturing works which are expected to be linked to support overall co-ordination exercise. By encouraging representatives from the following identified multiple works affecting this area:
HS2 WPD works M42 J6 Works including utility works HS2 Station Works LMJV B’ham Business Park (Area A) BBV A452/A446 (Area B) BBV Area C Stonebridge A45 BBV Other BBV works NRTS/Technology works along the M42.
To start fixing temporary works and phases for their respective projects/elements N4 1. OCSS Refurbishment Programme - Set up systems and processes that Negotiations have continued since July 2017. We are will ensure cost, schedule and risk now waiting for DfT/Cabinet office response on the are captured and managed for increasing costs of Old Curzon. We have sent them works at OCSS the updated business case figures to consider and the sponsor is supporting with negotiations – maybe option to write off sunken costs. Legal agreements are now almost finalised between BCC and BCU. Hoping for go ahead to start refurbishment works by end of January 2020.
2. International Provisions Paper I have written a draft paper on ‘International Provision for Curzon Street and Interchange Stations. I am now working through comments and collating facts, from final design reports for the 2 station to incorporate the DJV comments on not precluding International provision. This will be followed by recommendations in a CIP paper to present to SMBC, BCC, CovCC and to gain approval for the discharge of the U&A.
3. CITB Education Hub I attended the first meeting with HS2 and Contractor Skills team with WMCA/BCC on 18/09/19. I shared a number of observations, recorded notes and actions and sent a joint response from interface and SEE teams on the next steps on how we could support in the future.
4. National Express Bus (NX BUS) I organised a stakeholder meeting on 05/09/19 to update directors and to share details of works at Curzon St Station and road closures starting March 2020. NX Bus are now included in the planning for the ‘Park Street’ closures to manage impact to bus routes.
6. Thinktank Museum As part of the U&A’s requirements, I have met (three meetings) with managers at the Thinktank museum with LM contractors and engagement teams to ensure any concerns relating to planned closure of Curzon Street and EWC works are shared and impacts upon the Museum specifically around access, deliveries and coach drop off and turning points are resolved and minimised.
7. Park St - Traffic Mitigation Group I am co-ordinating the mitigation group to look at resolving impacts from the closure of Park St from March/June 2020. I have set up future meetings and am working closely with N1/N4 SIM’s to pick up and respond to actions. These also feed into TLG’s. I have drafted an initial CIP paper on Overarching Traffic Management Strategy. Traffic Modelling is being undertaken. Options are also being reviewed at a collaborative planning session on whether HS2 fund or deliver BCC’s short term or medium-term traffic management scheme, and who should take the lead to manage reputational risk and impact to all stakeholders works programme.
1x Development goal Development in writing, My understanding of HS2 governance processes, presentation and getting approval writing papers and getting approval for CIP papers is for CIP papers to co-ordinate TPA's growing. with stakeholders for their additional outcomes. Approaching I am more confident in approaching and taking and taking direction from SLT and direction from SLT and working with project managers working with project managers to to resolve their concerns that impact the HS2 resolve their concerns that impact programme. the HS2 programme. Going forward, I would like to be considered for a Progression towards Project Business Manager (IPT/Strategic Partnerships/Special Manager (Business/Special projects projects focused). My experience in the Birmingham focus) – by getting exposure to Stations interface role has reinforced my skills and highways works, management of knowledge of managing complex stakeholder multiple stakeholders with relationships and a number of projects concurrently, conflicting asks and complex including working with internal delivery teams. I am concerns and developing skills to much more assertive in flagging things up and nudging put structure and solutions into things along to hit deadlines and focus on finding place to resolve. solutions and common outcomes.
HS2 STEM Ambassador – Mentored young people on the Envison Community Apprentice challenge 10/05/19 support included with Specifically to support young people 14-15 year olds from Holyhead school in Handsworth to development role. develop workplace skills through working with business mentors, to plan a fundraising activity for a local charity. My group of young people won the overall pitching challenge at Aston University.
Skills Builder Office Visit - 24/01/20 I took part in the ‘Skills builder’ initiative to support a primary school group complete challenge activities and talk about their job role and career aspirations.
Social Mobility Foundation Young Women's workshop – 21/02/20 Supported workshop on the challenges that affect women in their careers, barriers to progression and offered support on realising personal goals and steps to achieve them and feel more empowered.
Vicky Higgins – Senior Interface Manager put me forward to the following but never heard back.
Our new Talent Process will allow us to: • Identify talent across the organisation • Develop and grow individuals • Demonstrate value re; people investment decisions • Identify the risk and impact of people losses • Enhance our attraction & retention processes • Understand our critical skills gaps and plan ahead • Review the diversity of our talent and succession pipelines
What you need to do: If you are a Line Manager at HS2, please sign up to one of the sessions here via Oracle [3] Business Partner Evolve CV Sift Scores
[4] HS2 Careers
Email received from HS2 careers Mon 24/08/2020 10:40
View this email in your browser
Dear sangeeta,
Skills, Employment and Education is one of our seven strategic objectives and is critical in achieving our vision of HS2 being a ‘catalyst for growth across Britain’. The launch of our Skills, Employment and Education Strategy sets the direction for how we upskill the nation and ensure that underrepresented groups are given the opportunity to be amongst the 30,000 people who at peak construction will help deliver HS2.
HS2 offers a once in a generation opportunity to upskill the nation and ensure that people who live local to the route, and those from disadvantaged and underrepresented groups, are given the opportunity to play their part in delivering this huge feat in British engineering. Our ambitions are high, but
they are fast turning to reality.
We are faced with the challenge of an ageing workforce in rail engineering and a significant under representation of women and BAME workers in the UK’s construction sector. It takes a project the size and scale of HS2 to support redressing those balances.
That’s why our commitment to the skills agenda is long-term and why our work begins in primary and secondary schools. Over 15,000 pupils have already taken part in our STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) workshops, which are designed to inspire the next generation to think
about what’s possible.
Kate Myers, HS2 Ltd's Head of Skills, Employment and Education: “Harnessing the use of essential skills really helps to inspire young people and support their development. We work with pupils at local schools along the HS2 route to understand the link between the essential skills they enjoy and how this links to future careers they may not have thought about before on major projects like HS2."
At HS2 we’ve always been focused on addressing the issue of an ageing workforce in railway engineering and construction, a workforce traditionally dominated by men. HS2’s Skills, Employment and Education Strategy ensures there are pathways in place to engage women and young people every step of the way. From early STEM-focused workshops, to careers fairs, work experience days, apprenticeships and graduate recruitment programmes. We also actively encourage more women to apply for our roles. We've produced a short film which subverts the stereotype of what an engineer looks like...
The future face of engineering at HS2
Women In Engineering We’re determined to become a global leader in high speed rail and engineering excellence. More women and young people is what will take us there. Read their stories here.
We look forward to sharing more with you in future.
Kind regards,
HS2 Recruitment Team
High Speed 2 (HS2) is the UK’s new high speed, low carbon railway. As well as improving capacity for more passenger and freight services on the existing network, HS2 will shorten journey times between a number of Britain’s major population centres, boost the economy and create thousands of jobs.
HS2 will create a lasting skills legacy and develop a diverse range of talent. We aim to be a leader in Equality, Diversity and Inclusion practice by creating a safe & inclusive working environment for all our staff - living our values of Safety, Respect, Integrity and Leadership.
In practice, this means we are positive and inclusive about making adjustments, providing flexible working, encouraging our staff networks to flourish and providing personal and professional development opportunities.
For the latest HS2 news, click here: https://mediacentre.hs2.org.uk/news/
[5] Portfolio Personas
Sangeeta’s Development Plan
I match - An individual on the portfolio pathway - have breadth of knowledge and experience across the organisation and in different professional areas (e.g. progression across Engineering, Project Management, Procurement) – yet offered a transition role – not shown.
Portfolio Persona can match into roles in a number of job families.
[6] Talking to local businesses
Staff image used – where are all the BAME? https://highspeedtwo.sharepoint.com/sites/interchange/News/SitePages/Working-together-to-get-local-businesses-onboard.aspx
Submission to Runnymede Inquiry March 2021 Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Newton. J*., Crego, J., Miah, A.H., Lawrence, N. and Grieve, J.
*correspondence to [email protected]
The publication of the Inquiry following the racist hate crime and fatal stabbing of black teenager Stephen Lawrence was a landmark in moves toward addressing ‘institutional racism’ in the police. On its 20th anniversary, a one-day event, in conference format, was held in London to explore progress and changes still needed, with key stakeholders (160). We controlled access to the freei places offered to ensure attendance by: individuals and organisations from minority ethnic communities (about half of places); those in related roles in public safety, community and voluntary groups, hate crime co-ordinators (about one quarter of places) and serving and retired senior officers from the police (about one fifth of places). Cressida Dick and Neville Lawrence played an important role on the day, as did the leaders of 6 community groups, and other police, and Neville is a co-author on the paper we are submitting to you Twenty years on, it might be expected that significant progress would have been achieved in meeting the 70 recommendations, enabling BAME communities to feel that institutional racism in policing has reduced, that the issues identified have to some extent been addressed. The first recommendation of the SLI (see Appendix) – that a ministerial priority for all police services should be to increase trust and confidence in policing amongst minority communities - forms the framework for analysis in the current submission, drawing on a structured conversation in London with representatives of the key parties (see above). The purpose of the event was to help galvanise further action toward achieving the SLI recommendations, and thereby improve trust. The conversation took place online through participants’ own laptops, using a tool that allows the capture of text input from an unlimited number of anonymous networked sources simultaneously. The app - called 10,000volts (Crego, 2018) - allows all in the room to type their thoughts and comments throughout the day, but which is no longer on their laptop after they leave the room. No-one is identifiable but all can see the anonymous comments of everyone else and add to these. All came with their own laptop, but if they did not, they were supplied with one for the day. One facilitator (JC) who was also logged into the app, typed in some prompts to encourage participants to engage on the app, but restricted these to open questions such as ‘What has changed since the SLI?’ ‘What has been the impact of the SLI on you?’ ‘… or your organisation?’ ‘What remains to be done?’ ‘How can we make working with the police better?’ And some single words/phrases were also posted, supplied by delegates in response to an early question from the facilitator, on concepts core to improving trust and confidence in the police, to help galvanise further detail. Words posted included trust, equality, support, family, humility, accountability, justice, being treated equally, leadership. Participants could comment under each or any (or none) throughout the day. Additional questions were added by the facilitator and chairs linked to discussion of presentations during the day, such as on stop and search, taking care to reflect the input, not to shape it, but to ensure there was an appropriate place to capture the thoughts of all participants on all issues arising. The facilitator also took care to respond swiftly to any inappropriate posts (ie offensive, racist, lack of respect), by deleting them. This paper is a summary and analysis of the delegates’ comments (which totaled over 37,000 words) together with some conclusions, including the continuing relevance of the SLI, and shaped by a consideration of the state of relationships between the police and the BAME community in the UK.
Findings and Discussion There were strong feelings, and the majority view was that some change had occurred since the SLI, Much was done to fix the system for homicide investigation and is now woven into the fabric of the modern police response. Examples include family liaison, decision logs and PIP (Professional Investigation Project) which led to systematic training and accreditation most people and senior managers are much more aware now of potential lack of fairness and racist systems, processes of institutions and individual behaviour but far too little. More typical of respondents was: in my opinion we are "awaiting change". I still fear for my black sons, even though they have become men. Little has changed since the report as there has still been a large number of high profile cases where BAME families are still not treated fairly A thematic analysis showed that the three main issues participants felt should be prioritised for improvement are still - Stop and Search, Community Policing, and recruitment, retention, and progression of BAME police. Numerous constructive suggestions for improved practice were offered together with a willingness to contribute to making the required changes, as long as the initiatives involved a more equal partnership. For instance, in advising and monitoring police practice, funded development work, planning change, and in leadership roles in the police service. Many comments are familiar: on Stop and Search, there is concern it is over-used on BAME people, too often without reasonable suspicion, that it is not always done respectfully, that it is unnecessarily criminalising too many young men, and when done badly and too frequently it damages community-police relationships. The suggestions for increasing and improving community policing were numerous, showing how far this style of policing is welcomed. And recommendations on recruitment, retentions and promotion of BAME officers were also extensive,. What was perhaps most notable underpinning all suggestions for change was the role the community wishes to play, hence this is our central recommendation too. The communities wish to be respected as partners in working to improve practice. For instance, among suggestions for improving Stop and Search was: Should we be looking at a system similar to police custody Lay Visitors (post Scarman)1 whereby community volunteers are able to patrol & observe stop/search in action? Alternatively, could BWV2 of stop/search be made available to independent scrutiny? The participants did not wish to suggest that Stop and Search be discontinued, just that it must be done well, as then: it provides an opportunity for positive engagement between officer and person stopped, visible reassurance to the community that the police are taking violent crime concerns seriously, and a visible deterrent to would-be offenders In relation to community policing, the many suggestions included There should be proper community policing…and eg run football coaching sessions for kids if they have kids themselves… Get invited to local community events in uniform and be available for discussion. Also publicise and attend MP’s surgeries as an additional source of help, eg raising ASB issues But of particular note are the suggestions about how these are arranged. The use of the term “co-production” in this one best sums it up: facilitate discussion with those at the edge of the cjs to enable coproduction of all services Initiatives such as patrolling together. This is working for CST so why not extend to other communities? Putting it more bluntly, these delegates suggest: - do not make decisions for us - instead do it with us. consultation and community engagement has become a farce. Respect the fact that we know what is good for us. There is no legitimacy if things are done for a section of community but doesn't engage them in the decision making, delivery and review. Some specific examples of what can be done to improve the collaborative working are: Engage with Youth Commission3 – Cheshire has a good one We need more Racial Harassment Forums and Racial Equality Councils. These need to be properly resourced, networked and able to meet regularly to share knowledge and plan work. Bodies like EHRC need proper resourcing. It is no accident that community activity increases when there are properly resourced community organisations. The REC
1 In fact the unannounced attendance in the police custody suite of lay visitors predates Scarman by 5 years but was given wider application and added impetus by him, see Fisher (1977). 2 Body worn video cameras which are now routinely used by the police service to record everyday contacts 3 Youth Commissions are now established in 8 police regions, supported by Leaders Unlocked, see http://leaders-unlocked.org/youth-commission-on-police-and-crime Networks were able to share information and help Commission for Racial Equality plan and deliver work. Reinstate regular meetings between MPS hate crime IAG and the Home Office. Similarly in recruitment, retention and promotion of BAME officers, participants share wide agreement that numbers need to be increased, and suggestions were very constructive, but again reflect the priority placed on collaboration: to ensure selection processes are fair, use Equality Act and other legislation that allows for supporting under represented groups through the process. Sussex Police has increased the number of officers by tracking and offering support at the stages where Black applicants drop out. Talk to communities about barriers to joining - structural, cultural both internally and externally. Re-design system accordingly There are many important implications for reviewing processes by senior officers: Look not only at recruiting Black officers but retention. What are the barriers to progression, e.g. lack of Acting Up opportunities, secondments, mentoring? Are they still over disciplined? Are senior officers trained to recognise barriers so they can remove them? Are there incentives, e.g. work Appraisals that can lead to more resources if not higher pay for showing positive achievements? But some strong sense that the mindset needs to change: white privilege means that Black people are not seen as leaders. That has not changed. Even in areas where we excel we are not allowed to go on to lead, e.g. even in football where are the Black managers? We (BAME) should lead in decision making roles demonstrating a truer, fairer, and authentic, representation of our communities. Key concepts which we see as underpinning the feedback are co-production: "User and community co-production of public services and outcomes is about public service organisations and citizens making better use of each other’s assets, resources and contributions to achieve better outcomes or improve efficiency." Governance International (www.govint.org)
And prejudice reduction in the way suggested by Allport (1954): that the more contact between groups, the less prejudice is seen, and that this contact needs to be from an equal status perspective, involving intergroup cooperation, common goals, and supported by social and institutional authorities. Hence we ask you to note: 1. The continuing relevance of the SLI report. 2. The need for integrating co-production approaches into Stop and Search; community policing; recruitment, retention and progression 3. the more contact between front line police and communities, in working for shared goals, as equals, the less prejudice, 4. time to fully implement the race equality duty in the police References Allport, G. W. (1954/1979). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. Crego, J. (2018) 10kv De-briefing https://hydrafoundation.org/hydra-methodology/10-000- volt-debriefing/academic-description-of-the-methodology last accessed 26.09.2020
Appendix MacPherson, W. (1999) The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. Report of an Inquiry. HM Government: Home Office, UK, chapter 47 – Recommendations
Recommendation 1:
That a Ministerial Priority be established for all Police Services:
"To increase trust and confidence in policing amongst minority ethnic communities".
Recommendation 2: The process of implementing, monitoring and assessing the Ministerial Priority should include Performance Indicators in relation to: i. the existence and application of strategies for the prevention, recording, investigation and prosecution of racist incidents; ii. measures to encourage reporting of racist incidents; iii. the number of recorded racist incidents and related detection levels; iv. the degree of multi-agency co-operation and information exchange; v. achieving equal satisfaction levels across all ethnic groups in public satisfaction surveys; vi. the adequacy of provision and training of family and witness/victim liaison officers; vii. the nature, extent and achievement of racism awareness training; viii. the policy directives governing stop and search procedures and their outcomes; ix. levels of recruitment, retention and progression of minority ethnic recruits; and x. levels of complaint of racist behaviour or attitude and their outcomes. The overall aim being the elimination of racist prejudice and disadvantage and the demonstration of fairness in all aspects of policing.
i The other authors gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of London Metropolitan University and the Hydra Foundation - a charity founded by Professor Jonathan Crego MBE who provided the facilitation, the equipment and the initial collection of the data free of charge.
INQUEST Roundtable Examining deaths in prison 2015 – 2020: challenging racism and discrimination
In the wake of George Floyd’s death and the Black Lives Matter protests which ensued, there has been renewed attention on the interconnected issues of state violence and structural racism in the UK. At INQUEST, we are currently building on our existing work in these areas through a research project that will address the deaths of racialised1 people in prisons in England and Wales from 2015 to 2020. We believe there is an acute lack of information, knowledge and research about the deaths of racialised people in prisons. Research provides some insight into the experiences and treatment of some groups, but there has been little interrogation of the data and evidence relating to their deaths. About the Project This research project will examine how race, racism and discrimination may have played a part in the deaths of racialised people in prisons in England and Wales from 2015 to 2020. Specifically, the research will consider the deaths of: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) people, Black people, Asian people, Eastern European people, and any other groups of racialised people. Additionally, the research will identify any patterns or trends relating to the immigration status, sentence (such as joint enterprise and IPP), nationality, gender, religion, and age of those who died. At the end, we will publish a short briefing paper setting out our findings. About the online roundtable We are very keen to share our plans and hear from the experiences and expertise of other organisations working around these issues. We are holding a small, invite-only online roundtable event on 16 March 2021 from 11.00-12.15. We will be grateful for the contributions of other expert organisations and hope that this collaboration can help inform and shape our work on these issues and support positive change in the future.
1 The term ‘racialised people’ refers to people who are subject to the process of racialisation and who face racism. We have chosen to use this term (instead of other terms such as BAME or BME) because we think it best reflects all the different groups of people with which this research is concerned.
Agenda for the roundtable
Introduction and Deborah Coles, 11.00-11.05 background to the project INQUEST
Our research: what we Louise Finer and 11.05-11.20 know so far and what we Jessica Pandian, want to explore INQUEST
Open discussion (see All organisations 11.20-12.00 questions below) present
Conclusions and next steps INQUEST 12.00-12.15
Key questions to discuss 1. What are the key issues facing distinct racialised groups in prison? How does this vary according to the gender and age (and other identity factors) of the prisoner? 2. What factors in the experiences of racialised people in prison relate to race, racism and discrimination? How might these contribute to deaths of racialised people? 3. What experience do you have of how issues relating to racism and discrimination are addressed through complaints procedures and the PPO? 4. What other issues does your organisation think we should explore, and how can we use this research to influence? Invited organisations • Institute of Race Relations • The Traveller Movement • JENGbA • Zahid Mubarek Trust • Prison Reform Trust • Women in Prison • Prisoners Advice Service • Howard League for Penal Reform • UNGRIPP • Maslaha • Barrow Cadbury Trust • Hibiscus Initiatives • Runnymede Trust • Partners of Prisoners • Safeground
Evidence for the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
March 2021
2
About JCWI JCWI was founded in 1967 to ensure that the rule of law and human rights are respected in the immigration system. We are the UK’s leading immigration charity covering all aspects of immigration, asylum, and nationality law. Our clients comprise mainly of migrants from BAME backgrounds, and we research, examine, and analyse the discriminatory effects of immigration policy and lead advocacy efforts for systemic reform. Background This submission will focus on the impact of the UK Government’s immigration policies and Hostile Environment on the rights of BAME communities. The UK has a relatively large migrant population, and an immigration system, which thanks to the Hostile Environment, is embedded and pervasive in almost every aspect of everyday life. The Hostile Environment comprises a set of policies announced in 2012 by then Home Secretary Theresa May to make life impossible for people without status. It turned doctors, landlords, police and teachers into border guards, tasking them with conducting immigration checks and determining who could and couldn’t access basic services.1 Unsurprisingly, the effects of the Hostile Environment don’t stop at irregular migrants but play out in the lives of all migrants, anyone who “sounds foreign” and BAME British citizens, most famously with the Windrush scandal.2 It is therefore impossible to speak about or to analyse issues that affect BAME groups without also considering the effects of the immigration system, nor to talk about issues affecting migrants without considering institutional and structural racism, poverty and restriction of access to housing, secure and quality employment, and public services it engenders.
Unfortunately, there has been a failure across government to consistently collect data or monitor policies in a way that allows the government or others to assess the impact of policies and laws on different social and ethnic groups. Within the immigration system there is a widespread failure to collect data on race and ethnicity in things such as Home Office decisions on visas, appeal success rates, immigration enforcement activity, detention, removals, deportations, data sharing with other departments etc. This was commented on by Wendy Williams in the Windrush Lessons Learned Review saying she found the ‘monitoring of the racial impact of immigration policy and decision-making in the department to be poor’.3 As a result, while there is growing evidence from academics, NGOs, and others that immigration policy like the hostile environment and NHS charging creates and exacerbates racial discrimination, the government refuses to collect the data necessary to measure the extent of such discrimination.
1 JCWI’s Hostile Environment explainer: https://www.jcwi.org.uk/the-hostile-environment-explained 2 JCWI’s Windrush Scandal explainer: https://www.jcwi.org.uk/windrush-scandal-explained 3 Windrush Lessons Learned Review, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/87 4022/ 6.5577_HO_Windrush_Lessons_Learned_Review_WEB_v2.pdf
1
Summary
The Right to Rent scheme
• The Government’s right to rent scheme causes racial discrimination against migrants and BAME British citizens. • Recommendation: Repeal the Right to Rent policy.
Race disparities in detention
• BAME migrants are overrepresented in groups vulnerable to being detained and on average are detained for longer periods, in greater numbers, than white migrants. • Recommendation: Release everyone detained under immigration powers to reduce the risk of COVID-19 entering the detention estate and causing avoidable harm.
NHS charging and data-sharing
• NHS charging and data-sharing with the Home Office operate in ways which are discriminatory towards BAME communities. • The integration of the Hostile Environment within the NHS deters migrants from accessing healthcare, even those who are entitled to do so. • Recommendations: - Roll back the NHS charging regime and introduce a comprehensive firewall between healthcare and immigration enforcement. - Launch a public information campaign that makes clear that healthcare services are available and safe for all migrants to use.
No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF)
• The NRPF condition disproportionately impacts BAME migrants and contributes to higher rates of poverty, destitution and insecure employment amongst BAME communities. • Recommendation: Immediately suspend NRPF conditions to ensure all migrants have access to public funds and a state safety.
EU Settlement Scheme
• BAME EU citizens face additional barriers to the scheme and are therefore at greater risk of falling out of status and rights after the deadline. • The issue of EU citizens who have lived in the UK for less than five years being denied access to benefits disproportionately impacts BAME EU citizens. • Recommendations: - The Government must lift the EUSS deadline of June 30th 3021 with immediate effect. - Make pre-settled status an automatic ‘right to reside’.
2
Minimum Income Requirement (MIR)
• People from BAME backgrounds are disproportionately affected by family migration policies that impose an income threshold on British citizens and settled residents with a partner from outside the European Economic Area. • Recommendation: Scrap the Minimum Income Requirement with a return to pre-2012 rules.
COVID-19
• We know that BAME communities are at greater risk of serious illness and death from COVID than white communities and there is emerging which suggests that a person’s immigration status impacts their likelihood of contracting and becoming seriously ill with COVID-19. • Recommendations: - Make assurances that no one will be penalised for missing appointments, reporting or court dates due to illness. - Make sure no one is made an 'overstayer' because of being self-isolated or unable to return to a country that is not safe to travel to, by extending or modifying visas. - Provide specialist support for those housed in shared Asylum Accommodation to enable safe access to medical services and testing.
The right to rent scheme causes racial discrimination The Government causes racial discrimination in the housing market by forcing landlords to conduct immigration checks. The right to rent scheme is a cornerstone of the Hostile Environment, currently only in place in England. It was created by the Immigration Act 2014 and it transformed the law of private tenancies in the UK, by prohibiting landlords from renting accommodation to people in the UK without a ‘right to rent’.4 It was designed to force undocumented migrants to choose between destitution and a ‘voluntary’ departure from the UK. In reality, it simply forces undocumented migrants away from the legitimate private rental sector, and into more dangerous and exploitative living situations, unable to complain about health and safety violations or other abuses, because of fear of the Hostile Environment.
In addition to the disastrous impact this policy has on those denied a right to rent by the law, it also causes racial discrimination. Both the High Court and the Court of Appeal have now found that the right to rent scheme causes racial discrimination against foreign nationals, as well as ethnic minority British people who are seeking to rent a home.5 According to the government’s own data 25% of landlords would not let to non-British passport holders as a result of the scheme, while surveys by Shelter, JCWI and the Residential Landlords Association have consistently shown
4 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/right-to-rent-checks-introduced-for-landlords-in-england 5 R (Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 452 (Admin); Secretary of State for the Home Department v R ( Joint Council for The Welfare of Immigrants) [2020] EWCA Civ 542
3 that around 40% of landlords will prefer British passport holders as a result of the scheme.6 The scheme incentivises landlords to prefer those with British passports, and where people cannot show they have British passports, landlords use cues like ethnicity, name or accent to determine who “looks or sounds British”. As a result, ethnic minority British people without passports and foreign nationals with leave to remain effectively are forced to compete in a different housing market to British people with some options closed off to them or only available if no British person wishes to take it up.
The right to rent policy compounds existing racial inequalities in housing conditions. BAME people were already more likely to live in poor and overcrowded housing than white communities7 and since the introduction of the right to rent policy many migrants and BAME people have increasingly been forced to settle for substandard housing which is overcrowded, lacks indoor and outdoor space, involves a more difficult and dangerous commute or some combination of the above. The policy cannot be morally justified at the best of times, but particularly not during a pandemic.
Recommendation: The Right to Rent policy must be repealed. Destitution, homelessness, and the risk of death are not acceptable tools of immigration control.
Race disparities in detention BAME migrants are at greater risk of being detained and being detained for long periods than white migrants. In the context of a pandemic in which BAME people are more likely to contract and become seriously ill with COVID-198, the Government’s decision to continue housing large numbers of migrants in overcrowded and unsanitary detention centres is particularly concerning. Research shows BAME people are overrepresented among people vulnerable to detention and are liable to be detained for longer periods, and in greater numbers, than white people. During 2019, 90% of Australian nationals held in immigration detention were released in less than 28 days, compared with just 40% of Jamaican nationals.9 However, attempts to ascertain the full picture of the discriminatory use and impact of immigration detention on BAME communities are hampered by the failure of the
6 Shelter, ‘Research Report: Survey of Private Landlords’, February 2016, https://england.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/1236820/Landlord_survey_18_Feb_publish .pdf, p.46; JCWI, ‘Passport Please: The impact of right to rent checks on migrants and ethnic minorities in England’, February 2017, https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=ffcde3b5-e590-4b8e-931c-5ecf280e1bc8, p.31; Resident Landlords Association, ‘The right to rent scheme and the impact on the private rented sector’, p.4. 7 Shelter, ‘The black and minority ethnic housing crisis’, September 2004, https://england.shelter.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/48555/The_Black_and_Ethnic_Minority_Ho using_Crisis_Sep_2004.pdf, p.4. 8https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/90 8434/Disparities_in_the_risk_and_outcomes_of_COVID_August_2020_update.pdf 9 ‘Home Office ‘uses racial bias’ when detaining immigrants,’ The Observer, June 2020. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/21/home-office-uses-racial-bias-when-detaining- immigrants
4
Home Office to collect or publish statistics relating to the protected characteristics of people held in immigration detention.
Recommendation: Release everyone detained under immigration powers to reduce the risk of COVID-19 entering the detention estate and causing avoidable harm.
NHS charging and data-sharing discriminate against BAME communities NHS charging and data-sharing with the Home Office operate in a manner that is discriminatory to all people from BAME backgrounds, including British citizens. In 2019 around 500 delegates of the British Medical Association backed a motion stating that asking overseas visitors to pay made medical staff ‘complicit in racism’.10 NHS charging regulations are extremely complex, especially for healthcare staff and overseas visitor managers who do not have specialist knowledge in types of immigration status and which are exempt from being charged for which types of healthcare. JCWI’s research suggests that a large proportion (48%) of healthcare workers are unaware of how charging regulations operate within their hospitals.11 With such a high proportion of staff unclear on who is chargeable and for what treatment, there are indications that, with trusts under budgetary pressure, patients will be asked to prove their eligibility for free treatment in a discriminatory manner, with those from BAME communities subject to questioning where their white counterparts are not.12 Such incidences break trust between patient and healthcare provider, with the potential for negative health outcomes for the patient and knock- on implications for public health.
In the middle of a global pandemic in which access to free healthcare has never been more crucial, the grave consequences of these policies are even starker and more far-reaching. Despite the fact that the Government announced early in the pandemic that migrants – including those who are undocumented – will not be charged for testing, treatment or vaccinating against COVID, the wider charging and data- sharing systems remain in place. There is significant evidence13 that these policies stop migrants, refugees and asylum seekers14 from accessing healthcare, even where exemptions exist15 and in cases where they are not the targeted group. For example, there is clear evidence the Hostile Environment deters individuals with tuberculosis from accessing care and that migrants are deterred from accessing
10 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/making-tourists-pay-to-use-nhs-is-racist-say-doctors-7qswlhbsd 11 YouGov poll commissioned by JCWI. Available on request 12 Ibid. 13 Deterrence, Delay and Distress: The impact of charging in NHS hospitals on migrants in vulnerable circumstances, Doctors of the World, 2018 14 Making sure people seeking and refused asylum can access healthcare: What needs to change?, Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2018 15 Registration Refused: A study on access to GP registration in England, Doctors of the World UK, 2017
5 healthcare advice for fear that they will be charged or targeted by immigration enforcement.16
New research from JCWI has found that Hostile Environment policies in the NHS hamper public health efforts against COVID by making migrants afraid to access healthcare even when they are entitled to do so. Almost half of all the migrants surveyed (43%) said they would be scared to access healthcare if they got sick during this pandemic. We did not ask for ethnicity information but 60% of migrants from Africa and the Caribbean report being fearful of seeking healthcare. 56% of Asian respondents said they would be scared. This is compared to just 16% of respondents originating from North America, Australasia and Europe.17 Given that there is evidence that BAME populations are being vaccinated at far lower rates than the rest of the population and dying of the disease at higher rates for reasons not explained by underlying health conditions, these findings are extremely concerning.18
Recommendations:
• Roll back the NHS charging regime, found by the BMA to make it harder for medical professionals to do their jobs. • Introduce a comprehensive firewall between healthcare and immigration enforcement. • Launch a public information campaign that makes clear that healthcare services are available and safe for all migrants to use.
No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF)19 disproportionately impacts BAME migrants The NRPF condition, which bars most migrants from accessing most benefits, disproportionately impacts BAME communities and contributes to higher rates of poverty, destitution and insecure employment.20 Access to a state safety net has never been more important than during a global pandemic which requires us to self- isolate if we develop symptoms and has forced hundreds of thousands of people out of work and into destitution. Despite this, the Government has refused to suspend the condition, making it extremely difficult for many to self-isolate when necessary, especially those in insecure, low-paid work, and forcing significant numbers to make the difficult choice between protecting their own and public health and feeding their
16 Registration Refused: A study on access to GP registration in England, Doctors of the World UK, 2017 17 JCWI, ‘Migrants deterred from healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic’, February 2021, https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=fa346f70-cb08-46c1-b366-9a1f192ff4f3, p.2. 18 MacKenna, B., Curtis, H.J. et al. Trends, regional variation, and clinical characteristics of COVID-19 vaccination recipients: A retrospective cohort study in 23.4 million patients using OpenSAFELY. Preprint. (2021) & Williamson, E.J., Walker, A.J., Bhaskaran, K. et al. Factors associated with COVID- 19-related death using OpenSAFELY. Nature 584, 430–436 (2020) 19 https://www.infomigrants.net/en/post/29087/homeless-migrants-targeted-by-uk-government-s-new- immigration-rules 20 Baroness Doreen Lawrence, ‘An Avoidable Crisis’, October 2020, https://uploads- ssl.webflow.com/5f5bdc0f30fe4b120448a029/5f973b076be4cadc5045fad3_An%20Avoidable%20Cris is.pdf
6 families. Recent research from JCWI found that people with NRPF are losing their jobs just like everyone else – particularly in hardest-hit sectors like hospitality where migrants are overrepresented - but cannot rely on state support. Furthermore, surveyed migrants with NRPF were more likely to be living in shared accommodation where it would be impossible to isolate adequately, more likely to be afraid of going to the doctor, and more likely to be have gone into debt than their peers who are entitled to benefits.21 Recommendation: Immediately suspend NRPF conditions to ensure all migrants have access to public funds and a state safety.
Barriers to the EU Settlement Scheme for BAME EU citizens BAME EU citizens face additional barriers to the EU Settlement Scheme and are therefore at greater risk of falling out of status and rights after the June 30th 2021 deadline. In 2017 the UK Government decided that all EEA+ residents must apply to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) if they wished to continue living in their homes and working in the UK after Brexit. For most, this process is straightforward, but for many it is complicated and inaccessible. The consequences for someone slipping through the cracks are devastating and far-reaching. Anyone who is unable to apply by the cut-off point of 30th June 2021 will lose their legal status and feel the full force of the Hostile Environment, including facing criminal charges, detention, and deportation. If even a tiny fraction of the estimated 4 million EEA+ residents are unable to apply in time, tens of thousands of people will lose their status overnight.
Roma people are one group facing specific and heightened challenges due to high rates of insecure housing, illiteracy, digitally exclusion, criminality and social isolation.22 The Roma Support Group found there to be ‘substantial barriers’ to Roma people gaining knowledge of and access to the EUSS system. In addition, they discovered that women, older people, children and rough sleepers within the Roma community face further barriers in accessing the scheme.23 According to their report, the ‘vast majority’ of Roma people knew about Brexit but didn’t know how to apply for the EUSS.24 This report crucially highlights not just the barriers Roma people face now in securing their status, but the continued discrimination they and
21 JCWI, ‘Migrants with No Recourse to Public Funds’ Experiences during the Pandemic’, https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=17805c35-d3bc-4251-9ada-6dfdae8dbca6, p.2. 22 NPC, ‘Avoiding Pitfalls’; Migration Observatory, ‘Unsettled Status’; Unlock, ‘EU nationals, settled status and criminal records’, September 2019, https://www.unlock.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/EU- nationals-settled-status-and-criminal-records-Sept-2019.pdf; Roma Support Group, ‘Brexit, EUSS and the Roma communities in the UK’, June 2020, https://www.romasupportgroup.org.uk/uploads/9/3/6/8/93687016/roma_brexit_euss_report_16.06.202 0_final.pdf 23 Roma Support Group, ‘Brexit, EUSS and the Roma communities in the UK’, June 2020, https://www.romasupportgroup.org.uk/uploads/9/3/6/8/93687016/roma_brexit_euss_report_16.06.202 0_final.pdf, p.4. 24 Ibid, p.11.
7 many other EEA+ citizens are likely to face after the cut-off point due to issues with wholly-digital systems and a lack of physical documentation.
In addition, people with derived rights of residence face particular risk of being left out by the scheme. The September 2020 Quarterly EUSS statistics show that overall, derivative rights refusals (the vast majority of which were for Zambrano applications) account for 7% of refusals issued, despite only making up a tiny fraction of applications. Further, Zambrano applications had a much higher proportion of refused outcomes (63%) than other derivative right to reside routes (less than 1%).25 Zambrano carers are the sole carers of children and disproportionately women and/or BAME. Many of them are also survivors of domestic abuse. When seen in the context of socioeconomic barriers to the scheme it is unsurprising but entirely unacceptable that this community is facing so much additional hardship securing status than their white, European counterparts.
Recent research from JCWI has found that as well as extremely vulnerable groups, EU care workers and other key workers – the very people we are relying on to pull us through the COVID crisis – are in real danger of being left behind by the EUSS.26 There is an overrepresentation of BAME workers in the care industry and other “at risk” key sectors. BAME people are disproportionately more likely to work in jobs with low pay, insecure employment arrangements and exploitative working conditions.27 Roughly 24% of England’s care industry and 18% of the UK’s EU care workers define as BAME, compared with 14% of the UK’s overall population.28 We discovered a concerning lack of awareness and understanding about the scheme amongst EU care workers. 1 in 7 surveyed online did not know what the scheme was and 1 in 3 surveyed in person had never heard of it before we met them.29
Many EEA+ citizens who have lived in the UK for less than five years are being denied access to Universal Credit, an issue that will likely be felt harder by BAME EEA+ residents.30 ‘Settled status’ counts as an automatic right to benefits, whereas those with ‘pre-settled status’ must take the Habitual Residence Test (HRT) and demonstrate they are ‘exercising treaty rights’, eg working, in order to access benefits. However, with hundreds of thousands out of work, for many this is simply not possible. IPPR found that the number of UC claims that have closed due to the HRT has been increasing over time, with around 45,000 claims closed in the last 12
25 Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/eu-settlement-scheme-quarterly- statistics-september-2020/ eu-settlement-scheme-quarterly-statistics-september-2020 26 JCWI, ‘When the Clapping Stops: EU Care Workers after Brexit’, January 2021, https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=15c60f7e-17ff-4fa0-8f5d-df00cf2c5967 27 Runnymede Trust, ‘The Colour of Money’, https://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/publications/pdfs/2020%20reports/The%20Colour%20of%20 Money%20Report.pdf, pp2-3. 28 Skills for Care, ‘The State of Care’, 2019, p.70; Migration Observatory Care Worker stats, https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/selectedcare-worker-statistics/; https://diversityuk.org/diversity- in-the-uk/. 29 Ibid, p.14. 30 Available at: http://0d385427-9722-4ee6- 86fe3905bdbf5e6e.usrfiles.com/ugd/0d3854_e677a22f9ce44f35922ec5225df044e5.pdf
8 months of available data, which will likely have grown considerably due to Covid- 19.31 Many of these will have been claims from EU citizens and their families. Considering the factors and risks outlined, we are strongly concerned that BAME EU citizens and non-EU family members will be bearing the brunt of this wrongful denial of state support, due to higher levels of precarious employment arrangements alongside increased reliance on social security benefits. As such, BAME EU citizens and non-EU family members with pre-settled status face a double threat of COVID, due to their ethnicity and increased chances of being laid off work without access to a vital safety net.
Recommendations
• The Government must lift the EUSS deadline as the only way to prevent tens of thousands of EU citizens and non-EU family members falling out of status and rights after the deadline. • Make pre-settled status an automatic ‘right to reside’ to protect BAME EU citizens and their families from COVID-19, destitution and to help control the spread of the virus.
Minimum Income Requirement (MIR) hits BAME communities hardest Family migration policies that impose an income threshold on British citizens and settled residents with a partner from outside the European Economic Area are felt hardest by people from BAME backgrounds and entrench existing racial inequalities. The MIR means that anyone earning less than £18,600 a year may not sponsor the visa of a partner from outside the EEA, rising to £22,400 a year for those sponsoring a non-EEA national child, with an additional £2,400 for each child. Black African and Bangladeshi households in the UK, for example, have 10 times less wealth than White counterparts.32 Workers from a Bangladeshi background have a median hourly pay of £9.60, compared to £12.03 per hour for a White British worker.33 This discriminatory impact has been acknowledged by the Supreme Court, which in 2017 found that “sponsors from certain ethnic groups whose earnings tend to be lower” were disproportionately affected by the MIR.34 Further, Home Office policy-makers outlined in the impact assessment for family migration policy changes that people of Pakistani and Bangladeshi ethnicity in the UK would be
31 IPPR, ‘Testing Times: Universal Credit and the Habitual Residence Test’, July 2020, https://www.ippr.org/files/2020-07/habitual-residence-test-july20.pdf, p.13. 32 ‘The Colour of Money,’ Runnymede Trust, April 2020. Available at: https://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/publications/pdfs/2020%20reports/The%20Colour%20of%20 Money%20Report.pdf 33 ‘Ethnicity pay gaps in Great Britain: 2018,’ ONS, July 2019. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/articles /ethnicitypaygapsingreatbritain/2018 34 MM (Lebanon) v SSHD Supreme Court judgement, 22 Feb 2017. Available at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0011-judgment.pdf
9 disproportionately affected by the introduction of a fixed income threshold. 35 Women from BAME backgrounds are particularly hard hit, as they are affected by both the ethnicity and the gender pay gap.
During the coronavirus pandemic, the MIR has meant that men and women from BAME backgrounds with non-EEA partners have felt compelled to continue working, even where it was not safe to do so, in order to meet the income threshold and keep their families together. This has compounded the risk for people in this situation, given that people from BAME backgrounds are more likely to contract COVID-19, and more likely to die from it, than White people.36 Many of those who were previously unable to meet the MIR will be ‘key workers,’ carrying out the most essential and risky jobs, often on zero-hours contracts, during the pandemic. Since the MIR is set at a level well above the minimum wage, it affects people in a huge range of essential but low-paid jobs, in which BAME people are also over- represented.37 People in precarious jobs who fear that their family’s future together will be impacted by any absences from work will feel they have no choice but to continue working, even where it may be unsafe to do so.
Recommendation: Scrap the Minimum Income Requirement with a return to pre- 2012 rules.
COVID-19 poses disproportionate risk for BAME communities People from BAME backgrounds are at greater risk of serious illness and death from COVID if they contract the virus than white people. The Intensive Care National Audit and Disparities in the risk and outcomes from COVID-19 40 Research Centre (ICNARC) report published on 22 May found that Black and Asian patients were over-represented among those critically ill with confirmed COVID-19.38 Further, ONS analysis showed that, when taking age into account, Black males were 4.2 times more likely to die from a COVID-19-related death than White males. The risk was also increased for people of Bangladeshi and Pakistani, Indian and Mixed ethnic groups. The increased risk of contracting COVID for BAME communities is found to be due to a variety of factors including being more likely to live in urban and/or deprived areas, overcrowded households and precarious employment arrangements with a higher risk of exposure to COVID.39 As Runnymede argue, the COVID crisis has
35 ‘Policy Equality Statement,’ Home Office, June 2012. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/family-migration-impact-assessment 36 ‘Beyond the data: Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on BAME groups,’ Public Health England, June 2020. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/89 2376/COVID_stakeholder_engagement_synthesis_beyond_the_data.pdf 37 ‘Over 5 million workers in insecure, low-paid work,’ Living Wage Foundation, June 2020. Available at: https://www.livingwage.org.uk/news/news-over-5-million-workers-insecure-low-paid-work 38 ICNARC report on COVID-19 in critical care, 22 May 2020 39 Public Health England, ‘Disparities in the risks and outcomes of COVID-19’, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/90 8434/Disparities_in_the_risk_and_outcomes_of_COVID_August_2020_update.pdf, p.40.
10
‘thrown into sharper focus the way racial and other inequalities blight people’s lives from cradle to grave.’40
There is growing evidence that suggests that being a migrant – particularly a BAME migrant - puts you at greater risk of COVID41 and yet the Government is continuing to make decisions that put their lives at greater risk of the virus. By failing to monitor immigration status, the Government is unable to say how many of the deaths caused by COVID are those of migrants. Further, in recent weeks it has emerged that the Home Office is housing asylum seekers in Napier Barracks, the ex- military camp in Kent, deemed by experts as unsuitable for accommodating residents. The decision to place hundreds of asylum seekers in a prison-like conditions with 20+ sharing dormitories not only retraumatises those inside but puts them at huge risk of COVID. At a HASC evidence session on the 24th February 2021, the Home Office confirmed a total of 197 positive COVID tests in the barracks between January-February this year, exposing their assurances that the accommodation is in line with COVID-guidelines to be absurd falsities.42 Just yesterday, a damning NHS inspection report deemed social distancing to be ‘impossible’ in the barracks, and yet the Home Office is still refusing to move out residents.43
The government expects landlords to determine people’s nationality and immigration status. It expects overworked doctors and nurses to do so, while making life and death decisions about care. Your visa may determine what job you are allowed to do. It may require you to earn a certain amount, however unsafe the conditions of your work. If the government is unable to measure the consequences of the immigration policies it creates, then it must take a precautionary approach during the pandemic. Many of these policies raise a clear risk to those caught by them during the pandemic, and they must be suspended or modified to alleviate that risk until the government is able to show that they are safe to impose.
Recommendations:
• Make assurances that no one will be penalised for missing appointments, reporting or court dates due to illness. • Make sure no one is made an 'overstayer' because of being self-isolated or unable to return to a country that is not safe to travel to, by extending or modifying visas. • Provide specialist support for those housed in shared Asylum Accommodation to enable safe access to medical services, testing, and where necessary, re-housing for particularly vulnerable people
40 Runnymede, ‘The Colour of Money’, https://www.runnymedetrust.org/projects-and- publications/employment-3/the-colour-of-money.html, p.2. 41 Migration Exchange, ‘COVID-19 Impact Assessment Framework’, https://global-dialogue.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/C-19-Impact-Assessment-Framework-Full-report.pdf 42 https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/88edba63-6e2e-4e22-b083-2583f95e4d46 43 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/napier-barracks-asylum-seekers-coronavirus- ccg-b1811948.html
11
For more information please contact:
Caitlin Boswell Project Officer, JCWI [email protected]
JCWI is an independent charity campaigning for justice and fairness in immigration, nationality and asylum policy since 1967.
115 Old Street, London EC1V 9RT | www.jcwi.org.uk
Registered Charity No. 1117513
12
Justice 4 You is a youth-led campaign for the inclusion of racial diversity and immigration on the national curriculum. We are working with our own teachers to review the curriculum at our schools to address the lack of reputation of minority groups in what we are taught. As the founding member of this campaign, I would like to share our learnings from this process with you because I believe that education is a vital step towards reducing racism and racial inequalities in the UK. If you would like to find out more about the campaign, please visit our website.
CERD 2021: Call To Evidence (Specific Focus on Education, Political & Civil Rights)
Research from psychologists (Cole, 20181; Winkler, 20092; Tatum, 20033) demonstrates that children become aware of race in their early years, and can therefore develop racist beliefs at this age too. To combat the gestation of such beliefs, schools need to teach racial diversity from a young age. In terms of pre-school, this can be done through having, for example, dolls/toys of all races, and having teachers instigate play centred around equality. This could also be done through singing and storytelling. The same can be applied for lower primary school years.
For older primary school children, racial inclusion needs to be filtered into all subjects, for example, emphasising the role of Mary Seacole in the Crimean War as well as that of
1 Cole, K. Verwayne, D (2018). Becoming Upended: Teaching and Learning about Race and Racism with Young Children and Their Families. Available from: https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/may2018/teaching-learning-race-and-racism. 2 Winkler, E (2009). Children Are Not Colorblind: How Young Children Learn Race. Available from: https://inclusions.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Children-are-Not-Colorblind.pdf. 3 Tatum, B., 2003. "Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?" and other conversations about the development of racial identity. New York: BasicBooks. Florence Nightingale, or the role of the Gurkhas as well as British troops when we commemorate Remembrance Day/Sunday.
Furthermore, we believe that teaching immigration is vital to tackling racism, since xenophobia intersects alongside racial forms of marginalisation. Kimberle Crenshaw’s infamously pointed to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990 in the USA to demonstrate the intersectional oppression of immigrant women. This had forced all immigrants to be “properly” married for two years before being able to apply for permanent resident status, which had a disproportionate effect on female immigrants, who were more likely to be trapped in abusive relationships.4 This highlights the multi-level oppression that these women face - xenophobia, layered with racism and sexism. Whilst Crenshaw’s analysis is looking at a specific context of migrant women in the U.S, the arguments provided can be used to look and understand other forms of intersecting layers of oppression. Teaching students why people migrate will help them understand the complexities of immigration and this could help to overcome prejudice and a homogenous view of ‘foreigners’. Teaching immigration tolerance is not political; every student is of course entitled to their opinions on immigration quotas and policies. However, teaching students to understand immigration and the need to show respect to all citizens of the world is needed. I would like to see a mandatory module on immigration in KS2 to encompass this, as well as a more in-depth module in KS3.
However, the subject that needs most reformation, in my view, is history. The KS3 history modules encompass the following:
• The development of Church, state, and society in Medieval Britain 1066-1509
• The development of Church, state, and society in Britain 1509-1745
• Ideas, political power, industry, and empire: Britain, 1745-1901
• Challenges for Britain, Europe, and the wider world 1901 to the present day - must include Holocaust.
4 Crenshaw, Kimberle. Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, vol. 43, no. 6, 1991, pp. 1241–1299. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1229039. • A local history study
• The study of an aspect or theme in British history that consolidates and extends pupils’ chronological knowledge from before 1066
• At least one study of a significant society or issue in world history and its interconnections with other world developments
That there are two entire modules dedicated to the British Church whilst the rest of the world is squeezed into one module baffles me. An ethnic minority student cannot feel represented by these modules; in fact, one of the speakers at the E-petition evidence session on black history and cultural diversity in the curriculum stated that he stopped studying history due to a lack of connection and representation for ethnic minorities in the curriculum.5 I propose at least one topic per year of study in KS3 should be international and, more importantly, through a non-British lens. For KS4 and KS5 students, at least one of their GCSE & A-Level modules should also be through a non-British lens.
These modules should include both a positive celebration of culture and a more critical look into the oppression of ethnic minorities. For example, when studying Francis Drake’s circumnavigation in the GCSE Elizabethan topic, there should be an inclusion of the role of the black sailors too. I have only recently learnt about how Drake’s relations to the ‘Cimaroons’, who were mixed-race sailors from Africa, were integral to his success in capturing masses of Spanish silver in 1577 due to their local expertise. I learnt this through my own desire to expand the racial diversity of my historical knowledge by reading ‘Black and British’ by David Olusoga;6 but when I had studied the circumnavigation two years ago at school these sailors were not once mentioned. Alongside modules like this, that celebrate ethnic minority citizens, a study of their oppressions must also be included. For example, the American Slave Trade or Apartheid in South Africa. By encompassing both the positive and negative aspects of racial history, students will receive a comprehensive and balanced
5 Yassen, Y (2020). E-petition evidence session on black history and cultural diversity in the curriculum. 5 November, Uk Parliament Channel, Youtube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjwNciEYe9s&feature=emb_title.
6 Olusoga, D (2016). Black and British: A Forgotten History. London: Pan Books an imprint of Pan Macmillan, pp.16-17. understanding of racial equality, rather than solely learning about ethnic minorities as the oppressed or as on the periphery.
CERD 2021: Call To Evidence (Specific Focus on the intersections between BREXIT and the rise of religious and racially aggravated crimes)
Kajal Knight
Brexit has caused many divides within society, one of these being the safety divide between majority and minority groups. There was an ‘unexpected’ spike in racial and religious hate crime in the three months after the EU referendum according to the Centre for Social Investigation (CSI) and since then, there has been an increasing trend of racial and religious hate crime.1 It is important to recognise that:
a. The rise in racial and religious hate crime was real, and not due to an increase in public reporting of, or police recording of, hate crime. b. Brexit had the ability to cause this increase in hate crime. c. Experiences of this hate crime will differ depending upon a person’s ethnicity, and the way their ethnicity intersects with socio-economic status. d. Brexit will continue to cause an increase in such hate crime.
There has been suggestion from both the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) and the Crown Prosecution Service that the rise in hate crime was not real but was due to improved police methodology2. However, when examining the changes made to increase public reporting to the police force, it is evident that they were insufficient to boost reporting of racial and religious hate crime.
1 The Independent (2016). Hate crimes soared by 41%, official figures revealed. Available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/brexit-hate-crimes-racism-eu-referendum-vote-attacks- increase-police-figures-official-a7358866.html. [Accessed 24 May 2020].
2 CSEW (2019). Crime in England and Wales: year ending June 2019. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/y earendingjune2019. [Accessed 17 January 2020]. CPS (2019). Hate Crime Report 2018-19 data. Available from: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/hate-crime-data. [Accessed 30 April 2020].
Theresa May, Home Secretary in 2010, primarily focused on increasing the accountability of the police force through Police and Crime Commissioner Elections, however, the low turnout of these suggests they had little effect on the public’s incentive to engage with the police.3 In fact, 65% of people in the HMIC’s 2015/16 investigation of the police felt that methods of local policing had not changed since 2010, suggesting no significant increase in reporting would have been made, and thus, the rise in hate crime was not due to this.4 This is further evident when considering that 60% of hate crime goes unreported because the victims do not trust the police to act upon their complaint, meaning that the true figures for the increasing trend in hate crime are likely to be more profound. 5 The lack of change within the police force also suggests that better recording of hate crime incidents is not the reason for the increasing figures. The HMIC produced a list of recommendations to be made for efficient crime recording in 2014 which stressed the need for improved efficiency in recording crime6. However, the recommendation and need for fully integrated computer systems (which would provide a more accurate recording of crime) was only addressed in the Policing Vision 2025 strategy written in 20167. This specific recommendation was also addressed and accounted for in Metropolitan Police force’s bid for £150m funding8. Whilst this may address the issue of under-recording and demonstrate a shared commitment of working towards ensuring accurate recording in the build up from 2016 - 2025, it is plausible to argue that no clear attempt to create a well-established digital policing system has been made from 2010-16. This suggests that the rise in racial and religious hate crime has been real and is not attributable to increased recording or reporting of hate crime.
3 Home Office (2010). Policing in the 21st Century: Reconnecting police and the people. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/118241/po licing-21st-full-pdf.pdf. [Accessed 17 April 2020].
4 HMICFRS (2016). Public views of policing in England and Wales 2015/16. Available from: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/publications/public-views-policing-england-2015-16/#feeling- safe. [Accessed 29 April 2020].
5 The Guardian (2013). Hate crime in England and Wales: how prevalent is it?. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/dec/17/how-prevalent-hate-crime-england-wales. [Accessed 20 March 2020].
6 HMIC (2014). Crime-recording: making the victim count. Available from: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/crime-recording-making-the-victim- count.pdf. [Accessed 15 May 2020].
7 NPCC and APCC (2016). Policing Vision 2025. Available from: https://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/Policing%20Vision.pdf. {Accessed 30 March 2020]
8 Government Computing (2016). The Met explains thinking behind new integrated policing system. Available from: https://www.governmentcomputing.com/police-bluelight/news/newsthe-met-explains-thinking-behind- new-integrated-policing-system-4862503. [Accessed 26 May 2020].
To establish whether Brexit had the ability to cause this increase, I examined the motivations of hate crime perpetrators. Research from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) suggests that there are four main categories of hate crime perpetrator: The Thrill Seeker, the Defensive, the Retaliatory and the Mission.9 The Thrill Seeker has no particular link to Brexit – these 66% of perpetrators purely commit the crime for the excitement. However, the other three characteristics, which make up a significant 34% of perpetrators, each have motivations with a strong causal link to Brexit, due to their aims to defend territory and remove perceived outsiders. Considering that Brexit has brought to the fore the issue of immigration, and that 73% of those who stated they were concerned about immigration went on to vote Leave in the EU referendum according to the National Centre for Social Research, it is plausible that Brexit caused an increase in racial and religious motivated hate crime.10 LSE supports this idea. Their research suggests that those who amplify Englishness over their British identity held the harshest views towards immigrants, preferring a hard Brexit that would reduce immigrant rights in Britain the most. This is significant because LSE also found that the ‘English only’ group scored highest in the ‘blatant racist’ category, suggesting that those with the harshest immigration views were also most likely to hold racist views and more likely to commit racially/religiously motivated hate crimes.11 Given the anti-immigration rhetoric in the build up to Brexit referendum and the coinciding increase in racial and religious hate crime, it is likely that Brexit caused this increase.
The impact has not been the same across all ethnic groups. The ECHR’s research also found that hate crime perpetrators often perceive immigrants as an economic threat, thus, there are two categories of ethnic minority that are likely to see a rise in hate crime due to Brexit. The first is those that work in industries that voted overwhelmingly for Brexit and the second is those working in industries most at risk from negative economic impacts post-Brexit. Looking at Statista's research, the three industries with the highest vote to Leave were engineering (60.2%), manufacturing (59.9%) and hospitality
9 Equality and Human Rights Commission (2016). Causes and motivations of hate crime. Available from: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research-report-102-causes-and-motivations-of-hate- crime.pdf. [Accessed 7 May 2020].
10 The Independent (2017). Brexit: People voted to leave EU because they feared immigration, major survey finds. Available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-latest-news-leave-eu- immigration-main-reason-european-union-survey-a7811651.html. [Accessed 15 January 2020].
11 LSE (2018). Nationalism, racism, and identity: what connects Englishness to a preference for hard Brexit?. Available from: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/11/08/nationalism-racism-and-identity-what-connects- englishness-to-a-preference-for-hard-brexit/. [Accessed 26 January 2020].
(58.8%).12 The industries most at risk are the construction, manufacturing, transport and hospitality industries. 13 The ethnic breakdown of both these industries suggest that the South Asian group is at greatest threat from an increase in racial and religious hate crime. Yet this group is diverse, containing different communities such as the Pakistani/Bangladeshi and Indian communities, who will face different experiences due to two reasons - socio-economic status and religion. Research demonstrates that Pakistani/Bangladeshi people are much more likely to live in poverty and work in low-skilled jobs compared to Indian people.14 It also suggests that Islam faces a disproportionate amount of religious hate crime, with 47% of religious hate crime being targeted at Muslims in the year 2018/19.15 Considering that over half of the Islamic population in the UK are from the Pakistani/Bangladeshi ethnic group as found in the 2011 census, it is plausible that this ethnic group has been at greatest threat from the increasing racial and religious hate crime.16
Political analyst, Nathan Shoesmith, suggests that the Brexit stances of the two leading parties was the most significant cause for the Conservative Party’s landslide majority.17 Whilst he also argues that Jeremy Corbyn’s unpopularity due to anti-Semitism aided the Conservative landslide, this argument is unsupported when considering Johnson's own history of racism and Islamophobia. That Brexit aided the establishment of the current Conservative administration is important because the current Party’s intolerance of the Islamic community in particular suggests racial and religious hate crime would be maintained under this government. Evidence for this intolerance includes the thousands of EDL members who became members of the Party in the run-up to the 2019 general election; the Muslim Council of Britain’s filing of many reports pertaining to the current governing party’s actions, calling for decisive action against Conservative MP, Robert Blackman, after a sixth allegation of Islamophobia
12 Statista (2020). Brexit vote by industry. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1072277/brexit- vote-by-industry/. [Accessed 30 May 2020].
13 BBC News (2019). UK migration: Rise in net migration from outside EU. Available from: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47400679. [Accessed 9 February 2020].
14 Chapman, S (2015). OCR A-Level Sociology. Hodder Education. PG.283-288.
15 GOV.UK (2019). Hate crime, England and Wales, 2018 to 2019. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/839172/ha te-crime-1819-hosb2419.pdf. [Accessed 12 January 2020].
16 Wikipedia (2020). Islam in the UK. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_Kingdom. [Accessed 25 January 2020].
17 Shoesmith, N. The Speaker (2019). How Did The Conservatives Win The Election?. Available from: https://speakerpolitics.co.uk/analysis/1693-why-did-the-conservatives-win-the-election. [Accessed 20 January 2020].
as of 2020;18and the 375% spike in anti-Islamic incidents in the months after PM Boris Johnson compared Muslin women to ‘letter boxes’ and ‘bank robbers’, with 42% of offline incidents directly referencing him.19 The Party’s intolerance to Islam further suggests that the Pakistani/Bangladeshi group are at greatest threat from a continued increase in racial and religious hate crime.
As journalist Rachel Shabi puts it, ‘Brexit has veered Britain into the worrying politics of majoritarianism’.20 Action is needed now to prevent this from spiralling out of control. Our recommended actions include:
1. For the police and those professionals tackling crime, to ensure that there is a robust reporting system in place to deal with the evident levels of rising religious & hate crime in relation to Brexit.
2. In Global Britain, UK Political Leaders should take heed from the fearmongering of Brexit and approach social, political, and economic issues with a more nuanced mindset, moving away from essentialist mentality and reducing issues as simply being a result of religion, race & ethnic origins.
3. For all UK mainstream political parties to commit to anti-racism and fully comply and be transparent about investigations into racism and/or xenophobia.
18 MCB (2020). MCB Calls for Conservatives to Finally Take Decisive Action Against Bob Blackman MP Following the 6th Serious Incident Linking Him to Islamophobia. Available from: https://mcb.org.uk/general/mcb-calls-for- conservatives-to-finally-take-decisive-action-against-bob-blackman-mp-following-the-6th-serious-incident- linking-him-to-islamophobia/. [Accessed 3 July 2020].
19 The Independent (2019). Islamic incidents rose by 375% after Boris Johnson compared Muslim women to ‘letterboxes’, figures show. Available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/boris- johnson-muslim-women-letterboxes-burqa-islamphobia-rise-a9088476.html. [Accessed 11 January 2020].
20 Shabi, R. The Guardian (2019). Racism in political parties reflects persuasive prejudice in Brexit Britain. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/07/racism-politics-reflects-pervasive- prejudice-brexit-britain. [Accessed 11 January 2020]. Just Fair’s submission to The Runnymede Trust on the UK Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Executive summary ● Just Fair is a UK charity that is working to realise a fairer and more just society by monitoring and advocating for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR) in the UK. We aim to ensure that the UK Government’s law, policy and practice comply with international and domestic human rights obligations pertaining to ESCR. This submission collates ESCR evidence from our partners Safety4Sisters North West (S4S),1 the International Community Organisation of Sunderland (ICOS),2 Connected Voice3 and Praxis.4 This evidence covers employment, education, health and housing issues.
1 Safety4Sisters North West (S4S) is a dynamic frontline Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) organisation. Established in 2009 S4S was set up to respond to the imposed barriers and discriminatory practices that migrant women survivors of genderbased violence (GBV) experience including harmful practices, so called HBV/A and immigration abuse. The majority of women we support are excluded from safety and protection and remain at risk of violence and harm due to multiple levelled forms abuse and discrimination in relation to their uncertain immigration status/No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF). This includes interpersonal, family and community abuse- but in conjunction with this our approach addresses structural inequalities, state discrimination and trans- national threats. S4S provides specialist NRPF Refuge Accommodation (Abonsh House) alongside intersectional advocacy and access to therapeutic support, well-being group activities, training and development. S4S work has been developed in consultation with Black and minoritised women, and S4S Women’s Voices groups are central to the development of our strategic work and wider awareness raising activities. 2 The International Community Organisation of Sunderland (ICOS) exists to improve the quality of life of BME (Black and Minority Ethnic) people in the North East of England and to enhance community cohesion and intercultural understanding in this area. ICOS focuses on those who lack access to information and services to ensure equal access. 2 ICOS has particularly strong links to the Eastern European community, but has also successfully worked with refugees, asylum seekers and BME people born in the UK. Currently, most of its work is delivered in Sunderland and the surrounding area. ICOS’ approach is to focus on both assets of the community, as well as the issues that the community faces. While ICOS is committed to supporting those in crisis, it strongly believes that it is its duty to prevent the crisis. 3 Connected Voice is an organisation which has been supporting the voluntary sector and communities of Tyneside since 1929. As part of Connected Voice, Haref has been working for over 15 years with local Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities to tackle health inequalities and improve service health accessibility. Haref is committed to improving the quality of life of everyone in the diverse communities of Newcastle and Gateshead. We work with BAME communities to identify their key issues around health and improve the health information available to them. We help health services have a better understanding of what communities need, and we build confidence within communities so they can talk to health services about their cultural needs. Through Haref, local BAME communities have a stronger voice, can share information and evidence, and respond to issues as they are happening. Haref also lobbies and campaigns on key health issues locally and nationally. 4 Praxis provides expert support to migrants and refugees in the UK. Every year Praxis helps some 2,000 people through immigration advice, housing and peer support groups. Praxis takes a holistic approach recognising that people are complex, and so are their problems. Its services have evolved over time, adapting to the changing needs and circumstances of its users. Praxis has become the leading expert in finding pathways out of destitution and supporting migrants facing homelessness, as well as survivors of trafficking and domestic violence, young people, EU citizens and long term residents struggling to find the support they need. Praxis is commissioned to provide specialist
1
Employment
At ICOS, the Wise Steps project (2019-2021) provides employability support to BME people, and vulnerable individuals in Sunderland, who might face challenges accessing the labour market. The Senior Project Worker and Wise Steps Coach at ICOS, who works with Eastern European women on employability, finds that there are a number of issues faced which prevent progression in the workplace. Women are disproportionately represented in the hospitality sector - housekeepers, cleaners, production, food production, care sector, restaurants – despite their skill set.5
For instance, the project has found that women could have good experience and education from Poland but work in the production sector or cleaning/ hospitality jobs.6 The Senior Project Worker and Wise Steps Coach also states that childcare and other commitments prevent progression: “Many women I work with are really sick of these jobs because they know they have more potential it's just difficult to progress into something different especially when they have children and other commitments”, and problems with progression at work also include “language and communication barriers” and “problems with confidence and low self esteem”.7
For example, “Women from Eastern Europe face barriers when trying to enter/ re-enter the labour market and upskill or change their career- this includes limited English language proficiency or, even when women speak good English, lack of functional skills qualifications can make it impossible to upskill in other areas without achieving level 2 English and Maths qualifications first.8
Funding and support for Black and minoritized ethnic (BME) careers advice and employment projects
ICOS has an ongoing project called Back in Control (2019-2021), which aims to improve, the economic, social, and personal outcomes of victims of modern slavery/workplace exploitation, for people from minoritized ethnic groups residing in Sunderland and a 5-mile radius. The Manager of the Wise Step project and Back in Control project finds that progression issues across sectors include that “There is not enough support to improve careers prospects for those already in work; BME people- especially those not born in the UK but also settled communities often struggle to progress due to direct and indirect discrimination, lack of cultural awareness, but also - they lack the support networks and access to quality advice. At this moment in time, employment advice for BME people do not exist in many areas, and funding and support for BME - specific employability projects is difficult to access. Funding support for in work progression of BME communities is even more difficult, as funders do not see it as a priority.”9
immigration advice by other organisations, and works with local authorities to improve services for migrant residents through advice, training, and promotion of best practices. 5 ICOS, Senior Project Worker and Wise Steps Coach, 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair- LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and- inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. (page 5,6 and 38) 8 Ibid. 9 ICOS, Development and Services Manager, 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’,
2
Needs-tailored and specific careers advice and training for specific groups of young people
ICOS finds that for those who are under 24 years old and are refugees “especially are in need of needs-tailored careers orientation and advice activities - these cannot be provided by the same organisations that deliver training (such as colleges), as they inevitably encourage refugees to study at their institution, instead of providing honest, independent advice and support. Jobcentre Plus support lacks sufficient depth and understanding of their specific needs, hence BME- specific advice provision is needed for this client group.”10
Education
Impacts of lockdown and digital exclusion on BME young people
In August 2020, Safety4Sisters conducted interviews to find out more about the experiences of BME women in the North West of England during the first COVID-19 lockdown. One woman explained that “sometimes the tablets were not working or we couldn’t go out. They were scared to go out for a walk. They are still scared it is not safe even going back to school they are worried.11
The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the behaviour of children in migrant families, the impact is exacerbated for those who have limited access to food, and access to digital technology and data for digital connectivity. Speaking to Safety4Sisters, a woman recalls that her children have “lots of detachment” they are “Not as involved as they were. Small things they used to get pleasure from but lockdown shut everything out for us, we can’t drive, no access to bus. Food too expensive - cranky because they aren't getting proper food…Youngest torn ligaments in her knee and couldn’t walk much or move very frustrated. Not a lot of materials online. Sharing the computer and data. Data very important now it is where we get information from, connect with friends and family, we have to share for 1 or 2 hours at a time”.12
Praxis finds that national immigration policies and student finances People with Limited Leave to Remain on the pathway to settlement are not entitled to home student fees, grants or student loans until:
● They have had continuous leave for at least 3 years at the start date of the course; and
● They have spent at least half of their life in the UK. Praxis finds that these young people are significantly more likely to be from Black, Asian and minoritized ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. Every year Praxis receives a number of calls from young people who have
December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 10 ICOS, Development and Services Manager, 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 11 Safety4Sisters, Interview conducted August 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 12 Ibid.
3 recently discovered that they are not eligible for home student rates, grants, loans. Praxis believes that all people who are on the pathway to settlement should be entitled to home student rates and to student finances as soon as they are granted Limited Leave to Remain.13
Health
Barriers to accessing appropriate information, services or support
The Haref Network works with BAME communities in Newcastle and Gateshead. These communities are facing specific health issues and health inequalities. In June 2020, the Haref Network recorded that mental health was a “key issue of concern for BAME communities due to COVID-19, with escalating extreme stress, depression, fear and risk of suicide”.14 The Haref Network finds that there is “a lack of appropriate mental health services for BAME people” and “existing inequalities have just been amplified and made worse by the pandemic in health, poverty, access to services and information”.15 In particular, the Haref Network finds that “vulnerable groups have been disproportionately affected and the most vulnerable have fallen off the radar and are not engaging with services”. There are “particular concerns for asylum seekers with isolation, poor accommodation and overcrowding, lack of money, lack of social networks, scared they will be arrested if outside the house”.16
In Sunderland, ICOS’ work with BME people has evidenced that limited access to information, support and services exacerbates “problems with domestic abuse”.17 For example, people “find it difficult to access support services because of language barrier, lack of support networks such as family and friends, lack of their own income (being dependent on the abuser), lack of access to services and lack of access to translators, lack of trust in the police”.18
13 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf 14 Haref Network, Network Meeting, June 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 15 Haref Network, Network Meeting, June 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 16 Haref Network, Network Meeting, June 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf 17 ICOS, Senior Project Worker and Wise Steps Coach, 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair- LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and- inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf 18 Ibid.
4
In the North West of England, Safety4Sisters has found that abuse during COVID-19 frays social networks and exacerbates mental health issues. Safety4Sisters work shows that many migrant women who experience multiple discrimination and violence, had poor mental health even before the pandemic. Restrictions have led to more acute isolation, lack of contact with support agencies, and increased ability of abusers to prohibit contact with family members, friends and colleagues. Women report feeling helpless to maintain control over their lives and maintain social networks. Lockdown conditions are heightening previous experiences of trauma. Women say they are scared to go out for fear of racism and being blamed for COVID19.19
Ending data-sharing for immigration enforcement
There is an urgent need for an end to data-sharing between all statutory services - including the police, healthcare services and employment inspectorates - and the Home Office, to protect vulnerable workers and victims of crime. Fear of immigration enforcement is affecting not only undocumented migrants, but also European citizens who are not aware of their rights and entitlements due to misinformation and fears related to Brexit. Suspending all data-sharing will allow the most vulnerable workers to report abusive employers, victims of crime and domestic abuse to report to the police, and all migrants to access healthcare especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.20
Providing adequate, ring-fenced, unrestricted, flexible funding for specialist BAME, BME and migrant ´by and for’ organisations, including refuges, so they can reach the most vulnerable and marginalised members of society
Safety4Sisters have found that services working with migrant women escaping violence struggling to survive. Small BME and migrant women’s organisations like Safety4Sisters have been severely underfunded and under-resourced for years due to austerity. Funding is shortterm and piecemeal, making sustainability fragile.21 Safety4Sisters qualitative evidence shows that access to specialist support services is critical for women in specific racial and ethnic groups who have religious beliefs.22
In June 2020, the Haref Network found that there have been impacts on organisations and staff working to support BAME groups through the pandemic.23
Preventing discrimination and ensuring access to information about human rights
19 Ibid. 20 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf (pages 27) 21 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf (pages 32) 22 Safety4Sisters, Interview conducted August 2020; Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf (pages 11-12) 23 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf (pages 33)
5
In 2018, ICOS conducted qualitative research and found that discrimination results in worse health outcomes for minoritized ethnic groups in Sunderland. ICOS found that Polish people in Sunderland are facing discrimination in the workplace which put their health at risk.24
Housing
In May 2020, Just Fair and the Migrants’ Rights Network submitted evidence to the Housing Committee inquiry into the impact of COVID-19 on homelessness.25 The right to housing needs to be afforded to all regardless of immigration status. However, housing is a particular issue for migrant communities who are more likely to live in private rented accommodation or in overcrowded accommodation. They are also more likely to be living in poverty or to be working in a sector heavily impacted by COVID-19. COVID-19 has raised particular challenges for migrant communities notably drops in income; limited access to welfare; barriers for homeless migrants in accessing housing support; and overcrowded housing leading to increased risk of transmission of COVID-19 and this is particularly serious for multi-generational households. Many migrant women experiencing domestic abuse are not able to get a place in a shelter due to their immigration status leaving them to choose between staying with their abuser or destitution and homelessness. The ‘right to rent’ policy as part of the wider Immigration Acts 2014 and 2016 (hostile environment) must end. This policy encourages discrimination against tenants who look or sound foreign. Landlords have prospective tenants queuing up for rooms, and the evidence suggests that when facing a hefty fine or prison many will simply refuse anybody who they are sceptical about and turn to someone who is obviously a British citizen. This will drive many into the hands of slum landlords who will use their position to abuse and exploit them.
In Gateshead and Newcastle, the Haref Network finds that BAME young people are experiencing “hate abuse online” and are “living in crowded households” with “no outlet for pressures” and “scared their parents may be affected working in care professions”.39 BAME people are “experiencing hate crime/ discrimination and being targeted due to all the news that BAME people are more at risk”.26
No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF)
In 2020, Just Fair and its partners collated evidence showing that the No Recourse to Public Funds condition attached to visas is impacting living conditions, destitution, care responsibilities, domestic violence, and access to health services and support.27 An immediate suspension of the NRPF condition, so that migrants can access protection if they need to stop working or leave an abusive partner during the pandemic. Women with
24 Ibid (page 12) 25 Just Fair, Written evidence submitted by Migrants’ Rights Network and Just Fair to the Housing Committee inquiry into the impact of COVID-19 on homelessness, May 2020, https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Written-evidence-submitted-by-Migrants-Rights- Network-and-Just-Fair.pdf 26 Haref Network, Network Meeting, June 2020. Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S- ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the-open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in- the-UK-FINAL.pdf (page 14) 27 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf (page 18-26)
6 insecure immigration status need access to this vital and often life-saving support and routes to safety.28
28 Just Fair, ‘Joint Submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities ‘Open Consultation on Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK’, December 2020 https://justfair.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/2020/12/Upload-Just-Fair-LAWRS-S4S-ICOS-Haref-Praxis-Joint-Submission-to-the- open-consultation-on-ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-UK-FINAL.pdf (page 18-26)
7
Runnymede Trust shadow CERD report: Medact submission
About Medact
Medact is a public health charity focused on addressing the social, economic and political conditions which are root causes of health inequalities.
About this submission
We cannot hope to address ethnic disparities in healthcare outcomes while certain policies actively foster racial profiling in the NHS and deeply-entrenched socio-economic inequalities.
This submission focuses on three areas of Medact’s work with relation to racial and religious health inequalities: - Charging regulations linked to the so-called UK immigration policies; - The Prevent counter-radicalisation strategy and its implementation and impacts in the NHS; - UK economic and housing policies and their impacts on health.
Recommendations of action the Government should take to combat racial injustice in healthcare
1. Based on the findings of our 2020 report ‘False Positives: the Prevent counter-extremism policy in healthcare’1, we urge the UK government to: a. Repeal the Prevent policy in healthcare; b. Adopt a spectrum of evidence-based public health policies based on a holistic understanding of security which addresses longer-term interconnected determinants of violence; c. Provide urgently needed funding for youth, mental health and drug and alcohol dependency services, and delink these sources of funding from counter-terror and security services; d. Take steps to address the harms caused by Prevent and to rebuild trust in health services amongst impacted communities, including by withdrawing stigmatising and unsubstantiated claims of a link between mental health conditions and terrorism; e. End the lack of transparency and accountability in the creation and delivery of Prevent in public services through publishing the evidence base used to determine potential indicators of vulnerability to radicalisation (the ERG22+ factors) and a breakdown of the historic demographic data of those referred to Prevent, and data on the proportion of non-consensual referrals; f. Commission research into the impacts of Prevent on health-seeking behaviours and on its interactions with other key professional duties of health professionals. 2. Based on the findings of our joint research with Migrants Organise and the New Economics Foundation - Patients Not Passports: Migrants’ Access to Healthcare During the Coronavirus Crisis2, we urge the Government to:
1 https://www.medact.org/2020/resources/reports/false-positives-the-prevent-counter-extremism-policy-in- healthcare/
a. Withdrawing all NHS charging for migrants, in particular the National Health Service Overseas Visitor Charging Regulations 2015 and 2017 and the Immigration Health Surcharge. b. Ending all data sharing between the NHS and other health services, and the Home Office. The government should implement a firewall to ensure that patient data will never be shared with the Home Office or other bodies for the purposes of immigration enforcement. c. Launching an information campaign to ensure both NHS staff and the public are aware of these changes and that it is safe for people to seek care. It should be done with a particular focus on migrant communities across the UK with the intention of undoing the deterrent effects of the Hostile Environment. It should also inform people about their right to access translation services and translated guidance throughout their engagement with the NHS, and impress upon NHS Trusts their requirement to meet this need. d. These measures are urgently needed. They echo the recommendations made by: the Lancet Commission on Migration and Health, 60 MPs, the Mayor of London, the BMA & six Royal Colleges that represent doctors and midwives, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, and over 100 civil society organisations. 3. Medact and Migrants Organise coordinated the Vaccines for All campaign3, that highlighted the impact of Hostile Environment policies in the NHS on the ability of migrant and BAME communities to access the vaccine. The campaign is supported by over 340 organisations, including Local Councils, GP surgeries, and Primary Care Networks. The demands are that the Department of Health and Social Care must: a. Guarantee a firewall that prevents any patient information gathered by the NHS or Test and Trace being used for the purposes of immigration enforcement. b. End all Hostile Environment measures in the NHS, including charging for migrants, to combat the fear and mistrust these policies have created. c. Provide specific support to all GP surgeries to register everyone, including undocumented and under-documented migrants and those without secure accommodation, and ensure that all other routes to vaccination are accessible to everyone. d. Fund a public information campaign to ensure that communities impacted by the Hostile Environment are aware of their right to access the vaccine and the steps taken above. 4. Based on our epidemiological analysis on housing insecurity and COVID-19 transmission and risk we urge the UK government to: a. Suspend Right to Rent checks to ensure all people living in the UK do not have to fear eviction; b. Ensure private rental contracts are automatically rolled over to avoid sudden homelessness in an unstable private rental market; c. Implement a programme of debt relief for renters in arrears; d. End no fault evictions; e. Act to reduce overcrowding by increasing social housing. 5. From our evidence summary briefing on economic policy and public health we recommend the government make changes in labour market and social security policy to: a. Increase minimum wage and Statutory Sick Pay to Real Living Wage levels;
2 https://www.medact.org/2020/headlines/patients-not-passports-migrants-access-to-healthcare-during-the- coronavirus-crisis/ 3 http://www.vaccineforall.co.uk 2
b. Protect incomes with short time working schemes and ensure no furloughed or self- employed workers are paid below the Real Living Wage; c. Support people to self-isolate at Real Living Wage levels for 14 days; d. Mitigate long term unemployment with a jobs guarantee and job creation, in particular by investing in green infrastructure and combating youth unemployment; e. Protect workers’ rights by supporting union membership and access to employment advice, and repealing the Trade Union Act 2016; f. Create a debt relief programme for council taxes, rental arrears and utility bills; g. Overhaul Universal Credit, including raising the basic payment, as well as legacy benefits, to £260 per week and scrapping the benefits cap, two-child limit and the five-week wait (by turning the loan into a grant); h. Extend the housing eviction ban to include no fault evictions and rental arrears and increase Local Housing Allowances; i. Expand free school meals, making it a universal programme; j. Increase funding of local services especially for mental health, young people, the homeless, women’s refuges and BAME specialist services; k. Scrap No Recourse to Public Funds to ensure that everyone, regardless of their immigration status, can access financial support.
Evidence of the impacts of the Prevent duty in healthcare on BME communities and health
Prevent was first implemented in 2006 as part of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, CONTEST. With the Counter-Terror and Security Act in 2015, Prevent was made into a statutory duty on all public and specified authorities - including the NHS - to “have due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism.”
In 2020, Medact published False Positives: the Prevent counter-extremism policy in healthcare, one of the first substantive pieces of research on the impacts of Prevent in health settings. The reports key findings are:
1. Racial and religious disproportionality in referrals to Prevent: a. Asians/ British Asians were four times more likely to be referred to Prevent than non- Asians in the NHS; b. Muslims were eight times more likely to be referred to Prevent than non-Muslims in the NHS; c. Qualitative data and anecdotal evidence outlined in our report suggests that this disproportionality is in part a result of racial bias in Prevent training materials, racial and religious discrimination amongst staff implementing the duty, and the recommendation within trainings that staff rely on their “instinct” in making referral decisions; d. In sum, the negative impacts of false positive Prevent referrals are felt disproportionately by minority groups, which risks exacerbating pre-existing health inequalities suffered by those same groups.
2. Mental health, race and Prevent: a. Quantitative and qualitative data from our research pointed to people with mental health conditions being disproportionately referred to Prevent; 3
b. Our case studies suggest that this disproportionality may be compounded when an individual is Muslim and/or BAME; c. Qualitative evidence suggests that Prevent referrals can actually harm people’s mental and physical health, as well as the health of family members, both directly and indirectly; d. Mental health harms came as a result of damage inflicted on therapeutic relationships, setting back or disrupting recovery and treatment, and at times causing people to disengage from treatment altogether.
3. Impacts of Prevent on public sector equality duty and other professional duties: a. Our research found widespread neglect of equalities monitoring around Prevent, raising questions about compliance with public sector equality duties; b. Our qualitative data indicates that many if not most Prevent referrals do not involve informed consent, suggesting an infringement upon professionals’ duty of confidentiality to the patient; c. Our analysis found that Prevent training materials strongly emphasise the importance of disclosure while minimising the need for consent-seeking; d. Our analysis also found that non-consensual referrals can never rely on a public interest justification since Prevent does not deal with immediate risk; e. Given the above information, we are concerned that Prevent erodes the duty of confidentiality within the NHS, and that patients from minoritised communities are consequently disproportionately suffering the impacts of this.
Evidence of the impacts of NHS charging and data sharing on BME communities and health
Medact, Migrants Organise, and the New Economics Foundation have undertaken research to understand and raise awareness of barriers to healthcare for migrants during the coronavirus crisis, and to help inform the response to this emergency. We surveyed migrant and refugee support organisations and community groups from across the UK. We then undertook interviews with a subsection of respondents in order to gather further information. The evidence is published in Patients Not Passports: Migrants’ Access to Healthcare During the Coronavirus Crisis (June 2020).
Our research presents new evidence of the inequalities faced by BAME and migrant communities. We demonstrate how the Government’s Hostile Environment immigration policies, along with other barriers, exacerbate these inequalities, and the role they play in preventing migrant and BAME people from accessing healthcare. We have identified urgently needed changes of policy and practice to help prevent deaths and suffering in these communities, which we have outlined below.
Our research shows that: 1. Migrants are not coming forward for healthcare because of the Government’s Hostile Environment. It has long been common for migrants to avoid seeking healthcare because of these policies, which include NHS charging and data sharing with the Home Office.Tragically, this remains the case during the pandemic. a. 57% of respondents in our research report that migrants have avoided seeking healthcare because of fears of being charged for NHS care, data sharing and other migration enforcement concerns.
4
b. Due to the complex nature of the policies, and the lack of staff and patient knowledge about eligibility, even those entitled to free care under the current policy are deterred from seeking healthcare. 2. The coronavirus exemption from charging is not working. a. While treatment for coronavirus and other communicable diseases is exempt from charging, few respondents (20%) agree that migrants are aware of this exemption. b. Most of those responding to the survey (56%) have not seen any information from public bodies raising awareness of migrants’ rights to healthcare during the coronavirus crisis. c. Fewer still (9%) think that information about charging exemptions is reaching all sections of their communities in an accessible format. 3. Even when this information gets through, a decade of Hostile Environment policies means that fear and mistrust prevail, and the deterrent effect persists. This is compounded by fears of data sharing and immigration enforcement, as the Department of Health and Social Care has made no assurances that patient data will not be shared with the Home Office. a. Further, there are reported instances of people being required to prove their entitlement to care whilst in hospital with coronavirus symptoms. 4. Migrants face a wide range of additional barriers – including language and digital exclusions – to accessing care, including emergency services. For those that come forward despite the fear created by the Hostile Environment, the coronavirus crisis has created additional barriers to accessing care. a. As many services - including health services and migrant support services - shut and others move online, the crisis has also shed new light on existing barriers, which are exacerbated and compounded during the pandemic. b. Chief amongst the additional barriers to care are: the absence of translation and interpretation services; digital exclusions; housing and proximity to care services. c. Further, a fear of contracting coronavirus while accessing healthcare, leading to an avoidance of services, has been exacerbated by fears of discriminatory treatment and the disproportionate number of migrant and BAME coronavirus deaths.
It is important to note that many migrants, especially those whose status is most precarious, often do not receive any support from migrant organisations. The results of this research, therefore, are likely to understate the scale and depth of the issues highlighted.
Evidence of systemic racism in UK governments COVID-19 response and existing inequities in housing, labour markets and social security
The worst impacts of COVID-19 have been borne by the socially, economically and politically marginalized in society. As well as the elderly and frail, the disease itself has disproportionately affected the most deprived, and in particular BAME communities. 1. Public Health England found that all-cause mortality among the most deprived was 2.2 times higher than the least deprived. 2. For BAME communities, all-cause mortality went up 3-4 times more than expected for Black people, and 2-3 times more for Asian people, compared to white people. 3. The economic impacts of the crisis were also heavily borne by BAME communities, many of whom worked as essential workers and a majority of whom were women, facing the double 5
burden of economic loss in income and jobs and health loss because of the disproportionate exposure to COVID-19.
In 2020 we published an epidemiological analysis of the risk of housing insecurity on COVID-19 transmission4. We highlighted the fact that: 1. Housing is not equitably distributed in the UK; a. Systemic racism in housing allocation stretching back to the 1960s, through waves of migration into poor quality housing in the private rental sector in the 70s and 80s, to continued economic disadvantage for BAME people, has left a stark legacy; b. The impact of inequitable housing access has been especially strong on BAME households, who have often had to wait longer to be allocated a flat from social housing programmes, and ended up in poorer quality homes; c. BAME households are still more likely to live in overcrowded, older homes with insufficient fuel, and are substantially less likely to own their own homes. d. BAME households account for 1 in 3 homeless acceptances by local authorities.
In 2021 we published an evidence summary report on the UK’s economic policy and public health response to COVID-195. 1. We linked historic policy change and political decisions that undermined social and economic protection and have exacerbated inequities in the labour market, social security and public health system. 2. These historic changes and policy design were instrumental in the massive avoidable loss of life in the UK and disproportionate impact faced by BAME and migrant communities, both in health and economic outcomes as a result of the pandemic.
4 https://www.medact.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/The-impact-of-insecure-housing-on-COVID-19- transmission-%E2%94%80-Medact-May-2020-FINAL-1.pdf 5 https://www.medact.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/MEDACT-Health-Vs-Wealth-February-2021- ONLINE.pdf 6 Written Submission to CERD 2021 Call for Evidence
Submission by Migrants’ Rights Network
1. Migrants’ Rights Network is a campaigning organisation that stands in solidarity with all migrants in their fight for rights and justice. We are seen as a support and solidarity network, which includes migrants, grassroots and migrants’ rights organisations. We work to create a situation where:
● People are free to move because migration is and has always been an integral part of the human experience. ● Everyone, including all migrants, live in a society which is free from all forms of oppression and discrimination. ● Nobody’s access to safety and rights should be determined by their immigration status.
Executive summary
2. We welcome this much needed call for evidence. This evidence submission will address the area “the impact of hostile environment and immigration policies on BME people’s rights and evidence of the impact of Covid-19.”
3. The hostile environment policy has created a climate of fear for all migrants and communities of colour, from migrant key workers, to business owners, to international students. These policies have been harmful to communal relations and have led to human rights abuses of BME individuals.
Essential migrant workers during COVID-19
4. In July, we launched a survey on the Impact of Covid-19 On People of Colour and Migrant Frontline Workers alongside Kanlungan Filipino Consortium, Migrants at Work, and the 3 Million. We surveyed 170 individuals and collected 14 in-depth case study interviews, of which, 53% were without recourse to public funds1. a. We restricted data collection to the following sectors: construction; health and social care; logistics and delivery; and security. b. Survey respondents were exclusively people of colour.
5. The vast majority of survey respondents (74%) were on permanent contracts yet (20%) were concerned that if they were not able to go to work during the pandemic that their immigration status would be affected. 76% of respondents felt that they were putting their health at risk by being at work during the pandemic and 11% felt pressured by their employer to continue going to work.
6. In terms of discrimination, 21% felt their ethnicity influenced the way their employer treated them during the pandemic and 23% felt their nationality influenced the way their employer treated them during the pandemic; 14% felt their immigration
1 See here for the full report: https://migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2020/12/22/report-launch-the-impact- of-covid-19-on-poc-migrant-frontline-workers/ status had an influence. In addition, 28% experienced overt racist abuse or harassment. 20% believed they were required to undertake less desirable tasks then their white colleagues and 16% believed they were required to work less desirable shift patterns than their white colleagues.
7. For instance, a neuropsychiatrist said that she received a lot of xenophobic abuse, not only from her patients but also in the trade union movement by other representatives and union staff. She described an incident where she sectioned a patient and, as a result, he told her that “he hoped she would be deported to Germany after Brexit.”
8. As another example from our case studies, a security guard (referring to some of his colleagues) said that many do not understand their rights to challenge their employers. Their workplace culture in the security industry is that migrant workers do as they are told: “you do your work, and you don’t ask any questions.” In his view, BAME workers are treated less favourably than their white colleagues which is in part due to the fact that “the management is overwhelmingly white.”
9. We have found that the discrimination that is experienced by migrant workers directly results from hostile environment policy and its dehumanisation of migrants. Because the dignity of migrants is denied in government policy, this naturally impacts the experience of migrants in their workplace, as this enables and normalises institutionalised racism.
Highly Skilled Migrant Group
10. Since 2019, we have been working closely with the Highly Skilled Migrants group that were denied indefinite leave to remain (ILR) in relation to historic self- employment tax discrepancies; some spanning 10 years ago2. This left some 400 individuals in a legal limbo, and in a hostile environment, with no ability to work, rent, drive, receive NHS healthcare, open bank accounts or receive access to public funding (as a result of Immigration Act 1971 section 3C).
11. Despite the Balajigar3i ruling that found the Home Office’s (then) decision-making process unlawful and saw up to 80% of HSMs granted ILR, at least 65 people’s cases have fallen through the cracks for reasons including the timing of their applications and having no opportunity to answer questions or ‘tell their story’4 as to why the discrepancies occurred. 80% of remaining HSMs have received no ‘Minded to Refuse’ letter and of these, 22% have had no chance to explain the discrepancies through a right of appeal.
12. All remaining HSMs without ILR are people of colour, originating from 6 South Asian and African countries. All of these countries are in the Commonwealth. Over half (52%) are from Pakistan and others are from India (24%), Nigeria (12%),
2 See here for the full report: https://migrantsrights.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/HSM-Report- Jan-2021.pdf 3 ibid, See: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/balajigari-othrs-v-sshd- judgment16.4.19.pdf 4 https://www.gov.uk/guidance/procedural-justice
Bangladesh (7%), Sri Lanka (3%) and Zimbabwe (2%). All of them, apart from 2 who have been here 9.5+ years, have been in the UK for over 10 years, and some as many as 17 years.
13. This profile raises immediate questions over government “institutional ignorance and thoughtlessness towards the issues of race” as the Windrush Lessons Learnt Review (2020)5 found. The Equalities and Human Rights Commission November 2020 report finds that hostile environment policies have accelerated the impacts of decades of complex policy and practice in which black and white immigrants are treated differently6.
14. The latest November 2019 Home Office policy guidance still only states that Balajigari ‘removed the argument 322(5) is concerned with only cases of national security (para. 32)’. But It does not give any justification for applying 322(5) to HSMs and how this is linked to being ‘undesirable’ for the UK and makes them ‘dishonest’ or failing ‘good character requirements’ (any more than other people with tax discrepancies in the UK). There is a disproportionate inconsistency and double standard applied for people born in the UK vs. those who are not. The impact on BME rights in these cases is apparent.
Immigration Raids
15. Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) businesses are being disproportionately targeted by immigration raids based on limited ‘intelligence,’ which has suggested that ‘racial profiling’ is being used to justify these raids.
16. Since 2017, we have coordinated a network of pro-bono immigration solicitors and grassroots groups who monitor how immigration raids are conducted in the UK, and their subsequent impact on the small business owners, employees affected, and the communities in which these raids take place.
17. During this period, we have come across a number of cases where raids undertaken by the Immigration and Compliance Enforcement teams have not been ‘intelligence-led’ nor have they taken appropriate regard for the law. We have also been extremely concerned that many of the immigration enforcement procedures are enacted against small BME business owners, and therefore disproportionately impacting BME employers, employees and communities perpetuating discrimination and inequality. This has been documented in the 2015 ICIBI report7 that demonstrates who are arrested in workplace raids.
18. Of 184 ‘visits’ that were sampled in the 2015 ICIBI report, 107 were take-aways or high-street restaurants of Chinese or Indian cuisine, and some fried chicken
5https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/87 4022/6.5 6 See: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/public-sector-equality-duty- assessment-of-hostile-environment-policies.pdf
7 Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (2015) An Inspection of How the Home Office Tackles Illegal Working October 2014-March 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-report-on-illegal-working-december-2015. outlets8. This creates an extremely harmful climate of fear for all migrants. According to the 2015 ICIBI report, as well as leaked Home Office documents from the 2014 “Operation Centurion,” people from Bangladesh, Pakistan, China, and India make up 85% of those arrested9. This included the timeline of September 2012-January 2014.
19. Many of these ‘intelligence led’ operations conducted by ICE tend to become ‘fishing’ expeditions. They rarely focus on the intelligence the operation is based on and will go beyond the scope of the warrant they have been issued.
20. There are also examples we can cite of ‘racial profiling’ of employees once an immigration enforcement raid is undertaken on a premise of interest. For example, a factory owner in London had his business raided by the (ICE) Team in June 2019. The ICE team showed a warrant for a named person who has never worked on their premises and was unknown to the business owner. At no point, did they explain the reason for why they were on the premises and executing a warrant and not asked to sign any paperwork to agree to the execution either.
21. Despite this, ICE proceeded to ‘racially profile’ employees on the premises, and also brought onto the premises individuals who were in close proximity to the premises to check their immigration status. Some of those employees and individuals being checked were held for at least 9 hours, and after checking their status were released the following day. As a result of this raid, the company made a huge financial loss because it had missed a client deadline.
22. The 2019 ICIBI report10 supports the claim the claim of racial profiling, and that little has changed in terms of immigration raids becoming more “intelligence led” and less reliant on obvious racial targeting. Despite this, during April 2015-August 2018, nearly two-thirds, 63%, were from the same four nationalities: Pakistanis, Chinese, Bangladeshis, and Indians.
23. The number of cases that claim to be “intelligence led,” yet are from uncorroborated sources, is extremely concerning. This is despite the fact that UKBA must have “reasonable suspicion” that immigration laws have been or are being breached11. Of the 184 sample cases included in the 2015 ICIBI report, 127 cases were from rated “sources.” Using the National Intelligence Model’s “5x5x5” rating system, sources are classified on a rating scale. Of the 127 rated “sources,” 98 of them (77%) were rated as E4: “untested source, information not known personally to
8 Corporate Watch (2018) UK Border Regime: Immigration Raids Briefing October 2018, https://corporatewatch.org/uk-border-regime-immigration-raids-briefing-2018/. 9 Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (2015) An Inspection of How the Home Office Tackles Illegal Working October 2014-March 2015, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inspection-report-on-illegal-working-december-2015. 10 Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (2019) An inspection of the Home Office’s approach to Illegal Working, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/80 0641/An_inspection_of_the_Home_Office_s_approach_to_Illegal_Working_Published_May_2018.PD F.
11 Home Office (2017) Enforcement visits, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/58 4655/Enforcement-visits-v2.pdf. source, and cannot be corroborated.” 8 cases were classified as E3: “untested source, information not known personally to source, but corroborated.” A mere 10% of all sample cases were from B2 or B3 “tested” sources and none were classified as A. In the other 57 cases, the source was “not known, intelligence rating not shown or not clear on file.”12
24. Other examples from immigration raids on construction sites have been publicly reported. In July 2019, the BAM Kings Cross construction site13 was targeted for an immigration enforcement operation based on ‘intelligence.’ Many of those initially detained were eventually released.
25. At the Battersea Power Station construction site14, there was an operation orchestrated between the construction company, Sir Robert McAlpine and the Home Office. This was made clear from witnesses who shared that the workers were told to be on site by a specific time and then the gates were shut so that no-one was able to leave the welfare/ office area. the Home Office entered the premises.
26. When the ICE Team entered the premises, they separated those who were assumed to be White British from other mainly European national workers. They checked all these workers and detained at least 70 individuals mainly from Albania. EU citizens from Romania were also pulled to one side and checked separately from other workers.
27. One of the contractors commissioned by Sir Robert McAlpine held a meeting with its workers to apologise for the event, and acknowledged that workers had been treated wrongly, and were offered support and counselling for what they endured.
38. They then proceeded to successfully challenge the Bristol immigration raid. So far, the 6 cases where they have challenged the fines have all been successfully overturned by the Home Office. Each case needed a lot of work on it, as it required detailed statements. There was no pattern to the cases.
Key Asks
- A review of the hostile environment policy is urgently required. This review must include migrants’ rights and migrant-led organisations.
- We urgently ask for an end to No Recourse to Public Funds that continues to disproportionately impact people of colour and leaves migrants and their families in destitution.
12 Corporate Watch (2018), Ibid. 13 Construction Enquirer (2019) 29 arrests in immigration raid on BAM King’s Cross site, https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2019/07/15/29-arrests-in-immigration-raid-on-bam-kings-cross- site/. 14 Construction Enquirer (2019) , https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2019/08/09/immigration-raid- on-mcalpine-battersea-site/.
- More transparency from the Home Office on so-called ‘intelligence-led’ operations is urgently required. The Home Office to publicly demonstrate how they are non-discriminating and ‘racially profiling’ communities targeted.
- We urgently ask for an independent review of institutional racism in the Home Office.
For further information, please contact: Dorian Leatham, CEO [email protected]
Runnymede Trust Submission Text Initial Teacher Education (ITE) plays an important role in transforming school practices (Carter Review, 2015), including, therefore, in the transformation of teachers’ and schools’ understandings of racism and anti-racism. ITE remains, however, a neglected part of the social policy jigsaw in the eradication of racism and action to combat racial discrimination in schools. The Race Disparity Audit demonstrates continued differential patterns of education access and outcomes for pupils of BAME heritage (DfE, 2018), who make up approximately 1/3 of the school population in Primary and Secondary schools. The current Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated educational vulnerabilities because of poverty and employment insecurity resulting in unequal access to technology at home, food poverty and grief from loss of family members. (Reay, 2020).
It seems obvious therefore that the education of future teachers must contribute to breaking this cycle (NEU, 2020), but a focus on racial inequities is entirely absent in contemporary ITE policies from the Teachers’ Standards (DfE, 2011) to the new Core Content Framework (2019), which provides a ‘minimum entitlement’ for those training to become teachers in England. This de-racialisation in the removal of a concern about racism of ITE (Smith, 2013) and education more generally (Gillborn et al, 2016) is critical as it bestows institutional authorisation on what is and is not important to student teachers, ITE providers and the education profession as a whole. The lack of attention to racism in initial teacher education (ITE) policy for example, tells a student teacher that understanding racism is not as important as learning about say, behaviour management, even in cases when understanding an individual’s behaviour requires an understanding of racism. Consequences of the absence of value attributed to race within ITE are visible in the annual Newly Qualified Teacher Survey, undertaken by the DfE 6 months after student teachers have gained Qualified Teacher Status (not undertaken in 2020 because of the pandemic). The results for the 2019 cohort released in 2020, revealed yet again that far too few newly qualified teachers (53%) feel well prepared to teach pupils from “across all ethnic backgrounds” and only 39% felt confident to “teach EAL pupils” (the lowest score in the survey and an important consideration because of exclusionary language practices sometimes referred to as ethnolinguistic racism). Consequences are also visible in the unacceptable disparities in the percentage rates of men and women of different ethnicities onto ITE courses. For example, in 2019, the statistics from UCAS reveal an acceptance rate for white men into ITE courses of 66%, whereas for Black men it is only 35%. This is undoubtedly also a result of the removal of funding for ITE providers specifically targeting the recruitment and retention of student teachers from BAME backgrounds (Training and Development Agency -TDA was dissolved in 2010). These recruitment disparities (see the attached UCET presentation for more intersectional disparities) may also be a consequence of the cessation in 2010 of the process to confirm a legal duty placed on schools to record and report racist incidents. Our argument therefore is that the lack of explicit attention to race equality in ITE has meant negligence and a lack of consistent quality in the training of student teachers, who can play a transformational role in schools. Student teachers and initial teacher education providers need to learn racial literacy to understand the role of education and their racialised positions within the education system in becoming anti-racist pedagogues: for example, they must learn to critique the curriculum, understand institutional and systemic racism within education and ways of actioning change (e.g. Lander, 2014; Jones and Smith, 2018) . They must also know how to teach anti-racism in preventing and dealing with racist incidents.
Carter, A (2015). Carter review of initial teacher training (ITT). DfE Carter review of initial teacher training - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Gillborn, D., Rollock, N., Warmington, P., & Demack, S. (2016). Race, Racism and Education: inequality, resilience and reform in policy & practice. A Two-Year Research Project Funded by the Society for Educational Studies (SES) National Award 2013. Final Report to Funders. Jones H, Smith HJ. (2018) Teaching for Social Justice: Creating equity for pupils living in poverty and those from black and minority ethnic backgrounds. In: Cremin T; Burnett C, ed. Learning to Teach in the Primary School 4th Edition. Routledge. Lander, V. (2014) Initial Teacher Education: The Practice of Whiteness. In: Race R; Lander V Advancing Race and Ethnicity in Education. Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 93-110.
Reay, D. (2020). English Education in the Tome of Coronavirus. Forum, 62(3), 311-322. Smith, H.J. (2013) A critique of the teaching standards in England (1984–2012): discourses of equality and maintaining the status quo. Journal of Education Policy, 28(4), 427-448.
1
Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
National Education Union
March 2021 The National Education Union (NEU) stands up for the future of education by bringing together more than 450,000 teachers, lecturers, support staff and leaders working in maintained and independent schools and colleges across the UK. The NEU is the UK’s largest education union. We are an effective and powerful voice – championing everyone who works in education.
The NEU welcomes the opportunity to the shadow report for the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD).
The NEU believes that our education system should create a teaching and learning environment that allows all pupils to succeed and thrive. Education can play a key role in increasing equality, given the right education policies. The NEU has published an anti-racist framework for schools and colleges to build the capacity of education professionals to challenge racism.1
In 2020, racism was revealed like the ‘open’ quadrant of a Johari window – not just known to self but exposed to others. The value of Black lives has been the subject of persistent and painful news stories, not just about the killing of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor but also concerning the severity of inequalities, laid bare by the Covid pandemic e.g.: the shocking levels of poverty and child hunger; the higher number of deaths and illnesses of Black NHS staff, key workers and Black people caused by an unscrupulous virus layered onto existing inequalities. In education, the algorithm used in assessment highlighted the NEU’s long standing concerns about the unfairness built into an education system.
Race impacts young people’s experience of education in a way that can perpetuate inequalities. For example, the retention and progression of Black staff, an unrepresentative curriculum and racial harassment and discrimination can all contribute to the systemic exclusion of young Black people. This racism and racial inequality is often in addition to the barriers experienced as a result of living in poverty.
Child Poverty and Race
Some groups are significantly more likely to experience poverty, including Black, people migrants and families with no recourse to public funds (NRPF). Many children and families may experience multiple disadvantages simultaneously. A stark example of this was highlighted in the Children’s Commissioner Report on school exclusions: in 2009-10 a Black African-Caribbean boy with special education needs who receives free school meals was 168 times more likely to be permanently excluded than a white female counterpart not eligible for FSM and without special educational needs. There is also a misguided narrative being developed in several arenas about white working-class young people being ‘left behind’2. This is often posed as a riposte to the need for more attention to race equality and Black young people and represents a false division on race lines on matters about working
1 NEU, Anti-Racism Charter 2 Select Committees 2
class young people. The reality is that it is the 14% of pupils on FSM that have the lowest attainment rates3. Racism creates poverty and is a contributing factor to why Black families are trapped in poverty. The DFE pays insignificant attention to the role that racism and poverty play in affecting the educational experiences of working-class children.
Gilborn (2019)4 discusses how certain tabloids can use headlines such as ‘White boys worst performing ethnic group’ and ‘Betrayal of white pupils’. The civil servant below is prioritising white working- class students over Black working -class students instead of accepting the significant role that poverty and economic deprivation plays in harming all working-class young people and keeping them behind middle class young people:
“Why is it that White kids are doing so much worse? We have to tackle that as a society. For the future of Britain, it obviously matters more to tackle white underperformance just because there are more white people. You cannot have your dominant racial groups doing badly in school and expect to flourish as a country in the next generation and beyond”. Tim Leunig Chief analyst and senior ministerial Policy Adviser at the Dept for Education 2014 -17)
• 46% of children from Black groups are in poverty, compared with 26% of children in White British families. • For children from Bangladeshi and Pakistani families, child poverty rates are 60 and 54 per cent respectively. • Black people are overrepresented in precarious parts of the economy and are more likely to be in low-paid work. • Additionally, Black households are more likely to include larger families. This means government policies like the two-child limit and benefit cap disproportionately impact Black children and leave them worse-off.
Recommendations:
• The Government should tackle child poverty and adopt robust targets to reduce the impact of poverty on the lives of Black students. • The government should do more to progress the sustainable UN development goals for education and poverty. • The government should ensure that narratives on poverty and class are not posed in ways which suggest there is competition for attention on race lines.
UK Demographics for Teachers and Initial Teacher Education
Fourteen per-cent of the UK population is Black. The school and college workforce does not reflect the diversity of wider society or of the Black school population (approx. 33% in primary and secondary schools).5 Of headteachers, 4% are from a non-white group.6
3 David Gillborn (2019) 38 mins in to 42 mins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFMhoR8Xv48 4 IBID 5 GOV.UK, Academic Year 2019/20 Schools, pupils and their characteristics 6 GOV.UK, School teacher workforce, 18/02/2021 3
The lack of Black representation means that Black children and young people experience an ethnocentric curriculum and pedagogy and their sense of belonging and place may be jeopardised.
The Department for Education regularly gathers information on newly qualified teachers’ views of how well their Initial Teacher Education course prepared them to teach. This survey includes a question about students’ preparedness to teach pupils across all ethnic backgrounds and a question on their preparedness to teach pupils with English as an additional language (EAL). There is a long history of these questions being rated poorly across the sector (e.g., Lander, 20147), especially in comparison with other questions. The most recent analysis published in 2018 is from student teachers completing in 2017.8 This revealed that 53% of those completing the survey said their ITE course prepared them well to teach “across all ethnic backgrounds”. There are only three other survey questions rated more poorly, and these include the question with the worst rating of all – only 39% of those completing the survey said their course prepared them well to “teach EAL pupils”.
The preparation of student teachers in the UK in relation to race equality, language minoritisation and anti-racism practices must be improved, and we need a strategy to develop the capacity of the teaching profession to understand the cultural context of children’s lives and their communities and its impact on learning. 9. The current Teachers’ Standards include no reference at all to race, racism or ethnicity. There is now only one reference to pupils learning English as an additional language which appears in a long list.
Recommendations
• The Government must commit to review Initial Teacher Education to equip all trainee teachers with anti-racist strategies and tools, for the benefit of all students. • Improve recruitment, retention and progression. There is a need for a Government strategy to increase the number of new entrants to the teaching profession and to make it significantly more diverse. Such a strategy should include better incentives to train; increased pay for the profession; a reduction in workload; a programme aimed at existing school leaders to ensure they attract, encourage and support more Black educators into senior leadership position and an urgent recruitment campaign for Black staff, using where applicable, positive action provisions of the Equality Act 2010. • It is also important to restore the Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) (England) Regulations 2011 to their first iteration so that the impact of management decisions on the appointment, promotion and retention of workers of different ethnic backgrounds may be better monitored and accurately analysed. Educational establishments, as all public bodies, should be required to publish a workforce profile by reference to workers’ ethnicity and other protected characteristics and an analysis of the gender and ethnicity pay gap. Enforcement of the Equality Act also requires increased resourcing to make that possible.
7 Lander, V. (2014) Special Issue Race Ethnicity and Education: Initial teacher education: developments, dilemmas and challenges. Race Ethnicity and Education, 17(3), 299-303. 8 GOV.UK, Newly qualified teachers: annual survey 9 Smith, H.J. (2013). A critique of the teaching standards in England (1984–2012): discourses of equality and maintaining the status quo. Journal of Education Policy, 28(4), 427-448. Smith, H.J. (2016). Britishness as racist nativism: a case of the unnamed ‘other’, Journal of Education for Teaching, 42(3), 298-313. 4
Exclusion rates
Young people who are excluded from school are at far greater risk of a variety of negative outcomes, including poor educational attainment, prolonged periods out of employment; poor mental and physical health; involvement in crime; and homelessness (Parsons 2009; IPPR 2017)10. • There is evidence more than one third of Black Caribbean kids receive at least one exclusion between year 9 and year 11 - which obviously impacts on GCSEs. (Gilborn, 2019)11 • Black Caribbean pupils are permanently excluded from school at three times the rate of white British pupils. • Low educational attainment and progress is closely associated with economic disadvantage and there is a disproportionate number of Black children living in poverty. • Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children are permanently excluded at five times the rate of White British pupils.
“In the 2017 to 2018 school year, temporary and permanent exclusion rates were the highest among Irish Traveller (17.42% and 02.29% respectively) and Gypsy and Roma pupils (16.52% and 0.36%). The lowest rates were among pupils from the Chinese (0.50% and 0.01%) and Indian ethnic groups (0.75% and 0.027%). The exclusion rates for White British pupils (5.70% and 0.10%) were comparable to those from Mixed (5.89% and 0.16%) and Black (5.56% and 0.13%) backgrounds; but are notably higher among Black Caribbean (10.48% and 0.28%) and Mixed White/Black Caribbean (10.13% and 0.27%) pupils.”12
The 2019 Timpson review acknowledged that children from African-Caribbean, Irish Traveller and Gypsy/Roma backgrounds are three-to-four times more likely to be excluded from school than other groups but concluded the trends are complicated.13 The report did not attempt to engage with the issues around racism or to develop strategies to develop teachers‘ professional skills or access to research and knowledge.
NEU commissioned research on place and belonging which found that: 1) 1 in 4 young people feel they do not belong in school: a figure which is rising, 2) Children from disadvantaged communities are twice as likely as their more advantaged peers to feel they
10 Parsons, C. (2008) “Race relations legislation, ethnicity and disproportionality in school exclusions in England.” Cambridge Journal of Education 39 (3):401-419 IPPR (2017) Making the Difference: Breaking the link between school exclusion and social exclusion. London: Institute for Public Policy Research https://www.ippr.org/files/2017-10/making-the-difference-report-october-2017.pdf 11 Gillborn, David (2018) Exclusions Review 2018 -Evidence on the Exclusion of Black Caribbean and Mixed: White/Black Caribbean students. Centre for Research in Race and Education. University of Birmingham. 12 Upton, Mark, December 2020, LGIU “Ethnic Disparities in Education’ Local Government Information Unit. 13 The Timpson Review of School Exclusion, May 2019 5
don’t belong and four times more likely to be excluded, 3) Black Caribbean and special educational needs children are more likely to be excluded than their peers, 4) Young people who experience a sense of exclusion from school or society seek ‘belongingness’ elsewhere.14
Recommendations:
• The Government should develop a strategy to focus on what supports a sense of belonging in schools. • The Government should seek to reduce and prevent the number of Black children who are excluded through a joined-up strategy which includes a focus on mental health, motivation, identity and belonging. • The Government must restore the tools which schools need to prevent exclusions which include a broad curriculum, funding for pastoral systems and multi-disciplinary teams and local authority expertise on an anti-racist curriculum.
Fair Grade 202115
Students taking GCSEs, AS and A-levels in 2021 face a unique set of challenges. They missed out on several months of face-to-face learning in the previous academic year. The need for schools and colleges to implement wide-ranging health protection measures this year is impacting the ability of many to provide teaching as usual. And ongoing uncertainty around the development of the pandemic means it’s possible that some, many or all students may not be able to physically sit exams in summer 2021.
Furthermore, these challenges are not impacting equally on all students. Some were able to continue learning from home much more effectively than others during the spring and summer, with significant variation in access to laptops and quiet places to study. Some are facing significant ongoing disruption, including requirements to self-isolate, while others may be able to go into school or college with no further disruption.
This differential impact is likely to further disadvantage already disadvantaged students for a number of reasons. Students from lower socio-economic groups are less likely to have access to laptops or other devices to use at home, and less likely to have quiet spaces in which to study. Poorer communities, as well as those with significant Black populations, are also suffering disproportionately from Covid-19, meaning students in those communities are more likely to experience ongoing disruption to their learning.
Recommendations:
• The government, Ofqual and the awarding organisations find ways to recognise, as much as possible, the different impact the public health crisis has had on different students. • Measuring and valuing a wider set out outcomes, life skills and aptitudes that exam results alone
14 NEU, Place and Belonging 15 NEU- Fair Grade 2021 6
• Ensuring assessment arrangements in 2021 are fair and do not disadvantaged poor children and Black children. • Whilst there may be specific impacts felt by students due to the situation facing students in 2021, we would point to the longer-term inadequacies of the system as key contributors to any unfairness or inequalities experienced. As such, the best way to address these issues would be to review the qualifications system in England more widely, with a view to addressing the many flaws embedded within it.
Representation and Decolonising the Curriculum
Many reviews and reports have called for reform of the curriculum from the Swann report (1985)16 to the MacPherson Inquiry (1999)17 through to the Baroness Lawrence report (2020).18
The Windrush review of March 2020, recognised the importance of educating everyone on Black Histories, cultures, and achievements. It stated, “The Home Office should devise, implement and review a comprehensive learning and development programme which makes sure all its existing and new staff learn about the history of the UK and its relationship with the rest of the world, including Britain’s colonial history, the history of inward and outward migration and the history of black Britons.”19
The introduction of a ‘knowledge-based’ national curriculum, which came into force between 2014-16, removed a significant degree of flexibility from schools over curriculum design and has driven the development of ‘centralised planning’ coupled with prescriptive teaching approaches. The current approach to the national curriculum fails to reflect Black children’s histories, achievements and cultures. Black children should have an entitlement to a relevant education and white children should be entitled to a broad and balanced education which equips them for life and work in diverse, modern Britain. All children deserve to see themselves reflected in their books, schools and communities.
Benefits of a Reflective Curriculum
• Representation matters. The omissions around British Imperialism in the British education system, as well as lack of histories from around the world, is a problematic omission within the current approach. • Understanding the history of inequalities: Colonisation’s many legacies shape the world we live in today. British culture is deeply affected by ideas about empire without any understanding into what empire is/was. For example, domestic debates about migration would be completely different if they were informed by a shared understanding of empire; British people’s concept of themselves as superior and as a ‘civilising force’ is directly
16 The Swann Report 1985 17 The MacPherson Inquiry, February 1999 18 Lawrence Review, October 2020 19 Windrush Review, March 2020 7
challenged by an understanding of the extent of global exploitation that colonisation produced. • A sense of belonging for Black people: local Black people and the contribution of Black workers are not represented in education content or spaces, which renders those spaces less inclusive and representative for Black students. Debates about Black children are often stereotypical and stigmatising, and Black communities are often viewed in deficit terms. • Challenging racism: Colonisation was both predicated on, and reinforced, racism. If all British people learnt about colonisation, we would have a better collective understanding of how race is constructed and used. This would mean we would all be better equipped to challenge racism more effectively and contribute to a cohesive, diverse and plural society.
Recommendations:
• Remove from schools the negative constraints and pressures of the current accountability system and replace it with a system of school self-evaluation and a professional development strategy that is founded on collaborative school improvement, not competition between schools and between teachers. • Longer term, there is a need for a better statutory framework, with an assessment system that supports learners and encourages depth of learning - not a focus on test- based accountability. • A review of the curriculum to ensure Black history, culture and achievement is properly reflected.
NICRE & ALL PARTY GROUP ON ETHNIC MINORITY COMMUNITY JOINT SUBMISSION TO
NI AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
ON
“EXPERIENCE OF MINORITY ETHNIC AND MIGRANT PEOPLE IN NORTHERN IRELAND INQUIRY”
May 2021
Introduction
NICRE is a black led membership based organization. It is currently had 18 ethnic minority and migrant organizations as well as individuals’ members. NICRE was set up to continue the policy work of the previous NICEM (NI Council for Ethnic Minority) which was under voluntary administration in November 2016. The former Executive Director, Dr Patrick Yu OBE, is now the Secretary of NICRE, was the first group to give evidence before the NI Affairs Committee on Hate Crime in 2003. It is long overdue to look at the experience of ethnic minority and migrant community in Northern Ireland.
The All Party Group on Ethnic Minority Community was set up in 2007 to look at issues and concerns facing by the BME and migrant community. It has been sponsored a number of Assembly Motion Debate such as Racial Equality Strategy on 3 July 20071, 26 May 20092 and more recently the Chair of the APG, Dr Steve Aiken MLA OBE, sponsored the Private Member’s Bill on Hate Crime.
We welcome the inquiry on the experience of minority ethnic and migrant people in Northern Ireland. It is long overdue. At the same time, we need to look at the local, national and regional politics. The recent resignation of both the Democratic Unionist Party as Leader and the First Minister, Arlene Foster, will have repercussions in the Northern Ireland Assembly, the UK Parliament as well as other regional institutions. The Brexit and the Irish Sea border are opposed by the two unionist political party and more alarming by the Loyalist paramilitary groups. The Republicans paramilitary group acts to set bomb in Derry/Londonderry. These could contribute to the destabilize our society.
Experience of ethnic minority and migrant people living in Northern Ireland
1. Institutional and Structural Racism Disparities do persist. Racism and discrimination remain a factor in shaping people’s life outcomes, and the adherent attitudes continues in our society’s institution and increasingly online. Institutional and Structural Racism continue to add the experience of BME and migrant people living in Northern Ireland. The McPherson Report defines Institutional Racism as
“The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional services to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin which can be seen or detected in processes; attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness, and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.”
(McPherson Report 1999)
1file:///Users/patrickyu/Dropbox/NI%20Assembly/Motion%20Debate/Racial%20Equality%20Strategy%20The%20Assembly%20 -%20Official%20Report%2003:072007.html 2 http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/record/reports2008/090526.htm#a11 The government evidence confirms that institutional racism does not existing is frankly disturbing. We challenge the Race and Ethnic Disparities Commission in its recent published Report which forced Tony Sewell to resign. We also asked in particular Samir Shah to resign immediately as he and Tony Sewell were the former Chair of Black Think-Tank Runnymede Trust over two decades. We also ask the entire Commission to resign who could no longer represent ethnic people. Dr Halima Begum, the Chief Executive of Runnymede Trust questioned the suitability of the two formers Chair.
The Commission continuously uses rhetoric which pits the white working class against ethnic minorities, suggesting that for the white working class the ‘door may be only half open’. This Commission lost the confidence of ethnic minority communities when Tony Sewell was appointed to lead it, a figure who had previously asserted that institutional racism does not exist, and whose commitment to the wider equality’s agenda was questionable.
Sewell report is historically illiterate3. And though our education on these issues may indeed, have been what David Olusoga condemns as “Wilberforce-centric”, it was nevertheless, morally admirable and effective so that, even in the 1960s, most schoolchildren believed that slavery was an obscenity on a par with the Holocaust, that colonialism had a dubious legacy and that the empire was a jingoistic joke.
By denying the evidence of institutional racism and tinkering with issues like unconscious bias training and the use of the term ‘BAME’, the government have insulted not only every ethnic minority in this country – the very people who continue to experience racism on a daily basis – but also the vast majority of the UK population that recognize racism is a problem and expect our government, whether it is Central or our Regional NI, to contribute to eradicating it.
As No 10’s special adviser for civil society, Samuel Kasumu, resigned recently. He first attempted to resign earlier this year. At that point a leaked letter to the prime minister shows Kasumu raised concerns about the conduct of Kemi Badenoch, the equalities minister, after she publicly criticized black journalist on social media.
2. Experiences of ethnic minority and migrant people living in Northern Ireland The UN Committee on Racial Discrimination (CERD) on 26th August 2016 published the Conclusion observation on UK periodic reports4. Mr. Patrick Yu, the former Executive Director of NICEM addressed to the CERD members with dialogue about his concerns. This crucial roles as an NGOs to voice out the most vulnerable groups in our society such as asylum seekers and refugees, Irish Travellers, as well as intersection of gender and race. We raise it in my oral statement and additional information in post oral statement which reflects our members’ concern, in particular
3 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/02/sewell-race-report-historical-young-people-britain 2 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/CERD_C_GBR_CO_21-23_24985_E.pdf 3 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/PY-Oral-Statement-at-CERD-on-3-August-2016.pdf
Bronko Bronko (Women Refugee Group), Irish Travellers and Gypsy Network and BME Women’s Network.
He said that “Regrettably our Northern Ireland Executive Government failed to supply all basic data and information under Article 2 to 7 of the Convention except what measures they have been introduced in this report. Without basic information and data set, we cannot benchmark the progress of the Convention in Northern Ireland and indeed across the whole United Kingdom or do we know whether these measures have any impacts? How on earth ethnic minorities could enjoy the progressive realization of rights, if no benchmark data collected.”5
Para. 13 “…. the Committee expresses concern that data are neither collected systematically in all fields where racial discrimination exists, nor uniformly across the State party’s jurisdiction, most notably in Northern Ireland…. It is also concerned at the lack of systematic and effective use of data to develop policies to tackle racial discrimination... The Committee also notes the concern that a shift of the State party’s policies away from special measures that are targeted specifically towards vulnerable groups may, in the present circumstances, exacerbate the existing inequalities on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin (art. 2).”
The Committee further requested the UK government in Para. 14 “Given the importance of collecting accurate and updated disaggregated data to develop effective policies to combat racial discrimination and to monitor the impact of measures taken, the Committee recommends that the State party ensure that the governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales, the British Overseas Territories and the Crown dependencies systematically collect and publish disaggregated data on the enjoyment of rights by members of ethnic minorities in all fields of life, and to include such information in the next periodic report. The Committee also recommends that the State party: • Carefully review the impact of existing policies and programmes aimed at promoting integration so as to ensure that they do not constitute indirect discrimination; • Consider adopting a detailed action plan with concrete targets, monitoring mechanisms and sufficient resources, including temporary special measures, to secure the adequate advancement of certain ethnic groups to ensure that persons belonging to such groups are able to enjoy their rights on an equal footing, taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 32 (2009) on the meaning and scope of special measures in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination”
3. Challenges that ethnic minority and migrant people living in Northern Ireland
When I was before this Committee in 2004 on Hate Crime Inquiry6. NICEM was subsequently published its first hate crime report “The Next Stephen Lawrence? Racist Violence and Criminal Justice in NI” in June 2006.7 The author, Dr Robbie
6 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmniaf/548/54804.htm 7 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/the-next-Stephen-report.pdf McVeigh used one of the two hundred plus cases supported by NICEM between 2003-2006 and interviewed the couple.
“In September my husband returned from Nigeria. He had gone over there because there had been a bereavement in his family. On his return home he was immediately greeted with racist abuse from local youths in the area shouting at him and taunting him. This was very difficult for my husband as it was in stark contrast to his experience in Nigeria where he was treated with respect. Within months of his return from Nigeria my husband was diagnosed with high blood pressure and diabetes. My husband attributed the onset of these conditions to the intimidation and persistent attacks on our home and us. My husband’s mental state was very poor and he was afraid that he would snap and he decided that he could no longer remain in Northern Ireland. He felt that our complaints to the police were not being taken seriously. They could not guarantee the safety of our family. My husband was physically assaulted by youths throwing stones and water balloons on numerous occasions and he did not want to remain to be the next Stephen Lawrence.” (NICEM client)
“I think that that’s what will probably happen, somebody is going to get killed. Racist harassment is going to happen until there’s somebody from the ethnic minorities that does get killed and then they will start pushing for new laws and trying to do something - but as we all know, that is going to be too late….” (NICEM client)8
Nothing has been changed since the Next Stephen Report and Race and Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland Report: Towards a Blueprint for the Eradication of Racism from the CJSNI in January 2013. 9 In our submission10 to the UN Committee on Racial Discrimination, we highlighted “Disturbingly, there is a paramilitary component to racist hate crime in NI, with both the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee acknowledging ‘significant loyalist paramilitary involvement in racist violence’”11.
CERD in Para. 15 stated that:
“The Committee is seriously concerned at the sharp increase in the number of racist hate crimes especially in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in the weeks prior to and following the referendum on the membership of the European Union held on 23 June 2016. In particular, the Committee is deeply concerned that the referendum campaign was marked by divisive, anti-immigrant and xenophobic rhetoric, and that many politicians and prominent political figures not only failed to condemn it, but also created and entrenched prejudices, thereby emboldening individuals to carry out acts of intimidation and hate towards ethnic or ethno-religious minority communities and people who are visibly different. The Committee remains concerned that despite the recent increase in the reporting of hate crimes, the problem of underreporting persists, and the gap between reported cases and successful prosecution remains significant. As a result, a large number of racist hate crimes seem to go unpunished. It also remains concerned at the negative portrayal of ethnic or ethno-religious
8 Ibid. p.7 9 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Race_and_Criminal_Justice_2013.pdf 10 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/NICEM-CERD-Alternative-Report-2016-Edit.pdf
11 Committee for Justice, ‘Report on the Committee’s Inquiry in the Criminal Justice Services Available to Witnesses and Victims of Crime in Northern Ireland’ (2012), para.683
minority communities, immigrants, asylum-seekers and refugees by the media in the State party, particularly in the aftermath of terrorist attacks, as well as the rise of racist hate speech on the Internet. Notwithstanding these challenges, the Committee regrets that the State party continues to maintain its interpretative declaration on article 4 of the Convention (arts. 2, 4 and 6).”
In Para. 16 it recommends the followings:
“(a) Investigate all reported acts of racist hate crimes, prosecute and punish the perpetrators with sanctions commensurate with the gravity of the offence, and provide effective remedies to victims;
(b) Systematically collect disaggregated data on hate crimes, ensure that measures to combat racist hate crimes are developed with the meaningful participation of affected groups, and undertake a thorough impact assessment of the measures adopted to ensure their continued effectiveness;
(c) Adopt concrete measures, in consultation with affected groups, to increase the reporting of racist hate crimes by ensuring that the reporting mechanism is transparent and accessible, and that victims have trust in the police and the justice system;
(d) Taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 35 (2013) on combating racist hate speech, adopt comprehensive measures to combat racist hate speech and xenophobic political discourse, including on the Internet, particularly with regard to the application of appropriate sanctions, and ensure that public officials not only refrain from such speech but also formally reject hate speech and condemn the hateful ideas expressed so as to promote a culture of tolerance and respect;
(e) Take effective measures to combat racist media coverage, taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 35 (2013) on combating racist hate speech, and ensure that such cases are thoroughly investigated and, where appropriate, sanctions are imposed. “
The European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) of the Council of Europe adopted ECRI Policy Recommendation No. 11 on Combating Racism and racial discrimination in Policing on 29th June 2007. It recommends the followings: 1. As concerns racial profiling; 2. As concerns all forms of racial discrimination and racially-motivated misconduct by the police; 3. As concerns the role of the police in combating racist offences and monitoring racist incidents; and 4. As concerns relations between the police and members of minority groups.12
There are other issues such as Black Lives Matters in which we are the only region that Police Service Northern Ireland used COVID law to prosecute organizers and peaceful demonstrators who wore facemask with social distance.
4. The “discriminatory” nature of hate crime The Chair of the All Party Group on Ethnic Minority Community, Dr Steve Aiken MLA OBE, has sponsored the Private Member’s Bill on Hate Crime in February 2020. In
12 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/First-decade-fighting-against-racism-speech.pdf his Irish News13 interviews he warned the Justice Minister Naomi Long MLA in her plan to introduce legal protection on hate crime is too late until next Assembly which have already been outpaced by extensions to legislation in England and Wales. The Justice Minister has received a comprehensive report from Judge Desmond Marrinan who chaired the Independence Review on Hate Crime in last December. However, the Law Commission in England and Wales published their consultation paper on the Hate Crime Final Paper in September 2020 which is much more progressive than that proposed by Judge Marrinan.
What is the proposed purpose or policy objective? The purpose is to consolidate the existing laws on hate crime in England, Wales and Scotland which do not apply to Northern Ireland as well as the EU Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, 28 November 2008 in order to fulfil the UK Government obligations under EU Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as international human rights standards which was identified in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement and the subsequent signed Brexit Agreement and the annexes to Northern Ireland.
We propose to use the “group selection” model also known as the ‘discriminatory model’. An offender must have “selected” his or her victim because of victim’s protected group characteristics. Evidence of the offender’s prejudiced or bias motivation is not required. Instead, it is considered that, by virtue of specifically targeting a victim because of the victim’s identity characteristics, the offender has evinced prejudice or bias towards that individual. For example, the Criminal Code in Illinois read as follows:
“Sec. 12-7.1. Hate crime
(a) A person commits hate crime when, by reason of the actual or perceived race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability, or national origin of another individuals, regardless of the existence of any other motivating factor or factors, he commits assault, battery, aggravated assault, misdemeanour theft, criminal trespass to residence, misdemeanour criminal damage to property, criminal trespass to vehicle, criminal trespass to real property, mob action, disorderly conduct, harassment by telephone, or harassment through electronic communication…”14
In our Briefing Paper: The Reform of Hate Crime Law in NI- Hate Speech & Negationism15 that based on the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia (Framework Decision).16 The uniformity of the Union law requires Member States to ensure that hate speech with intentional conduct is punishable when directed against
13 https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2021/02/18/news/-bring-in-race-hate-crime-before-it-is-too-late--- assembly-members-urge-justice-minister-naomi-long-2227302/ 14 France, Bulgaria and Denmark use a version of the discriminatory selection model: see OSCE, Hate Crime Laws – A Practical Guide (Warsaw: OSCE, 2009). 15 https://nicre.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/The-Reform-of-Hate-Crime-Law-in-NI-Part-II-Final.pdf 16 Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, 28 November 2008. a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin: • Publicly inciting to violence or hatred, including by public dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or material; • Publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivializing ! Crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as defined in Article 6, 7 and 8 of the Statue of the International Criminal Court (ICC) or ! The crimes defined in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal appended to the London Agreement of 8 August 1945.
According to the international best practice from Article 20 of the International Covenant Civil and Political Rights and Article 4 of the International Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination as well as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe provides a comprehensive analysis which identifies issues and concerns to reform the current law that based on the legal case study. We endorse his approach and form the basis to reform the hate crime law in the context of incitement to violence and hatred whether it is a speech or a behaviour.
5. Steps UK Government can take to help ensure effective racial equality legislation in Northern Ireland In my oral statement at the UN CERD I stated that: “Devolution in the UK created a national Parliament in Scotland, a national Assembly in Wales and a national Assembly in Northern Ireland. This process transferred, and continues to transfer, varying levels of power from the UK Parliament to the 4 nations of the devolved administration. This complex transfer of power disguise the United Kingdom as a whole in terms of law, policy and practice under the Convention obligation for full implementation to all the devolved governments.”
We urge the CERD as the matters of urgency to ask the 4 nations of the UK government in the future report to provide information on all areas of devolved policy and good practice within their jurisdiction in order to compile with the Reporting mechanism of the Convention.
In Para. 7 about Implementation of the Convention, CERD said that:
“The Committee notes that the State party maintains its position that there is no obligation to incorporate the Convention into domestic law. It reiterates its concern that the provisions of the Convention have not been given full effect in the State party and throughout the overseas territories and Crown dependencies. In particular, it expresses concern that several provisions of the Equality Act 2010 have not yet been brought into legal effect, including Section 9(5)(a) on caste-based discrimination and Section 14 on dual discrimination. It also reiterates its concern that the Equality Act 2010 does not apply to Northern Ireland, where comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation has yet to be adopted (arts. 1 and 2).”
It further state that:
“The Committee recommends that the State party ensure that the principles and the provisions of the Convention are directly and fully applicable under domestic law in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, as well as the overseas territories and Crown dependencies. In particular, the State party should:
(a) Invoke Section 9(5)(a) of the Equality Act 2010 without further delay to ensure that caste- based discrimination is explicitly prohibited under law and that victims of this form of discrimination have access to effective remedies, taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 29 (2002) on descent;
(b) Taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 25 (2000) on gender- related dimensions of racial discrimination, ensure that equality legislation in all jurisdictions of the State party provide effective protection to victims of dual or multiple discrimination, including, in the case of England, Scotland and Wales, by bringing into force Section14 of the Equality Act2010 on dual discrimination; (c) Ensure that the authorities of Northern Ireland act without further delay to adopt comprehensive legislation prohibiting racial discrimination in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.”
Therefore, we urge the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, as a matter of urgency, to ensure the UK Government introduces the race law to Northern Ireland that mirrors the Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997.
6. Four dimensions of racism in Northern Ireland Based on the experience in Northern Ireland, racism can be seen to operate in our society in four dimensions: 1. denigratory stereotyping, hatred and violence; 2. a cycle of disadvantage; and 3. the negation and even obliteration of culture, religion or language; 4. exclude, expel or repatriate17. I use my speech ten years ago on four dimensions of racism to conclude this submission.
Denigratory stereotyping, hatred and violence It is not about objective characteristics, but about relationships of domination and subordination. To put it into the local political context it is the territorial issue. It is the hatred of the “Other” in defense of “Self”. It was perpetrated and legitimated through images of the “Other” as inferior, abhorrent, even sub-human. The “Yellow People” leaflet distributed in Dongell Pass is a good example. I quote the followings from the leaflet:
“These immigrants occupy a vast amount of our houses stopping any Protestant families moving in that would be more beneficial for the betterment of our community in all aspects of community life. The overwhelming mass of Chinese immigrants in Donegall Pass are driving our youth to move out of the area where they were reared, because they see no future for them in the Chinatown/Donegall Pass. The Chinese only take form our community and provide nothing for it. These foreign immigrants have no sense of Christian values or decency and have no respect at all for our community.
I firmly believe that it is our duty to defend our community and our Protestant way of life within it. The influx of the yellow people into Donegall
17 Patrick Yu, First Decade Fighting Against Racism, speech at NICEM 10th Anniversary, 25th May 2007. Pass has done more damage than 35 years of the IRA’s recent campaign of republican propaganda and violence waged against the Protestant community of Donegall Pass……...”18
This view is not just the loyalist paramilitary UVF who made and distribute the leaflets. It is also share by majority local community based on false information. The White Nationalist Party leaflet described asylum seekers as bogus and also shared the same by the local majority.
Another good example is the recent arrival of migrant workers from Portugal, Eastern Europe EU countries and overseas nurses (predominant from Philippine) in our health care system, both public and private. The fear of outsiders taking insiders’ jobs means that the local people need to defense themselves, not just the jobs but also their cultures and identities. As a result, petrol bomb and pipe bomb were thrown into houses of migrants, racist attacks have been widely reported in those areas where they are working and living.
Interestingly the post-September 11 not only does it have more attacks against Muslim alike (local people have no distinction between Sikh and Muslim who wear turban. It also transforms the international conflicts between Palestine and Israel into local sectarian politics. Therefore, it is not surprising that the loyalist areas display the Israel flag and the republican areas display Palestine flag to show their support. More interestingly Combat 18, the extreme UK right wings group disassociate with the UDA and UFF as the result of the Israel flag.
A cycle of disadvantage Polices, through immigration law, aimed at ensuring that newcomers remain in such jobs are justified and apparently legitimated by characterizing workers as inferior, not fit for any other work or preferring to remain as they are. In general, migrant workers are working in an insecure employment with low pay in Northern Ireland.
On the other hand, the long settled Chinese community works exclusively in catering business and the same Asian community works also exclusively in catering and shops or as traders to sell goods. These are typical economic segregation. At the same time, we have the highest unemployment rate in Northern Ireland within the Travellers community.
Racism as assimilation The issue of access to the basic public services due to language, cultural or religious barriers in addition to unfamiliar to the local system create a much disadvantage position in our society. This links, intrinsically, to the wider issue of institutional racism as the McPherson Report defined as:
“The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin which can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantages minority ethnic people.”
Racism is insensitive to diversity between ethnic groups. Thus, it is not uncommon to refer to “ethnic minorities” as a homogeneous group, without noting the differences between those
18 See the then Leader David Ervine of PUP condemns the leaflets. groups. The assumption of an undifferentiated “Other” assumes that a group has a fixed essence, and that individuals can be wholly defined by their membership of their group. This in turn makes it easy to stereotype individuals, often linking their group identity to denigratory ascriptions. Such essentialism creates a rigid and static view of culture, described from the outside, ignoring the dynamic evolution of culture and religion.
In addition, while membership of a cultural or religious group is an important aspect of people’s lives, many people belong to several different overlapping and intersecting groups. It is therefore more appropriate to speak, not of racism but of multiple racism (disabled Muslim women).
Racism as exclusion This most usually takes the form of immigration controls, which frequently impact most heavily on people from the Third World. Ironically, strict immigration control is often justified as the necessary complement to “good race relations at home”. Race discrimination legislation in Great Britain was coincident with the imposition of stricter immigration control, and it may be no accident that the EU Race Equality Directive came soon after the agreed imposition of immigration control around “Fortress Europe”. Therefore, it is not uncommon in the UK immigration law to invoke citizenship exception to legitimate the treatment of aliens as second-class people, often with racist implications.
A similar manifestation is in the current attitudes in Great Britain, to certain extent in Northern Ireland, to asylum seekers. Those seeking refuge in Great Britain and end up in Northern Ireland for political reasons, and therefore not viewed as performing an economically useful role and in fact they are banned from work, are characterized as bogus, cream off our benefit system, manipulative and unwelcome intruders.
Address Racism: racism is the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms In order to address racism, we need to shift the focus from non-discrimination to human rights protection and the equality principles under human rights. It is about mainstreaming race into government policy and practice and the positive duty of the state to ensure that fundamental rights are guaranteed without discrimination and distinction. It is also the use of affirmative action to redress the inequality of the past and the social institutions, as well as disadvantage position of ethnic minorities in our society. It is also the recognition, acceptance and accommodating social and cultural differences of minority ethnic people in our society.
Firstly, we need to break the cycle of disadvantage of ethnic minority. It must be asymmetric and targets disadvantage of groups. It should place the importance of the equality of result, rather than the usual equality of opportunity. Equally important is to equalising capability of minority ethnic people in order to have more power of influence and the issue of equitable redistribution of resources.
Secondly, we need to promote dignity and worth for all. Dignity means equal recognition at law as human beings. There is no superiority or inferiority. It is about dignity and worth for all. It is never be acceptable to denigrate the dignity of any individual. Dignity does not connote an isolated, sovereign individual; but a relationship between individual and community. It is a relationship that resolves conflicts within the community and to the wider extent to the society. Dignity also addresses the inequality of power and status in our social institution. Reverse discrimination does not infringe dignity but creates a social condition to achieve dignity for all.
Thirdly it is the affirmation of community identity in order to promote wider diversity in our society. There is no abstract and universal individual. Individuals partly constituted by group membership no matter what community background constituted. The group membership maximises positive consequences of social capital, namely mutual support, cooperation, trust and institutional effectiveness. It also minimises negative manifestations of sectarianism, ethnocentrism and corruption. A group rights approach can and should solve racism and the conflicts in our society in a much more imaginative way.
The last but not the least is to be facilitating full participation in society. This is the only meaningful means to compensate for the absence of political power or the democratic deficit in our society. Participation, therefore, is an indicator in achieving equality. Or put it into another way: equality principle is to promote wider participation for those disadvantage groups in our society.
If you have queries about this submission, please contact Mr Patrick Yu Secretary of trustees NICRE 7 Rugby Road Belfast BT7 1PS
or his mobile at 07710 767235.
No More Exclusions www.nomoreexclusions.com Email: [email protected] Twitter: @NExclusions
This submission has been produced by No More Exclusions (NME), an abolitionist coalition grassroots movement in education. We draw upon academic research, empirical research conducted by NME and media reports detailing the harmful impacts of school exclusion. NME focuses on combating racial inequalities in education – our work is about addressing institutional racism, negative stereotyping and low teacher expectations as well as examining the wider structures and practices that create the context within which the removal of education as a fundamental right is possible in the twenty-first century. We exist to name, challenge and tackle the racial disparities that are reproduced in school exclusion statistics year on year.
In the four years since the last Runnymede CERD review, DfE statistics demonstrate that school exclusions for racialised children and young people continue to increase1. Additionally, research since 2016 continues to show that fixed-term and/or permanent exclusion from school is a damaging and traumatic process2. Done and Knowler3 suggest that the recent proliferation of exclusionary practices, both legal and illegal, are a function of the tension between neoliberal policy imperatives and a failure to tackle the overrepresentation of Black pupils in school exclusion data. In this policy context, specific pupils are more likely to encounter exclusionary practices, in addition to poorly timed interventions and crisis support, there is no more evidence for this than in the cases of Jaden Moodie and Tashaun Aird – two children murdered following exclusion from school .
We argue that, despite this evidence, exclusion and its role in educational failure have been largely ignored by the current government in spite of the promises of the Timpson Review4. In our view, the only way to combat the racial injustices experienced by pupils and their families in education, ensuring that all children are kept safe in the long term, is to abolish school exclusions. We are calling for an immediate moratorium on all exclusions during the pandemic.
Research Evidence
In evidence presented to the Timpson Review, 78% of permanent exclusions issued were to children classified as having ‘special educational needs’, being disadvantaged (children deemed in need or eligible for free school meals) and of ‘Black Caribbean’ or ‘Mixed White and Black Caribbean’ ethnicity; boys were and are also more likely to be excluded, but this depends on the presence of these characteristics5. Similar correlations have been posited in the case of ‘off‐rolling’, where children are illegally excluded from school6 7
The disproportionate exclusion of Black Caribbean pupils is not new. Over 50 years ago, Coard8 detailed how Black children were unfairly and inappropriately placed in schools for the ‘Educationally Sub-Normal’ (ESN) owing to low teacher expectations, lack of cultural awareness, an unsuitable curriculum and racist assessment procedures. Although ESN schools no longer exist, a priority review by the Department for Education and Skills9 identified the presence of institutional racism in English schools, particularly concerning the use of exclusion. The review made the following conclusion: “left to its own devices, the system will conclude that Every Child Matters, but that Black children’s failure and social exclusion is to be expected – they matter a little bit less”10
Recent DfE1 statistics show that Black Caribbean and Gypsy/Roma pupils are still excluded at a disproportionate rate compared to their White British peers. According to Done and Knowler3, statistical modelling can now enable the identification of ‘exceptional’ movements by school and pupil category, revealing that pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are disproportionately removed from school rolls6. Disadvantaged pupils are similarly over-represented as a sub-category7. Evidence provided by local authorities to the Office of the School Adjudicator11 reports increases in ‘elective’ home education of up to 70% between 2016 and 2017 and, anecdotally, many cases are held to be ‘inappropriate’ responses to pressure from schools. Ofsted12 is particularly concerned that 5,800 pupils with SEND left school between Years 10 and 11 (January 2017 to January 2018) and states that a significant proportion ‘may have been off rolled’; of the 19,000 pupils (4% of all Year 10 pupils) who left school during this period, 9,700 remain unaccounted for7.
Consequences of Exclusion
Perera13 has illustrated the association between exclusion from school and/or attendance of a PRU and involvement in youth violence. She argues that neoliberal education reforms, the securitisation of schooling and austerity policies have “created an educational underclass, whose only prospect is a downward spiral from school exclusion, to youth detention and ultimately prison”14.This is particularly concerning as Black Caribbean boys are overrepresented in both exclusion and PRU attendance figures. Further, exclusion from school is shown to have implications for mental health. Ford and colleagues15 found that poor mental health can simultaneously contribute to and arise from exclusion from school. Ford claims that alternative behaviour management methods would have a positive influence on the mental health and educational outcomes of children and young people16. In addition, a review into safeguarding and criminal exploitation found that of the 21 young people in their sample who had died or experienced serious harm, 17 had been permanently excluded from school17.
COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought to the fore concerns about so-called ‘learning loss’18 19. While we welcome this new discourse, it adds to our frustrations. Young people from racialised groups have, for many years, been denied their human right to an education through the use of exclusion from school, with some pupils being forced out of the school environment for months and even years20 21.While the COVID-19 pandemic has been a traumatic time for much of the population, The Health Foundation22 found that the key worker sector is disproportionately occupied by individuals from Black and Minority Ethnic groups, particularly in London. When such findings are combined with the fact that Black and Minority Ethnic groups are between 10% and 50% more likely to die with COVID-19 compared to White British groups23 it becomes apparent that there will be an increased need to consider the trauma and stress young people from these ethnic groups have experienced post-lockdown.
Research conducted by NME24 demonstrated that our concerns are not unfounded. We collated Freedom of Information data gathered from 39 primary schools and 34 secondary schools across England, intended to investigate the use of official and internal exclusions before, during and immediately after the first national lockdown. An astounding 13,268 exclusions were issued between September 2019 and November 2020. During the first national lockdown, the number of pupils being excluded from school dropped significantly; however, it did not drop to zero within our secondary schools. Further, our research found that the number of exclusions in both primary and secondary schools was quick to rise again between the return to school in September 2020 and mid-November 2020. From the primary schools in our sample, 1 permanent exclusion and 26 fixed-term exclusions were issued
2 within the first two months of returning to school. For secondary schools, there were 728 fixed-term exclusions and 4 permanent exclusions being issued during this period. The data also revealed that 2,896 ‘internal exclusions’ were issued during this time within the 34 secondary schools in our sample. Our research mirrored official statistics in finding that children from marginalised backgrounds are more likely to be excluded: among others, frequently excluded are Black and brown children; those eligible for free school meals; and children on the SEN register. Moreover, these are just the officially reported figures, and do not reflect the number of children who may have been ‘off rolled’ during this period.
Recommendations
In light of the concerns outlined above we call on the government to:
Issue an immediate moratorium of permanent and fixed-term school exclusions while the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to impact education. We argue that exclusion is a safeguarding issue - not a disciplinary one. The cases of Tashaun Aird and Jaden Moodie clearly illustrate the damaging effects of school exclusion at any time, not to mention in the midst of a pandemic, when health, social care and welfare services are already pushing up against their limits.
Provide more resources for pastoral support in schools so that exclusion is not relied upon as a strategy for supporting children. This means ensuring that school leaders have capacity to support their staff, and that SENCOs can galvanise services around pupils who have intersectional experience of complex factors.
Review approaches to managing ‘persistent disruptive’ behaviours. Year on year this is shown to be the reason for the majority of exclusions, suggesting that the reliance on behaviourist approaches, as advocated for by Gavin Williamson25, ultimately leads to the further marginalisation of young people.
Prioritise and listen to the voices of young people, involving them in policy making around pastoral approaches and inclusive school environments. We recommend that organisations such a Pupil Power, Body Count and NME are consulted to ensure that young people contribute to the writing of disciplinary policies that impact their lives. Additional evidence can be found in Race and Racism in English Secondary Schools26 and the Young and Black Report27 both of which identify school policies as institutionally racist and support the need for pupils to be involved in shaping school policy.
NME strongly agrees with Dr Halima Begum from the Runnymede Trust in calling for an urgent moratorium on school exclusions during the pandemic.
1 DfE (2020) ‘Permanent and fixed-period exclusions in England: 2018 to 2019’. Online at: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/permanent-and-fixed-period- exclusions-in-england
2 Daniels, H., Thompson, I., Porter, J., Tawell, A., and Emery, H. (2020). ‘School exclusion risks after COVID-19’. Online at: http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/research/excluded-lives/
3
3 Done, E.J. and Knowler H. (2020). ‘Painful invisibilities: Roll management or “off-rolling” and professional identity’. British Education Research Journal 46(3): 516–531.
4 DfE. (2019). Timpson Review of School Exclusion. Online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79 9979/Timpson_review_of_school_exclusion.pdf
5 DfE. (2019). Timpson Review of School Exclusion. Online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/79 9979/Timpson_review_of_school_exclusion.pdf p.9-10
6 Ofsted (2018) ‘Off-rolling’: Using data to see a fuller picture. Online at: https://educationinspection.blog.gov.uk/2018/06/26/’off-rolling’-using-data-to-see-a-fuller-picture/
7 Ofsted. (2019). ’The annual report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2017 / 2018’. Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ofsted-annual-report- 201718-education-childrens-services-and-skills p.50
8 Coard, B. (1971). How the West Indian child is made educationally subnormal in the British School System. London: New Beacon Books
9 DfES. (2006). Getting it. Getting it Right. Online at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8656/
10 DfES. (2006). Getting it. Getting it Right. Online at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8656/ p.16
11 Office of the Schools Adjudicator [OSA]. (2017). Office of the Schools Adjudicator annual report: September 2016 to August 2017. London. Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/annual- report-of-the-chief-schools-adjudicator-for-england–3 p.35
12 Ofsted. (2019). ’The annual report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2017 / 2018’. Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ofsted- annual-report-201718-education-childrens-services-and-skills p.53
13 Perera, J. (2020). ‘How Black working class youth are criminalised and excluded in the English school system: a London case study’. London: Institute of Race Relations.
14 Perera, J. (2020). ‘How Black working class youth are criminalised and excluded in the English school system: a London case study’. London: Institute of Race Relations. P.3
15 Ford, T., Parker, C., Salim, J., Goodman, R., Logan, S. and Henley, W. (2018). ‘The relationship between exclusion from school and mental health: A secondary analysis of the British Child and Adolescent Mental Health Surveys 2004 and 2007’. Psychological Medicine 48(4): 629–664
16 University of Exeter. (2017). ‘Exclusion from school can trigger long-term psychiatric illness’. Online at: https://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_595920_en.html
17 Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel (2020) ‘It was hard to escape: safeguarding children at risk of criminal exploitation’. Online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/87 0035/Safeguarding_children_at_risk_from_criminal_exploitation_review.pdf
18 Ofsted. (2020). ‘COVID-19 series: briefing on schools, November 2020’. Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-series-briefing-on-schools-november-2020
19 EEF. (2021). ‘EEF publishes new analysis on impact of Covid-19 on attainment gap’. Education Endowment Foundation, 28th January. Online at: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/news/eef-publishes-new-research-on-the-impact-of- covid-19-partial-school-closures/
4
20 Visser, J., Daniels, H., and Macnab, N. (2005). ‘Missing: Children and young people with SEBD’. Missing. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties 10(1): 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1363275205050884
21 Hutchinson, J. and Crenna-Jennings, W. (2019). Unexplained pupil exits from school: Further analysis and data by multi-academy trust and local authority. Online at: https://epi.org.uk/publications- and-research/unexplained-pupil-exits-data-multi-academy-trust-local-authority/
22 The Health Foundation. (2020). ‘Black and minority ethnic workers make up a disproportionately large share of key worker sectors in London’. Online at: https://www.health.org.uk/chart/black-and- minority-ethnic-workers-make-up-a-disproportionately-large-share-of-key-worker
23 Public Health England. (2020). ‘Disparities in the risk and outcomes of COVID-19’. London: Public Health England. Online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/90 8434/Disparities_in_the_risk_and_outcomes_of_COVID_August_2020_update.pdf
24 NME (forthcoming) ‘School Exclusions in England during the pandemic: why we need a moratorium’.
25 Williamson, G. (2021) ‘Education Secretary speech to FED National Education Summit’. Online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/education-secretary-speech-to-fed-national-education- summit
26 Salisbury, R. (2020). ‘Race and Racism in English Secondary Schools’. Runnymede Trust. Online at: https://www.runnymedetrusts.org/uploads/pubications/pdfs/Runnymede%20Secondary%20Schools% 20report%20FINAL.pdf
27 YMCA. (2020). ‘Young and Black: The Young Black Experience of Institutional Racism in the UK’. Online at: https://www.ymca.org.uk/wp-cvontent/uploads/2020/10/ymca-young-and-black.pdf
5
PROTECTION APPROACHES
Evidence submission
8 March 2021
The Runnymede Trust’s shadow report assessing the Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
0.1 This submission is made by Protection Approaches to the Runnymede’s shadow report assessing the Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination coordinated by the Runnymede Trust. The submission draws on our community- based programmes and research into the propellants of identity-based violence in the UK and around the world, incuding two national social attitude surveys in 2019. We address two questions set out in the terms of reference: hate crime and discrimination; and education. We set out evidence and make a series of recommendations to Her Majesty’s Government.
0.2 Protection Approaches works to transform how we understand identity-based violence –and so transform how we work to prevent it. Protection Approaches is a registered charity in England and Wales, charity number 1171433. For more information please see www.protectionapproaches.org.
0.3 This submission was put together but Detmer Kremer (Policy & Communications Officer), Dilia Zwart (Senior Education Officer), Nasyah Bandoh (Programmes Assistant) and Dr Kate Ferguson (Co-Executive Director). For more information please contact Detmer Kremer, Policy & Communications Officer, [email protected]
Evidence on hate crimes and discrimination
Before Covid: Growing divisions, rising hate crime, and low resilience
1.1 We define identity-based violence as any act of violence motivated by the perpetrator’s conceptualisation of their victim’s identity, for example, their race, gender, sexuality, religion or political affiliation (Ferguson 2021, Protection Approaches 2014). This encompasses hate crime and violent extremism and all hate-based or discriminatory violent behaviour.
1.2 Moments of acute stress exacerbate existing structural risk factors of ‘othering’, exclusion, hate crime, violent extremism, and the violation of all manner of human rights. During crises, scapegoating, prejudice, and marginalisation of already vulnerable groups will rise and, if unchecked, political violence, identity-based violence, and other threats to the safety and security of women, minority, and marginalised communities will become more likely. Underlying systemic inequalities have been exacerbated by recent crises, including the 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent policy of austerity (United Nations, April 2019); the Brexit referendum and the UK’s long withdrawal from the European Union (BBC, 2019); and now the Covid-19 pandemic (Commission for Countering Extremism, HMG, 2021; Sky, 2020).
1.3 Her Majesty’s Government (HMG) must learn from failures to prioritise in past crises community building and to protect social cohesion. This deprioritisation contributed to more dislocated and divided country where trust in institutions has steadily decreased and indicators of marginalisation, hate crime, and social exclusion have worsened.
1.4 The continued failure to address social fracture in the wake of the EU referendum and the divisive Brexit debate exposed and deepened existing grievances (whether real or imagined); accelerated and emboldened a more extreme and exclusionary culture; contributed to legitimising in the eyes
1 of perpetrators their hate-based activities; and increased levels of hate crime and violent extremism. Our 2019 ‘A Gathering Storm’ series analysed social trends in Britain relating to identity, community, perceptions of security, and of belonging (Protection Approaches, 2019). We concluded that prejudice in the UK had become mainstream; that the propellants of exclusionary populist movements, hate crime, hate speech, and violent extremism were growing in strength; and that these trends were threatening the UK’s democracy, the security of its minority and vulnerable groups, and the longterm stability of the country. These trends were of serious concern before the pandemic.
1.5 Hate crime doubled in the five years before Covid reached the UK. (The Guardian, 2019) A 2019 briefing paper released by the Commons Library about police-recorded hate crime offences has seen a steady increase since 2012/13. At the same time, long-term de-prioritisation of community building initiatives and resources has perpetuated the exclusion and isolation of minority and marginalised groups.
1.6 These findings were are supported by our ongoing work on understanding hate crime in Newham, East London where we found that hate-based incidents against people because of their real or perceived migration and asylum status was grievously underreported and had become normalised. Our local partners described hate crimes as things that “happen all the time” and “we just take on coping mechanisms” rather than report it. Our 2019 social attitudes survey found that 38.7% of the public consider immigrants to be a threat to the prosperity of Britain. Hostility and prejudice towards those with a (real or perceived) migration or asylum status is prevalent in England.
1.7 We identify a causal relationship between the apparent normalisation of – and what is increasinly seen as impunity around – abusive, divisive, and exclusionary commentary in both public and political spheres, and the rise in identity-based violence. This has been exacerbated by a weakened confidence in the political establishment, particualrly among our community partners.
1.8 Covid-19 is an overwhelming crisis following on the heels of a divisive and dislocating decade, and disproportionately affects the most vulnerable – because of the nature of the pandemic and who the virus effects most seriously, the structural inequality of British society, and the underlying condition of the UK’s social resilience. If these trends are left unchecked and another financial crisis bites, the UK will very likely see an increase in identity-based violence with minority and marginalised communities, including BAME communities, LGBTQIA people, people with disabilities, and women, paying the greatest price.
Covid-19 and it’s impacts: Covid-related hate and risks of social fracture
2.1 The pandemic’s disproportionate impact on the UK’s marginalised, minoritized and vulnerable communities has been well documented: rising incidence of COVID-related hate against British Chinese, East and South-East Asian (BCESEA) communities; a widespread belief in conspiracies blaming Jewish and Muslim people for COVID-19; and the fact that Black people are more likely to die from the virus than any other ethnic group in the UK; are just some examples of how BAME communities have shouldered the greatest burden during this overwhelming crisis. The spread of misinformation and conspiracy is fueling xenophobia, discrimination, and polarisation, undermining already weakened social cohesion (ISD, 2020)
2.2 Since the first national lockdown, Protection Approaches has been working with and supporting BCESEA organisations in their efforts to combat rising incidents of COVID-related hate crimes through online workshops building capacity to identify, report, and support victims of hate crime. In collaboration with the Chinese Welfare Trust and the Newham Chinese Association, we are continuing this work with 22 BCESEA community-led organisations through a new England-wide
2 network. We have also helped facilitate monthly online forums in partnership with London-based organisations and MOPAC, creating platforms for open dialogue and trust-building between the Metropolitan Police and communities. These community-focused and community-led efforts help frontline service providers, including the police, to better understand and respond to what are often difficult and traumatic experiences. Smaller community-led organisations work with and are led by marginalised groups and communities and are best placed to share about the impacts of Covid- 19 and other crises. In the Social Connection in the COVID-19 Crisis report, the APPG for Social Integration highlighted PA’s work with the Metropolitan Police as an example of best practice to “be replicated in other police force areas with large Chinese populations, including university towns.” To the best of our knowledge this work, while urgently needed, has not been replicated and the BCESEA communities in the UK remain chronically underserved at a time of urgent need.
2.3 As the UK navigates and recovers from the pandemic, we anticipate that these risks of identity- based violence against BME groups and divisions within our communities will continue to increase. The economic, social and political consequences of the virus will likely take more lives than the virus itself, further compromising the quality of life experienced by marginalised groups, making community-led efforts to rebuild the UK’s resilience even more urgent. The prevention community, and its associated architecture, must now be leveraged to ensure that the UK’s COVID-19 response has at its heart what decades of practice have taught us: intersectional, inclusive communities are where resilience of all kinds comes from –whether in the face of a pandemic, economic crisis or identity-based division.
2.4 It is integral that communities most affected by the conesquences of the pandemic are centred in recovery strategies, something that has been evidently lacking in Covid repsonses in the UK so far.
2.5 It is also critical to recognise that while some in the UK have felt more connected to their neighbours during this extraordinary period, that is not a universal experience; many feel more isolated, lonely, forgotten, anxious, or disconnected. It is important that these people are also integrated into recovery strategies. High screen time, high levels of isolation, and a common sense of powerlessness inidcates a risk of risking expressions of support for discirimination, conspriacy, divisive ideologies, hateful extreimism and other harmful online content.
2.6 However, community-led organisations and networks are systematically underfunded and many government grant schemes are overburdensome. This prevents them from accessing support and setting agendas for challenges that are largely experienced at local level. Lack of funding also creates a reliance on volunteers and goodwill which privileges those more able to give their time and divests local organisations of the modest funds they need – and deserve – to carry out their important activities.
2.7 Cohesive and connected communities require an ecosystem of social, political, and institutional action. Global and national best practices show that community building is the most effective way to sustainably reduce division and build long-lasting resilience. Investment in grassroots community building initiatives and concerted efforts to connect and co-create solutions with BAME communities are crucial in upholding the UK’s commitment to CERD, mitigating the risks of identity-based violence, and building back better responses to the impact of COVID-19.
Recommendations to HMG
3.1 Integrate identity-based violence prevention into local, national and global responses to the worldwide health crisis: if this is not done, the pandemic and subsequent economic crises risk accelerating trends and deepening pre-existing inequalities that undermine social and political resilience to division, propaganda and fear. HMG should be doing this on a local level across the
3 UK, on a national level from central government, and in its international contibutions around the world.
3.2 Actively reach out to and consult with local grassroots community groups: the views and experiences of the marginalised communities worst hit by ongoing crises, including the pandemic and austerity, must be consciously and visibly integrated into local and national responses and in efforts to build long-term resilience against all kinds of crises. National and local Government should work with civil society networks to understand how unequal impact can be mitigated, and how rights to life and security of person are protected.
3.3 Provide Quick-release, easy-access grants for small grassroots organisations: Investment in locally-led organisations is essential to reverse the tides of hate the UK and its marginalised and minority communities are experiencing. The government and grant-giving organisations should prioritise easy-access, quick-release funding mechanisms for modest amounts of money for small organisations (under £500,000). Through a local community fund small organisations can access small pots of money in a short period of time through very simple application processes.
3.4 Establish a Cohesion Commission: to ensure that as the UK emerges from a period of collective grief, social dislocation, and heightened inequality the Government is prepared to meet what will likely be a sustained economic crisis unlike anything we have seen before. The government should use this moment to refocus attention and resources on those most vulnerable in our society, recognising that stronger, inclusive, intersectional, equal, and empathetic societies are not just nice to have but benefit us all.
Evidence on education as prevention and response
4.1 Schools are microcosms of society and as such are never immune to crises at the national level. In the academic year following the EU referendum, hate crimes in and around schools and colleges jumped 62%. One study found that 77% of eastern European pupils had experienced increased racism, bullying, and xenophobia, and that 49% of these pupils reported that attacks had become more frequent since the EU referendum in 2016. The NSPCC warned in 2019 that racial abuse and bullying of children in UK had risen by a fifth since 2015-16 and that children were whitening their skin to avoid racial hate crime.
4.2 Covid-19 is now exacerbating the many challenges facing the education sector. Unequal access to online learning has accelerated disparities of opportunities, education, and experience, particularly for vulnerable children or those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The legacy of collective and individual grief that Covid-19 will leave behind has serious implications for our communities, and the mental health and wellbeing of students, teachers, and families. Education essential to disrupting the path to democratic backsliding, discrimination and identity-based violence, however too many UK schools lack the capacity, capabilities, and resources to meet these challenges (Protection Approaches, 2020)
4.3 Joined-up schools-based responses that prioritise civic education can strengthen individual and societal resilience to division, hate crime, and other threats to democracy. Our research with UK communities consistently finds concensus support for formal education spaces to better prioritise teaching young people about differences and identity through positive debate and dialogue. During our 2019 consutlation of 150 practitioners and experts, education that nurtures empathy and builds critical skills was identified as the most evidence, sustainable, and important means of combatting rising identity-based violence in Europe (Protection Approaches, 2019) When Covid-19 forced the closure of UK schools to all except vulnerable young people and the children of key workers in 2020, Protection Approaches’ education team asked educators across England and Wales what support we could provide as they navigate the short- and long-term challenges of the crisis: We
4 found that 77% want more support in helping young people play a role in building kind and resilient communities, and 74% would like resources that help students recognise fake news and think critically about information consumption (Protection Approaches, 2020). A further 73% would like training on whole school approaches to building tolerance and resilience among students.
4.4 Whole-school approaches to resilience and justice are an effective means to identify and address root causes of inequality and structural violence. Whole-school approaches span the school ethos, policies, formal curriculum, and educational practices, creating an inclusive school culture that ensures that students feel that they belong, can contribute to school life, and are responsible for one another. The views and experiences of marginalised, socially dislocated communities must be integrated into guidance on designing and implementing such approaches. Moreover, whole- school approaches must be intersectional, holistic and aimed at an inclusive school culture; one- off educational programmes or singular policies are unlikely to succeed as they need the buy-in and trust of the school community. To plan and implement whole school approaches, schools should be given the resources to work with experts in IBV prevention and cohesion building to ensure that young people are empowered with the knowledge and tools to combat hate and build more inclusive communities.
Recommendations
5.1 Schools and teachers must be provided with the support they need to implement whole- school approaches to resilience and justice: As well as having the flexibility to diversify the curriculum, schools need the time and space to prioritise joined-up, whole-school approaches to resilience and justice that embed empathy, respect for differences, and social responsibility in their ethos.
Recommendations to the Department for Education
5.2 Actively reach out and consult population groups disproportionally affected by the crisis to ensure their needs are prioritised and integrated into guidance for schools
5.3 Make emergency augmentation to school curriculums to make space for school senior leadership teams and teachers to prioritise Social and Emotional Learning as well as media literacy and civic skills
5.4 Establish easy-access, quick release funds to support experts in trauma, social cohesion, media literacy, and positive debate to work with schools and school policymakers
5.5 Prepare guidance and toolkits for when schools return to in-person learning on implementing whole school approaches to wellbeing and civic engagement
Recommendations to OFSTED
5.6 Recognise that the priorities of schools will rightly have changed. Adjust the inspection framework to put more weight on Personal Development particularly focussed on resilience, wellbeing, and mental health
5.7 Consult with schools to consider postponing inspections until at least September 2021 in order to enable schools to have the time to prioritise Personal Development
5 Consultation response provided by the Queen Mary Global Policy Institute (QMGPI)
Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
About the Queen Mary Global Policy Institute: The mission of the QMGPI is to ensure that Queen Mary's commitment to inclusion, diversity and positive social change find their application in the policy world across the globe. The Institute takes Queen Mary's world class research and helps to translate this expertise into positive social and practical dividends by addressing key global problems across a range of policy areas. Read more about the Queen Mary Global Policy Institute online: https://www.qmul.ac.uk/gpi/.
This submission, which addresses a select few of the consultation questions and themes, has benefitted from contributions from the following members of the Queen Mary University of London community:
Nina Prusac, QMGPI Policy Associate Dr Sadhvi Dar, Senior Lecturer in Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics Dr Sandra Eldridge, PhD, FRCGP (Hons), Professor of Biostatistics Prof Nelarine Cornelius, Professor of Organisation Studies; Associate Dean, People, Culture, Inclusion Dr Yasmin Ibrahim, Professor of Digital Economy and Culture
1
Information on the intersectional experience of race in the context of other factors i.e. disability, gender, migration status, sexuality etc.
Intersectional analysis of mental health issues and women of colour
It is widely reported that minority groups in the UK have a shared and often negative experience of UK mental health services because the frameworks used for diagnosis and symptom management are in themselves biased1. Within minority groups, women of colour face extreme forms of exclusion when seeking support for mental health issues, suggesting that racism in mental health services is experienced in specific ways by women.
Suggestions for improving policy / evidence-based interventions:
Provide women of colour with dedicated free spaces to talk about mental health issues. Work with women of colour training psychotherapists and accredited psychotherapists to design therapeutic spaces founded on inclusive principles. Work with local NHS providers to establish a signposting service directing patrons towards tailored services and appropriate therapies.
Specific recommendations of what action the Government should take to combat racial injustice in education, employment, the criminal justice system, healthcare, and housing
Health care use differs by racial group. One of the key reasons for this differential use is mistrust of health services by certain racially minoritized groups. This mistrust has been identified, for example, in relation to Somali patients and mental health issues2, participation in health-related research (which can lead to poor evidence about treatments in some groups)3, and most prominently at the moment in relation to COVID vaccination4.
The majority of published research in this area comes from the USA. Though the complex factors operating may be similar in the UK, the historical and social context is different from that in the USA. There are UK research studies that show that experiences of health services can compound and perpetuate existing perceptions of alienation5. While the underlying sense of alienation has to be dealt with at a societal level, to combat this racial injustice in access to health care within the health service itself, a systematic approach to research in this area is needed, reviewing evidence that exists and providing funding for further research where questions remain unanswered, including around what sort of interventions are likely to make a difference.
Some interventions have been suggested in relation to COVID-19 vaccinations6, but it is unknown whether adopting these or similar suggestions in different contexts, or for different conditions, would yield positive outcomes. Where evidence exists on which to base health professional training to improve the situation, this training should be prioritised.
2
Evidence of the impact of Covid-19, Black Lives Matter and Brexit on the rights of BME communities
In 2020, two major events brought into sharp focus global governments’ failure to effectively address racial discrimination and disadvantage: the Covid 19 pandemic7;8 and the killing of George Floyd, which provoked global outrage[9].
In the UK, there is plenty of evidence, across a range of sectors, that the pace of change towards race equality is slow. Business in the Community’s The Race at Work Charter and Race at Work: Black Voices reports of 2020 show that, among signatory organisations to the charter, the basic requirements (monitoring, senior level race equality sponsorship) were likely to be pursued, but ground level change necessary for equitable and fair progression, such as ethnic diversity on appointments panels and diversity targets for line managers, was far less likely to occur10;11.
Although the proportion of women on FTSE 350 boards has now reached 30 per cent12, the Parker Review 2020 found that the target set out in their 2017 report – to have one person from an ethnic minority background on every FTSE 100 board – is still a long way from being realized. In 2017, 50 per cent of FTSE100 Board were all white. In the 2020 Parker Review, directors of colour made up only 11.3% of the FTSE100 total, while the FTSE 250 and 350 were found to be even less ethnically diverse13.
People of colour struggle in the work and career pipeline14, and although the UK government has commissioned a range of reports, and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) has estimated that the cost of under-utilisation of BAME talent is £24 billion per annum15, progress for ethnic minorities in the labour market remains painfully slow. This is in the context of the Office for National Statistics figures16 which show that ethnic minority entry into further and higher education continues to climb, with Black students having the greatest rise in entry from 21.6% in 2006 to 47.5% in 2020 for state school pupils, outstripping their White contemporaries (21.8% to 32.6%). However, this is not converting to solid progression and attainment in colleges and universities, and job destinations on graduation17. Many of these young people are second, third and fourth generation descendants of their migrant parents. With many of the young population (under 30) in the UK’s major cities comprising mainly ethnic minorities18, the squandering of young talent is not simply a moral outrage, but economically damaging (to individuals, and to society), and likely to affect overall national productivity.
The differential impact of Covid 19 and the greater likelihood of black people being criminalised share common antecedents: the positioning of people of colour as lesser, with the historical roots of this lesser treatment in slavery and colonialism19. The studied forgetting of the role that these play in the way people of colour are viewed, brought into sharp focus in 2020, remains contentious but is now a matter for open debate. The legacies of privilege structures and, white privilege may be dismissed as ‘woke’ by certain quarters within UK society, but there is substantial academic research to support this position.
The United Nations has made huge strides in developing tools for evaluating well-being and quality of life, such as the work of Amartya Sen and Mahbub ul Haq. These include the capabilities approach (Sen20; 21; 22 and the Human Development Report and Index (Ul Haq et al23;24), which have transformed the aspirations of many countries, at various stages of socio-economic development. However, it was clear that gender equality required a more explicit set of goals and a specific index, the Gender Equality Index, informed by major challenges facing women globally. 3
Many countries, for different historical, cultural and religious reasons, continue to struggle with racial and ethnic equality, and this now requires strong guidance from organisations such as the United Nations, drawing from the experience of driving progress on gender and poverty through instruments such as the Gender Development Index, Gender Social Norms Index and Global Multidimensional Poverty Index25. The articles detailed in the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination are a crucial step on the journey. However, the development of a Racial Equality Index may be a necessary further step in enabling nation states to understand more clearly their achievements to date, outstanding challenges to promote inclusion, and indeed, their obligations26. In the absence of such an index, efforts to address racial discrimination are likely to be incomplete and/or inefficient, and may fail to embed effectively in governance structures, within organisations, labour markets, and governments.
The impact of hostile environment and immigration policies on BME people’s rights
According to the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) the “Hostile Environment” refers to ‘all policies which make life difficult for migrants living in the UK - treating them as less deserving of dignity and humanity than British citizens’. Despite the tightening up of border control and immigration policies over the last 50 years or so, the notion of a ‘hostile environment’ directly relates to a raft of policies (including the immigration Acts of 2014 and 2016) enacted from 2012 by then PM Theresa May, making it difficult for those not deemed to have the right paperwork to access employment, healthcare, housing, education, banking and other basic services.
The effect was to induce a hostile environment by utilizing front line, essential care or service providers such as GP practices, landlords or educators/public sector workers to undertake checks on individual patients, tenants, clients and service users. In this setting, minor clerical errors, omissions or infractions might be used to re-cast a migrant as an ‘unlawful immigrant’. Such measures disproportionately affect people who are black or ethnic minority, in addition to creating psychological stressors. From renting properties to obtaining medical services, such checks can induce a burden and an intangible imposition of feeling illegitimate or dispossessed in society. The removal of access to the social and welfare safety net under such policies contributed to the creation of an underclass of foreign, mainly ethnic minority workers and families who are highly vulnerable to exploitation.
Windrush exemplifies the hostile environment, where immigrants from the Caribbean islands who arrived in the UK between 1948 and 1973 were made to test their right to stay in the UK. Many lacked documentation, and this was further exacerbated by the Home Office destroying relevant records and thousands of landing cards. It later transpired in 2017 that hundreds of those from this cohort had been wrongly detained, deported and denied legal rights. The hostile environment encompasses the practice of indefinite immigration detention, where migrants can be detailed for months, if not years, without committing any crimes. The UK is the only country in Europe which allows indefinite incarceration. Hostile environment policies affect BME communities in the UK by imposing a climate of fear, an association of deviance, and engendering discrimination and racism as an entrenched aspect of society.
4
Closing reflection
The recent global protests about race and equality have accelerated and sharpened the debate and scrutiny on how governments and public institutions are guaranteeing civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights. As societies evolve, so do our social norms. However, our culture, behaviours, and practices may not truly change. The process of how we assess implementation must also adapt.
Assessing implementation requires a forensic and granular review to better ascertain whether in developing research and policies, and implementing programmes it could amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racial stereotyping. The processes are just as important as the policies themselves, and may be a better indicator when assessing implementation. Likewise, policies themselves may appear to have the right rhetoric, but may still not deliver meaningful change. This detailed scrutiny of our daily ways of working will be an uncomfortable process, but it should be grounded in the realisation that we all need to change, and support each other to change.
In recent months the debate about racial equality has become toxic, politicised, and polarised. If we are to create a better, fairer and more equitable society, it is vital that new research addresses these emerging issues in an independent, objective, and evidenced-based manner.
5
REFERENCES:
1 See various in British Medical Journal (BMJ) special edition: Racism in Medicine BMJ 2020;368:m568 (Published 13 February 2020)
2 Catherine Linney , Siyan Ye , Sabi Redwood, Abdi Mohamed, Abdullahi Farah, Lucy Biddle, Esther Crawley "Crazy person is crazy person. It doesn't differentiate": an exploration into Somali views of mental health and access to healthcare in an established UK Somali community Int J Equity Health 2020 Oct 27;19(1):190. doi: 10.1186/s12939- 020-01295-0.
3 Smirnoff M, et al.A paradigm for understanding trust and mistrust in medical research: The Community VOICES study.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018. PMID: 29368998
4 Mohammad S Razai , Tasnime Osama , Douglas G J McKechnie , Azeem Majeed Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minority groups BMJ . 2021 Feb 26;372:n513. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n513.
5 Lawrence V, McCombie C, Nikolakopoulos G, Morgan Ethnicity and power in the mental health system: experiences of white British and black Caribbean people with psychosis. C.Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2021 Feb 5;30:e12. doi: 10.1017/S2045796020001043.PMID: 33543688
6 Douglas J Opel 1, Bernard Lo 2, Monica E Peek 3 Addressing Mistrust About COVID-19 Vaccines Among Patients of ColorAnn Intern Med 2021 Feb 9;M21-0055. doi: 10.7326/M21-0055. Online ahead of print.
7 Runnymede Trust, (2020), Over-Exposed and Under-Protected: The Devastating Impact of Covid 19, accessed at: https://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/Runnymede%20Covid19%20Survey%20report%20v2.pdf
8 Runnymede Trust (2021), Ethnic Inequalities in Covid 19 Mortality: A Consequence of Persistent Racism, accessed at: https://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/Runnymede%20CoDE%20COVID%20briefing%20v3.pdf
9 BBC (2020), Black Lives Matter: From Social Media Post to Global Movement, accessed at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53273381
10 Business in the Community, Key findings, Race at Work Charter Survey, 2020, accessed at: https://www.bitc.org.uk/report/race-at-work-charter-survey-report-2020/
11 Business in the Community, Race at Work: Black Voices, 2020, accessed at: https://www.bitc.org.uk/report/race- at-work-black-voices-report/
12 Hampton-Alexander Review (2021), Improving Gender Balance in FTSE Leadership, accessed at: https://ftsewomenleaders.com/
13 Parker Review (2020), Ethnic Diversity Enriching Business Leadership: An Update Report From the Parker Review, accessed at: https://assets.ey.com/content/dam/ey-sites/ey-com/en_uk/news/2020/02/ey-parker-review-2020- report-final.pdf
14 Chartered Management Institute/ British Academy of Management (2017), Delivering Diversity: Race and Ethnicity in the Management Pipeline, accessed at: https://www.managers.org.uk/knowledge-and- insights/research-thought-leadership/delivering-diversity/
15 Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy(BEIS) (2017), BME Individuals in the Labour Market: Analysis Of Full Representation, accessed at: [ ] Chartered Management Institute/ British Academy of 6
Management (2017), Delivering Diversity: Race and Ethnicity in the Management Pipeline, accessed at: https://www.managers.org.uk/knowledge-and-insights/research-thought-leadership/delivering-diversity/
16 Office for National Statistics, UK (2020), Entry Rates into Higher Education, accessed at: https://www.ethnicity- facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/higher-education/entry-rates-into-higher- education/latest
17 HESA (2019), Higher Education Student Data, accessed at: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/students
18 Office for National Statistic, UK (2020), Research Report on Population Estimates by Ethnic Group and Religion, accessed at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/ researchreportonpopulationestimatesbyethnicgroupandreligion/2019-12-04
19 Cornelius, N. (2020). From slavery and colonialism to Black Lives Matter: new mood music or fundamental change? Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 40(1), pp.8-20
20 Sen, A. (1995), Inequality Re-examined, Cambridge, Harvard University Press
21 Sen, A, (2001), Development as Freedom, Oxford, Oxford University Press
22 Sen, A. (2010), The Idea of Justice, London, Penguin.
23 ul Haq, M (1995), The Advent of the Human Development Report, in M ul Haq, Reflections on the Human Development Index, Oxford, Oxford University Press
24 United Nations Development Programme (2020), Human Development Index, accessed at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
25 United Nations Development Programme (2020), Human Development Reports: Gender Equality Index (GII), accessed at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/gender-inequality-index-gii
26 United Nations Development Programme (2020), Data Centre, accessed at: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi
7
Submission to CERD: Race Equality Foundation
The Foundation welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the 2021 report and follows our work on the 2016 report. The overall picture since 2016 has been decidedly mixed, with the ongoing impacts of austerity and the hostile environment combined with the legislative agenda being dominated by Brexit. There have been some positive moves from the government, such as the review and proposed reforms to the Mental Health Act as outlined in the White Paper, but these are limited.
Without an overall strategy and focus on race equality, the government continues to act on isolated issues and often with too much emphasis placed on quantifying the problems rather than taking action. The response to the coronavirus pandemic is illustrative of this approach, where action continues to lag despite overwhelming evidence of racial inequalities. It is also worth highlighting the damaging impact of the pandemic on black and minority ethnic-led community and voluntary organisations. The response by the government to these findings has failed to adequately address the key issues, and we fear that without a significant change of direction this will persist through the vaccination programme and into the covid- recovery programmes.
Real progress on the elimination of racial discrimination could be demonstrated initially by placing greater focus on race equality in responding to Covid-19, and then delivering on the recommendations of the large number of reviews into racial discrimination from recent years. There are around 375 such recommendations on topics ranging from policing and criminal justice through to the diversity of company boards. From here could develop the trust that has been broken by the poor response to the Covid-19 pandemic and following scandals such as the Windrush Affair. This trust will be needed to work together in advancing a more strategic and coordinated response to the elimination of racial discrimination.
Our response to the call for evidence will highlight some specific areas of work on hate crime, criminal justice, health and housing.
Hate crime and discrimination
In 2020, we saw an 8% increase in the number of hate crimes recorded (compared to 2019). Hate crime in England and Wales has also been rising steadily year-on-year since 2013. Around 20 to 30 percent of hate crimes occur in or immediately near the home. The Foundation hosted an event on housing and hate crime in 2019. The Conference brought together housing practitioners and key speakers to focus on the impact and extent of hate crime, the legal frameworks, gathering evidence to construct a case of hate crime and the uses and benefits of restorative justice.
The key points that emerged from the conference was that practitioners wanted more training and awareness of the issue of hate crime for staff and residents; promotion materials to offer messaging and how to report hate crime; robust victim support mechanisms including continuity of support; and stronger leadership in responding to the challenges posed by hate crime in and near where people live.
Criminal justice and access to justice
The Foundation’s work on criminal justice includes a focus on the intersection with mental health, and the specific issues faced by parents and young people in prison. In a recent focus group discussion with BAME parents of young people with experience of the criminal justice system carried out to input into the support the Ministry of Justice provides parents, issues highlighted included the nature of stigma within communities, the lack of support offered at a time when needed and before crisis point, the disparity between what parents want and what they are offered, poor communication when young people are in the system, and a lack of clarity and information as to what is happening, when and what support is available.
Our work in YOI's with 15-18 year old BAME boys and their families echoes some of this, with parents highlighting poor communication as especially problematic, family contact being especially hard when young people are accommodated at distance from home, and a lack of preventative support for parents with sibling groups. Young people express particular frustrations around trust and respect, with expectations and promises regularly not delivered on, changes to their routines and support happening at short notice.
Black and minority ethnic people continue to be more likely to enter the mental health system through the criminal justice system. The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act recognised this issue and the subsequent White Paper on reforms to the Act does include better advocacy and efforts to divert people with a mental health condition into non-custodial criminal justice pathways. However, we continue to argue that while these reforms are worthwhile, the root causes of overrepresentation associated with mental health are largely beyond the criminal justice system (although reinforced and exacerbated by institutional racism and bias in that system), and requires specific action to promote access and improve services. This is a theme that is picked up in the Health Section of our submission.
Health
Black and minority ethnic communities experience significant health inequalities, and this is the background to the racial disproportionality in Covid-19 infections and deaths in 2020. The Foundation’s briefing in March 2020 and recent update highlighted the vulnerability of black and minority ethnic communities to Covid-19, and while there was remedial action taken by government and various agencies in response to the high number of deaths, black and minority ethnic people continue to be at greatest risk. Similarly, our recent briefing on the UK’s vaccine programme argues it is failing to address inequalities and may actually widen them without further action by the government. Moving ahead, proposed reforms to integrate health and social care do have the potential to address health inequalities for black and minority ethnic people, but currently fall short in their ambition.
Black and minority ethnic people continue to have poor maternity outcomes, and are up to four times more likely to die during pregnancy and maternity. Our briefing with Maternity Action highlighted the impact of occupational risk and socio-economic factors, such as poverty, low income, and housing conditions in contributing to these disproportionate outcomes. It calls for action to improve workplace safety for pregnant BAME women, a better social security net and access to healthcare (including removing restrictions based on immigration status), and access to specialist support and services such as domestic violence shelters.
Mental health remains an area of great concern for us, despite efforts by the government and the NHS to address disproportionality in use of detention under the Mental Health Act. While the proposed reforms to the Mental Health Act are an improvement on the current system, and in particular improving access to advocacy, we have argued in our briefing on the Mental Health Act White Paper that the root causes of disproportionality are outside of the process to detain an individual and need to be addressed through promoting access, early intervention and tackling the wider determinants of poor mental health.
Our report on racial disparities in mental health showed a much more diverse picture of mental health needs that need to be met, from eating disorder services through to obsessive compulsive disorder and psychosis. Key recommendations from the report included improving access to primary care and to talking therapies, engaging with black and minority ethnic communities including constructively working with community and faith organisations, develop a clearer picture of needs across communities and meeting those needs through services.
Dementia is a growing issue among black and minority ethnic communities in the UK. This is both due to inequalities affecting specific risk factors, such as higher rates of diabetes and high blood pressure, and the demographic ageing of particular communities. Our project on dementia found issues of poor education and lack of awareness of dementia among black and minority ethnic communities, combined with an inadequate response from health and care systems to meet the needs of black and minority ethnic people with dementia, and lack of substantive action on prevention. This means, for example, black and minority ethnic people are diagnosed later on average and have poorer outcomes from care. While there were examples of good and better practice at a local level, these were often isolated and fragile – two of the community organisations we worked with on the project were on the brink of collapse due to the lack of funding. We recommended that support was needed by the NHS and Local Government to develop services to meet the needs of black and minority ethnic people with regards to dementia, and to engage and involve community organisations, service users and carers.
The Foundation has been working to understand the issues relating to muscular- skeletal conditions (MSK) for black and minority ethnic people. These are one of the largest contributors to the “burden of health” and are likely to become more common as black and minority ethnic communities age. Levels of physical inactivity, Vitamin D deficiency, poverty, socio-economic factors, working in manual occupations, and pre-existing long-term conditions such as diabetes, are all contributory factors to racial inequalities in MSK conditions. But our work also found poor experience of services, including poor information, lack of access to diet and exercise interventions, and a reliance on medication.
The NHS is working to address disparities in its workforce through the Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES). There are still significant differences in the experience of black and minority ethnic staff, and particularly women and those who are in lower paid roles. We worked with Queen Mary University to produce an analysis published in the BMJ online looking at the intersectional inequalities. This found that even in job roles where black and minority ethnic people were overrepresented, they were still underrepresented at the most senior levels. For example, more than half of BAME nurses (56 percent) are in the lowest nursing pay band and less than 2 percent of BAME nurses are in the top bands. This is largely due to discrimination in career progression and development opportunities and BAME nurses being made to feel uncomfortable and undervalued in the workplace. The NHS has been saying they will address for years, but there is a lack of tangible impact in formal efforts.
Again, these inequalities in the roles and the experiences of black and minority ethnic staff in the NHS were highlighted by Covid-19. In response to the high number of deaths of black and minority ethnic clinical staff, we published a piece by Dr Roger Kline that highlighted the need for NHS organisations to have carried out an Equality Impact Assessment to determine the risks to staff and to take actions to address them.
The Foundation has continued to raise concerns about the impact of the hostile environment on healthcare access and inequalities. Doctors of the World and Maternity Action have both highlighted cases where people who believed they were subject to health charging refused healthcare. There were also several high profile cases relating to “Windrush Generation” cases where healthcare was denied to black and minority ethnic British Citizens, such as Albert Thompson who was undergoing treatment for prostate cancer. This is also a present concern in the response to Covid-19. While there is a ‘public health’ exemption within the charging regulations, there is evidence to show people delay life-saving treatment even when experiencing acute symptoms. So, it would seem reasonable to believe that people with cold and flu-like symptoms who are routinely not eligible for free NHS care (or believe they are not) will not access health services.
Housing
There have been some positive developments in general housing policy that will have a positive impact on racial inequalities, for example the ban on letting agency fees in private rented housing and the forthcoming scrapping of Section 21 (“No Fault”) evictions. However, the introduction of “Right to Rent” checks in private rented housing has led to greater challenges for people who do not have a British passport, or who do not look or sound “White British”.
Social housing continues to be under-invested in, which means black and minority ethnic people are overrepresented both within private rented housing, temporary accommodation and the homelessness system.
Our work has highlighted that older black and minority ethnic people are more likely to experience housing deprivation than older white British people, according to work we did with the Housing Learning Improvement Network. Black and minority ethnic older people are less likely to own their own home, and are more likely to live in the private rented sector and in a smaller property, such as a flat or terraced house. This is the result of cumulative disadvantage through lower values of property assets, occupational social class and employment and tenure patterns.
Welfare reforms are a significant issue for black and minority ethnic people. Our briefing on Universal Credit found that black and minority ethnic communities are likely to be disproportionately impacted by Universal Credit, because they are more likely to be living in poverty, to have larger families, and lower levels of financial resources to cope with delays in payment. It also found that language barriers and higher levels of digital exclusion will mean that a disproportionate number of black and minority ethnic claimants will find it harder to apply for Universal and be more likely to be sanctioned for failure to meet claimant commitments.
Conclusion
We have outlined some of the issues in the areas of hate crime, criminal justice, health and housing where we have found and are working to address racial inequalities and discrimination. The lack of focus by the government on taking a strategic approach and in addressing the root causes of these inequalities risks undermining any progress made on specific issues, such as reforms to the Mental Health Act. The unequal experiences and deaths due to the coronavirus are a stark illustration of the scale of the challenge, and it is our hope that the CERD process can push the UK government and its institutions to make the elimination of racial inequality and discrimination a priority.
Submission to the Runnymede Trust: CERD 2021 Call for Evidence
8th March 2021
Release is the national centre of expertise on drugs and drugs law in the UK. The organisation, founded in 1967, is an independent and registered charity. Release provides free non-judgmental, specialist advice and information to the public and professionals on issues related to drug use and to drug laws. The organisation campaigns directly on issues that impact its clients - it is their experiences that drive the policy work that Release does and why Release advocates for evidence-based drug policies that are founded on principles of public health rather than a criminal justice approach. Release believes in a just and fair society where drug policies should reduce the harms associated with drugs, and where those who use drugs are treated based on principles of human rights, dignity and equality.
Harm Reduction International (HRI) is a leading NGO dedicated to reducing the negative health, social and legal impacts of drug use and drug policy. We promote the rights of people who use drugs and their communities through research and advocacy to help achieve a world where drug policies and laws contribute to healthier, safer societies.
Release and HRI are both NGOs in Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations.
We would like to thank additional contributors to this report: Dr. John Topping (Queen’s University, Belfast), Ch. Insp Jason Kew (Thames Valley Police), and Scottish Drugs Forum.
Release | 61 Mansell Street, E1 8AN, London (UK) | www.release.org.uk The present report is submitted in response to the Runnymede Trust’s call for evidence regarding the Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD).
Drug law enforcement disproportionately targets ethnic minority communities, including people of African and Asian descent. As such, this report focuses on racism and discrimination in the context of drug law enforcement in the UK. This report will address issues pertaining to: (1) data collection and disaggregation; (2) disproportionate stop and search; (3) inequitable criminal justice outcomes; (4) exclusion from educational settings; and (5) health. The impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic is also highlighted where relevant.
Data collection
This section focuses on issues with: (1) data collection and (2) data disaggregation. Specifically, an inability to examine intersectional experiences of race in the context of other factors, is highlighted. This discussion is contextualized by CERD’s 2016 para. 13 and 14 (p. 3-4).
The ability to adequately assess drug law enforcement discrimination continues to be hindered by the lack of complete, and disaggregated, data on drug policy, law enforcement, and health indicators by ethnicity, as well as by gender, sexual orientation, age, and other characteristics. In Scotland for example, disaggregated data on ethnicity are not effectively collected in the context of initial treatment engagement, thus the Scottish Drug Misuse Database does not disaggregate by ethnicity (despite disaggregating by gender, age, living situation, and more).1 Annual ONS drug-related death figures, which record deaths due to drug poisoning occurring in England and Wales2, do not collect ethnicity data as ethnicity has not traditionally been recorded on death certificates in England and Wales. The ONS are currently working on analysis of drug deaths by ethnicity group, including a data linkage project with the Census, but do not have a publication date as of yet.
In some instances, relevant data/disaggregation is collected, but not publicly presented.3 For example, the annual Police Powers and Procedures report for England and Wales4, which presents stop and search/ arrest data, does present a breakdown and comparison by ethnicity, and by sex, but disaggregation by sex and ethnicity is not presented in public-facing documents. This serves to invisibilise the experiences and needs of certain populations; with gender, sexual orientation, age, immigrant status, and class often intersecting with ethnicity, and creating uniquely negative outcomes. When intersectional experiences are measured and seen, phenomena such as the hugely disproportionate incarceration of Black women for drug offences compared to their White, female counterparts, can be observed5. Compounding this issue further is a distinct lack of research on intersectional experiences at every stage of the criminal justice system.
Where ethnicity data is collected, it is not always collected consistently or accurately. A recently released report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) highlights the inaccurate and inconsistent measurement of ethnicity by police forces in England and Wales during stop and search procedures, continuing that “a failure to record ethnicity data in an increasing proportion of records is hiding the true disproportionality rate. This means that some forces are not able to see the full picture”.6
1 Information provided by Scottish Drugs Forum. For more information see Public Health Scotland (2021) Scottish Drug Misuse Database – Overview of the Initial Assessment for Specialist Drug Treatment 2019/2020. Available: https://beta.isdscotland.org/find-publications-and-data/lifestyle-and- behaviours/substance-use/scottish-drug-misuse-database. 2 Latest report: ONS (2020) Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales: 2019 registrations. Available: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsrelatedtodrugpoisoninginenglandandwales/2019regist rations 3 Unless one conducts their own secondary data analysis using the excel data spreadsheets which, in some instances, accompany reports. 4 Latest report: Home Office (2020) Police powers and procedures, England and Wales, year ending 31 March 2020 – Second Edition. Available: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/929573/police-powers-procedures-mar20-hosb3120.pdf 5 GOV.UK (2016) Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic disproportionality in the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-disproportionality-in-the-criminal-justice-system-in-england-and-wales, p.19 6 HMICFRS (2021) Disproportionate use of police powers A spotlight on stop and search and the use of force. Available: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/disproportionate-use-of-police-powers-spotlight-on-stop-search-and-use-of-force.pdf., p.6.
1
Disproportionate stop and search
Discussions around how to address racial disparity within stop and search began over 30 years ago. The disproportionate policing of, and subsequent outcomes for, Black and minority ethnic groups have been widely evidenced in the UK - including within both the Lammy review and the MacPherson inquiry. In a written submission to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, Release emphasised that “despite repeated calls for reform - including from the Equality and Human Rights Commission and numerous inquiries - high levels of racial disparity persist”.7 There is now emerging evidence to suggest that racial disparity may be increasing in the midst of the current COVID-19 pandemic.
Already in 2016, CERD expressed specific concerns that the use of stop and search powers in the UK have a disproportionate impact on persons belonging to ethnic minority groups, especially young men.8 Similarly in 2015, the Human Rights Committee noted that stop and search powers in the UK are exercised in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner, and recommended that authorities establish ‘robust independent security and oversight’ over them. The following discussion focuses on the continued disproportionate use of these powers to stop, search, and use force against, people of African and Asian descent - most often as part of a search for drugs. The evidence presented is in the context of CERD’s 2016 para. 22, 26 and 27 (p. 6-7).
The disproportionate targeting of Black individuals and communities by drug law enforcement clearly emerges by the analysis of how stop and search is employed. Systemic racial discrimination in the use of police powers is well-evidenced, with drug law enforcement driving this trend given that over 60% of all searches in England and Wales are carried out for drugs.9 The recent HMICFRS report reiterates that “drug searches influence the disproportionality rate more than other types of search”.10 Although recorded stop-searches (under the main police powers) in England and Wales did decrease between 2011 and 2017 - boosted by the Home Office’s Best Use of Stop and Search (BUSS) scheme in 2014 (whereby all police forces agreed to improve transparency and accountability in their use of stop and search) - over this period, the disparity gap in fact widened. Arrests from drug searches halved for White people but remained stable for Black people.11 This exemplifies the failure of reform to adequately address racially disproportionate policing, even if they lessen harm for some individuals.
Home Office figures released for 2019/20 reveal that the use of stop and search in England and Wales has increased again for a second consecutive year, and that individuals from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic background were stopped at a rate 4 times higher than those who were from a White ethnic group.12 The disparity is particularly pronounced for Black individuals, who remain 9 times more likely to be stopped and searched than White people. Notably, 63% of all searches carried out in 2019/2020 were for drugs, and 76% of all searches resulted in no further action taken – 3% higher than in 2018/19.13
A recent study on stop and search operations conducted in London between July and September 2020, in the midst of the global pandemic, adds to the growing evidence of racial profiling by law enforcement, as well as of unjustified, disproportionate, and unreasonable use of these tactics.14 Of the over 65,000 people stopped and searched in that period (an increase from 2018 and 2019), 65% were searched for drugs, with over three quarters of all searches resulting in no further action being taken. In other words, over 48,000 people were stopped and searched – predominantly for drugs – on the basis of unfounded suspicions. That success rates of stop and search
7 Release (2020) Response to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities’ Consultation: Ethnic Disparities and Inequality in the UK. December 2020. Available: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/written-submission-commission-race-and-ethnic-disparities-ethnic-disparities-and. 8 Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination (2016) Concluding Observations on the combined twenty-first to twenty-third periodic reports of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, UN Doc. CERD/C/GBR/CO/21-23 (3 October 2016), para. 22-23, 26, 27. 9 Home Office (2019) Police powers and procedures, England and Wales year ending 31 March 2019, stop and search statistics data tables: police powers and procedures year ending 31 March 2019. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-wales-year-ending-31- march-2019. 10 HMICFRS (2021). Disproportionate use of police powers A spotlight on stop and search and the use of force. Available: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/disproportionate-use-of-police-powers-spotlight-on-stop-search-and-use-of-force.pdf., p.6. 11 Shiner et al. (2018) The Colour of Injustice: ‘Race’, drugs and law enforcement in England and Wales, Release. Available: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/ColourOfInjustice, p.viii. 12 Home Office (2020) Police powers and procedures, England and Wales, year ending 31 March 2020 – Second Edition. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2020 13 Ibid 14 Ashby, M. (2020) Stop and Search in London – July to September 2020, UCL. Available: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10115766/
2 further decreased from 2018 is additional indication that the ongoing resort to this practice is unjustified.15 Figures on racial and age disparity are revealing, with Black men aged 18-24 being 19 times more likely to be stopped and searched than the general population. Black children (aged 10 – 17) were also stopped and searched at significantly higher rates than White adults and White children.16 Furthermore, in the context of the COVID- 19 pandemic, it is concerning to see that the London boroughs with the highest proportion of searches were Westminster, Lambeth, Tower Hamlets, Newham and Southwark - boroughs with some of the highest number of reported deaths related to COVID-19.17
The dominance of the search for drugs explains in part the pronounced racial disparity in stop and search data, given that drug laws are often “imposed most harshly against ethnic minority communities, despite prevalence rates among these groups being no higher than among the White population”18. Notably, the disproportionality in stop and search cannot be explained by existing trends in drug use. In fact, repeated self-report studies19 have indicated that Black, Asian, Chinese and other minority ethnic group individuals tend to use drugs at a lower rate than White people, with detailed analysis demonstrating that this is partly a function of broader lifestyle differences, including levels of alcohol consumption, culturally distinct orientations to intoxication, and religious influences20. Analysis of the Crime Survey for England and Wales (2018/19) confirms these findings21.
In a recent UK survey, 85% of Black respondents were not confident that they would be treated the same as a White person by the police.22 The recently released HMICFRS report on disproportionate use of police powers in England and Wales confirms that disproportionality and discrimination extend beyond who is searched to the actual execution of such searches.23,24 2019/20 data indicates that Black people were almost 6 times more likely to have force used on them than White people. The data further shows that officers were more than 9 times as likely to have drawn Tasers (but not discharged them) on Black people than on White people. Additionally, Black people were 8 times more likely to be ‘compliant handcuffed’25 than White people, and over 3 times more likely to have a spit and bite guard used on them than White people. The HMICFRS report continues that “the reasons for this are unclear. It could mean that force is used on Black people with less justification than on White people, or there could be other explanations. This needs further exploration.”26
Much of the available evidence on disproportionate stop and search in the UK is based on data for England and Wales. Regrettably, virtually no information exists on Scotland, and only limited data are available for Northern Ireland. Dr. John Topping of Queen’s University, Belfast has provided the following summary in relation to the national picture in relation to Northern Ireland:
In Northern Ireland, police stop and search for non-terrorist powers mirror those in England and Wales – namely powers under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (MDA) and the Police and Criminal Evidence (NI) Order 1989 (PACE). Stop and search by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) (all powers) provides a notable exception in terms of volume use compared to the average in England and Wales – having dropped from a peak of 34 per 1000 of population in 2010 to 14 per 1000 in 202027. However, most of this downward variation is
15 Dodd, V. (2020) Young Black males in London “19 times more likely to be stopped and searched’’, The Guardian (3 December 2020). Available: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2020/dec/03/young-black-males-in-london-19-times-more-likely-to-be-stopped-and-searched 16 Ashby, M. (2020). Stop and Search in London – July to September 2020, UCL. Available: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10115766/, p 5. 17 Bernard, J. & Robinson, I. (2020) UK Policing During The COVID-19 Pandemic. Talking Drugs. Available: https://www.talkingdrugs.org/uk-policing-during- the-covid-19-pandemic 18 Eastwood, N., Fox, E. and Rosmarin, A. (2016). A Quiet Revolution: Drug Decriminalisation Across The Globe. Release. Available: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/drug-decriminalisation-2016, p.6 19 The most reliable basis for assessing levels and patterns of offending [Thornberry, T.P. & Krohn, M.D. (2000) The Self-Report Method for Measuring Delinquency and Crime’ in D. Duffee, R.D. Crutchfield, S. Mastrofski, L. Mazerolle, D. McDowall, & B. Ostrom (eds) Innovations in Measurement and Analysis, Washington DC: National Institute of Justice, p. 33]. 20 Shiner, M. (2009) Drug Use and Social Change: The Distortion of History, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 21 Home Office (2019) Drug Misuse: Findings from the 2018/19 CSEW: Data Tables (Table 3.01 Proportion of 16 to 59-year olds reporting use of drugs in the last year by personal characteristics, 2018/19). Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/drug-misuse-findings-from-the-2018-to-2019-csew 22 Henry, C., Imafidon, K. & McGarry, N. (2020) The Black Community and Human Rights, Available: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt5801/jtselect/jtrights/correspondence/The-Black-Community-Human-Rights-Report.pdf. 23 HMICFRS (2021). Disproportionate use of police powers A spotlight on stop and search and the use of force. Available: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/disproportionate-use-of-police-powers-spotlight-on-stop-search-and-use-of-force.pdf. 24 To note: whilst data about the use of Tasers/firearms has been collected for several years, data about use of force in general has been collected only since 2017, and so is not yet fully developed and has some limitations. 25 Compliant handcuffing means handcuffs are applied when the subject is compliant. 26 HMICFRS (2021). Disproportionate use of police powers A spotlight on stop and search and the use of force. Available: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/disproportionate-use-of-police-powers-spotlight-on-stop-search-and-use-of-force.pdf, p.5. 27 Topping, J. & Bradford, B. (2018) Now You See It, Now You Don’t: On The (In)Visibility of Police Stop and Search Powers in Northern Ireland, Criminology and Criminal Justice, Available: https://pure.qub.ac.uk/en/publications/now-you-see-it-now-you-dont-on-the-invisibility-of-police-stop-an
3 accounted for by drops in counter-terrorist stop and search powers rather than the main (MDA or PACE) powers28 - which have remained almost entirely stable. Overall, PSNI remain as one of the highest users of stop and search powers in the UK across the past decade bar the Metropolitan Police.
Available evidence suggests that ethnic disproportionality related to stop and search appears to be less prominent an issue in Northern Ireland compared to in England and Wales, possibly because the ethnic minority population in the country is very small – just 1.8% of the total29. Moreover, the correspondence between ethnic minority status, class and marginalisation is complicated by the deeply embedded distinctions between the two main Protestant and Catholic communities such that in Northern Ireland being from a visible ethnic minority does not necessarily mark one out as being of special interest to the police in the same fashion as it may in the rest of the UK. This does not mean that the burden of stop and search falls equally across the population; nor is it to argue that ethnic disproportionality in stop and search does not exist (although public figures are limited).
Of note from stop and search statistics during the recent ‘lockdown period’, members of the Irish Traveller Community, for example, represent 0.04% of the Northern Irish population, but comprise 1.5% of all PSNI stop and searchers. And similarly, all recorded PSNI BAME categories in the country are significantly more likely to stopped and searched under MDA than PACE powers – but with an arrest rate of 4% or below (except for Irish Traveller)30.
Set within those figures, finer levels of granularity are not available for PSNI stop and search in comparison to England and Wales, particularly for age and ethnicity. But it should be noted that PSNI’s overall MDA arrest rate between January 2020 – December 2020 sits at just 5%; while the arrest rate for ‘young people’ in the country (25 and under) sits at 3.9% for the same period.
Inequitable criminal justice outcomes
Drug law enforcement, and the prioritisation of low-level drug offences by the police, are a key factor in the overrepresentation of ethnic minority individuals in the criminal justice system. The damage caused by this disparity spreads to greater disruption to education, interpersonal relationships, and future employment opportunities.31 The HMICFRS report, which focuses on disproportionate use of police powers in England and Wales, adds that “it feeds perceptions among the public and police about Black people and crime, and may also influence how the police allocate and deploy resources”.32
The following discussion focuses on institutional racism within the criminal justice system and the targeting of people of African and Asian descent. The evidence presented is in the context of CERD’s 2016 para. 28 and 29 (p.7).
Ethnic disparities introduced by stop and search and other forms of police activity follow through to prosecution, conviction, and sentencing. The 2017 Lammy Review concluded that the odds of receiving a prison sentence for a drug offence were around 240% higher for ethnic minority offenders compared to White offenders.33
Research undertaken by Release, StopWatch, and LSE in 2018 identified a number of ways in which sentencing disparities in England and Wales further perpetuate the injustice that begins at stop and search34:
28 Topping, J. (2019) The Use of ‘Everyday Police Stop and Search Powers, Just News, Committee on the Administration of Justice. Available: https://caj.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Just-News-Autumn-2019.pdf 29 https://www.nisra.gov.uk/sites/nisra.gov.uk/files/publications/2011-census-results-key-statistics-northern-ireland-report-11-december-2012.pdf 30 https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/218383564/BAME_PSNI_Stop_and_Search_Profile_1st_April.pdf 31 Lammy, D. (2017) The Lammy Review: An independent review into the treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic individuals in the Criminal Justice System. HM Government. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/lammy-review-final-report 32 HMICFRS (2021). Disproportionate use of police powers A spotlight on stop and search and the use of force, available: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmicfrs/wp-content/uploads/disproportionate-use-of-police-powers-spotlight-on-stop-search-and-use-of-force.pdf, p.2. 33 Lammy, D. (2017) The Lammy Review: An independent review into the treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic individuals in the Criminal Justice System. HM Government. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/lammy-review-final-report 34 Shiner et al. (2018) The Colour of Injustice: ‘Race’, drugs and law enforcement in England and Wales, Release. Available at: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/ColourOfInjustice
4
• Black people were prosecuted for drug offences at more than eight times the rate of White people in 2017;
• Black and Asian people were convicted of cannabis possession at 11.8 and 2.4 times the rate of White people, despite lower rates of self-reported use, providing prima facie evidence of discrimination;
• White people were more likely to receive an out of court disposal, such as community resolutions or cautions, when compared to Black people who are much more likely to be proceeded against;
• Black people were sentenced to immediate custody for drug offences at 9.1 times the rate of White people, but given suspended sentences at 5.6 times the rate of White people. The lack of measures to address disproportionality in drug law enforcement, and criminal justice outcomes for drug offences, is seen to particularly impact Black women. This is evidenced by the disproportionate incarceration of Black women for drug offences compared to their White, female counterparts: with analysis of Crown Court sentences for drug offences in 2014 revealing that Black women were about 25% more likely than White women to be sentenced to custody at Crown Court35.
Health
The following discussion focuses on health inequalities in relation to drug dependency and available treatment for ethnic minority individuals. The evidence presented is in the context of CERD’s 2016 para. 30 and 31 (p. 7- 8).
Disproportionate drug policing, prosecution, and sentencing along racial lines not only results in higher incarceration rates, but also produces significant secondary harms. The experience of imprisonment has itself been repeatedly shown to increase the likelihood of drug use and drug dependency,36 and recent analysis found that the proportion of people reporting the development of a drug problem in prison in England and Wales rose 8.4 percentage points to almost 15% between 2013/14 and 2018/19.37
In the UK, substantial barriers are reported in accessing drug treatment services for ethnic minority individuals. People of colour, in particular Black people, face multiple and complex disadvantages and require service provision which is both culturally and religiously sensitive, and yet, there is a lack of drug treatment options that are appropriate to their needs.38 Significant regard must be given to how health systems more generally fail this population, and that distrust is born out of this failure, therefore working directly with groups that have been impacted is vital.39
School exclusion
The stigmatisation of young people’s involvement in drug use, and low-level supply, namely the ‘county lines’ rhetoric, is arguably rooted in school exclusion in the first instance - which disproportionately impacts young, ethnic minority males. The following discussion focuses on disproportionate exclusion from schools of pupils belonging to Black and other ethnic minority communities. The evidence presented is in the context of CERD’s 2016 para. 34 and 35 (p. 8).
35 GOV.UK (2016) Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic disproportionality in the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-disproportionality-in-the-criminal-justice-system-in-england-and-wales, p.19 36 Penfold, C., Turnbull, P.J. & Webster, R. (2005) Tackling prison drug markets: An exploratory qualitative study. London: Home Office.; HMIP. 2016. Annual Report 2015–16. London: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate for England and Wales. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237776662_Tackling_Prison_Drug_Markets_An_Exploratory_Qualitative_Study; User Voice (2016) Spice: The Bird Killer. What Prisoners Think about the use of Spice and other legal highs in Prison. Available: https://www.uservoice.org/consultations/spice-use-in-prison/; HM Inspectorate of Prisons (2015) Changing Patterns of Substance Misuse in Adult Prisons and Service Responses, pp. 37– 38. 37 Shilson-Thomas, A. (2020) The prison system: Priorities for investment. Reform. Available: https://reform.uk/research/prison-system-priorities-investment. 38 UKDPC (2010) Drugs and Diversity: Ethnic Minority Groups’, UK Drug Policy Commission. Available: https://www.ukdpc.org.uk/wp- content/uploads/Policy%20report%20-%20Drugs%20and%20diversity_%20ethnic%20minority%20groups%20(policy%20briefing).pdf. 39 For more on this issue, see Release’s Written Submission to the Dame Carol Black Review (Phase 2). Available at: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/written-submission-dame-carol-black-review-0; Bignall. T. et al. (2019) Racial Disparities in Mental Health: Literature and evidence review, Race Equality Foundation. Available: https://raceequalityfoundation.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/mental-health-report-v5-2.pdf
5
If we are to address concerns about young people in the current climate, including the risk of some young people becoming dependent on drugs or becoming involved in serious violence or the drugs trade, then we should be addressing: the high rates of school exclusions; the closure of youth centres due to austerity; the lack of opportunities for employment and advancement in communities that have been further decimated by austerity; the removal of the educational maintenance award; the trauma caused by the financial and housing insecurity faced by many children’s parents. It is these issues that place a young person at greater risk of drug dependency and increases the likelihood of a range of health and social harms.
Analysis of permanent and fixed exclusions in England demonstrates that exclusion disproportionately impacts students from certain ethnicity groups40. The government-commissioned ‘Timpson Review’ shows that after controlling for other factors, Black Caribbean children are around 1.7 times more likely to be permanently excluded compared to White British children, while Mixed White and Black Caribbean children are around 1.6 times more likely, and Indian and Bangladeshi pupils are around half as likely41. Equally, children in some ethnic groups do not appear to be permanently excluded at a different rate from White British pupils, such as Black African children.
Recommendations
The evidence presented by this brief submission identifies clear failures by the UK in implementing several recommendations outlined in CERD 2016’s concluding observations, particularly in relation to data collection, stop and search, criminal justice, and health. It is thus recommended that CERD reiterates such recommendations and urges the government to identify practical steps for addressing racial discrimination in those areas, with specific and dedicated attention to the role of drug policy in creating and exacerbating racial inequalities. Specifically, drug control should be acknowledged as a policy that significantly contributes to the disproportionate policing, arrest, and incarceration of people of African, and Asian, descent; and decriminalisation of drug use and possession should be endorsed by CERD. This endorsement would align with the UN’s common position on drugs; promoting “decriminalization of drug possession for personal use… and the principle of proportionality to address prison overcrowding and overincarceration by people accused of drug crimes”.42
As well as the need for large-scale datasets to record ethnicity consistently and accurately, it is necessary that these data are included in public-facing documents. It is recommended that disaggregation by ethnicity as well as by other protected characteristics, is also conducted, and publicly presented, to ensure that intersectional experiences, and discrimination (if present), can be made visible. Importantly, calls for collecting and releasing more accurate data should not translate to increased control and surveillance of already heavily-policed groups; but rather focus on the need to adequately evaluate the impact of drug policies, and in turn develop and implement more just and effective ones.
The central government spend on drug law enforcement and related activities is estimated to be approximately £1.6 billion per annum;43 despite growing evidence of its ineffectiveness from drug control, health, and human rights perspectives. In a comparable year, the estimated central government spend on early drug intervention is only £215 million44. This, in combination with significant funding cuts to such services, have prompted growing calls to reallocate this expenditure away from drug law enforcement and towards interventions and services which address the social inequalities and conditions that cause criminality. This call grows in response to the Home Office’s Police Officer Uplift Programme, which seeks to increase the number of police officers in England and Wales by 20,000 by 2025.
40 ONS (2020) Permanent and fixed-period exclusions in England: 2018 to 2019. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/permanent-and-fixed- period-exclusions-in-england-2018-to-2019 41 Timpson, E. (2019). Timpson Review of School Exclusions. Available: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/807862/Timpson_review.pdf, p.34. 42 United Nations (2019), Summary of Deliberations [November 2018 sessions]. Available: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3792232?ln=en, p.14. 43 HM Government (2017) Evaluation of the 2010 Drug Strategy. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/628100/Drug_Strategy_Evaluation.PDF 44 Ibid
6
For many people who develop problems with drugs, including alcohol, it will often be a response to trauma(s) that they have experienced45. Expenditure on drug law enforcement should therefore be reallocated towards social and economic programmes that reduce the risk of drug dependency as well as specifically trauma informed services and mental health support for children and young people: which the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) argue is especially lacking in strategies to address substance use and related harm.46 Release and HRI advise that such trauma-informed services also include specialist services for Black and minority ethnic individuals experiencing trauma directly related to racial disparity and disproportionate policing in the UK.
It is clear that the policing of drugs, which currently occupies a significant amount of police time47, is driving racial disparity in the criminal justice system. The continued criminalisation and incarceration of people who use drugs and those involved in low-level supply, is rooted in racial injustice and stigmatisation, undermines efforts for those seeking treatment, and defies much scholarly evidence supporting a public health approach to drug use as opposed to our current, punitive model. Release’s paper, ‘A Quiet Revolution’, highlighted positive outcomes seen across the globe as a result of drug decriminalisation. 48 As organisations, Release and HRI are supportive of a decriminalisation de jure model for all illicit drugs (controlled substances) in the UK.
In the absence of decriminalisation, Release and HRI support the rolling out of pre-arrest drug diversion schemes nationally. The handful of diversion schemes that have been established so far exist due to police leadership, in the absence of political leadership, on this issue. Thames Valley Police, as an example, piloted a drug diversion scheme in the West Berkshire Local Policing Area (LPA) using diversion to a drug service provider in lieu of traditional criminal justice pathways. TVP then shared their learning of diversion with schools in the LPA so that schools were able to adopt, and lead, a a similar scheme in relation to finding proportionate alternatives in lieu of school exclusion. It is important that we roll out school-led schemes which seek to replace exclusion given the evidence of exclusion inequity and the established link between school exclusion and young people’s risk of exploitation and involvement in criminal activity49.
45 Rudzinski, K., McDonough, P., Gartner, R. & Strike, C. (2017) Is there room for resilience? A scoping review and critique of substance use literature and its utilization of the concept of resilience, Subst. Abuse Treat Prev. Policy, 12 (1), p 41. 46 ACMD (2018) Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/761123/Vulnerability_and_Drug_Use_Report_04_Dec_.pdf. 47 Home Office (2020) Police powers and procedures, England and Wales, year ending 31 March 2020 – Second Edition. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/929573/police-powers-procedures-mar20-hosb3120.pdf 48 Eastwood, N., Fox, E. and Rosmarin, A. (2016) A Quiet Revolution: Drug Decriminalisation Across the Globe. Release. Available at: https://www.release.org.uk/publications/drug-decriminalisation-2016 49 IPPR (2017) Making the Difference: Breaking the Link Between School Exclusion and Social Exclusion. Available:https://www.ippr.org/files/2017-10/making- the-difference-report-october-2017.pdf
7
Resistance Lab submission to Runnymede Trust Re: CERD 2021: Call to Evidence
Submit to: [email protected] Deadline: 6pm, Monday 8th March 2021
Email: [email protected]
Name of Organisation and Organisation Website: Resistance Lab (https://resistancelab.network/)
Organisation Representative Name: Dr. Kerry Pimblott, University of Manchester
Dear Runnymede Trust,
We are replying to your CERD 2021: Call to Evidence to report evidence on the use of Conducted Energy Devices (Tasers) by police in England and Wales.
Resistance Lab has published a report, titled A Growing Threat to Life: Taser Usage by Greater Manchester Police (2020), documenting the intrinsic and potentially lethal threat posed by Taser in the hands of police. We wrote this report in response to the stories of the many victims of police Taser usage here in Greater Manchester and around the country. Since their introduction in 2003, 18 people have died following Taser usage by police and many more have sustained serious injury and trauma. In official investigations, coroners’ inquests have now identified the use of a Taser as a cause of contributing factors in the deaths of at least three individuals – Marc Cole, Jordan Begley, and Andrew Pimlott. In many cases, these individuals and their families have fought protracted battles through complaints processes, IOPC investigations, and the courts to secure justice as well as to alert the nation to the threat posed by Tasers in the hands of police.
The report examines the Home Office’s annual ‘use of force’ data and shows that these warnings from the victims and their families have not been heard. Tasers are being rolled out to more officers around the country and their use is being increasingly routinised. The use of Tasers by police forces across England and Wales has increased by more than 500% over the last decade up from 3,573 incidents in 2009/10 to 23,451 in 2018/19.
The report also shows that police are disproportionately using the weapon against Black communities. In 2018/19, Black people were subject to the use of Tasers by police in England and Wales at almost 8 times the rate of white people. During that same period, Black people in Greater Manchester were subject to the use of Tasers by police at nearly 4 times the rate of white people. It was the failure to address these racial disparities that prompted representatives of several human rights groups – including Liberty, Inquest, StopWatch and The Open Society – to announce their resignation from the National Taser Stakeholder Advisory Group (NTSAG) in March 2020.
In our report, we document the experiences of several community members whose devastating encounters with police armed with Taser illustrate how race intersects with other vulnerabilities of class, age and disability compounding the inherent risks associated with the weapon’s usage leading to trauma, serious injury and death. Tasers are being used against children and vulnerable adults, particularly individuals with mental health issues. In 2018/19, Greater Manchester Police (GMP) reported more incidents involving the use of Tasers against children under the age of 18, whether discharged or not, than any other force with the exception of the Metropolitan Police. In total, GMP reported 118 such incidents including eight against children under the age of 11. During that same period, GMP also reported that individuals perceived by the officer to have either physical or mental disabilities constituted 15% of total incidents involving Tasers. In fact, in many of the Taser stories documented in our report, GMP were called by a friend, neighbor or family member concerned for the emotional or mental well-being of an individual. When the police arrived, rather than help the individual in question they escalated the situation by drawing and firing a Taser. We are particularly concerned about these incidents and the potentially deadly impact Tasers can have when used against individuals with underlying health issues such as cardiac and pulmonary conditions, epilepsy and diabetes.
See the report and full evidence here: https://resistancelab.network/our-work/taser- report/index.html
In addition to the findings outlined in our report, the Children’s Rights Alliance for England (CRAE) has shown that Black children are disproportionately subject to Taser usage. A March 2020 briefing, titled Children’s rights and policing: Tasers and children’s rights, identified that in the first 10 months of 2019 nearly 74% of Taser use by the Metropolitan Police was on BAME children. See the briefing here: http://www.crae.org.uk/media/128554/CRAE_POLICING-TASER-PRINT-1.pdf
In 2018, Justice Gap published a report showing that two-thirds of people Tasered by police between 2010 and 2014 were identified as having a mental health condition. The human rights group Black Mental Health (BMH UK) has raised awareness about the overrepresentation of Black Britons in secure psychiatric settings and their increased chances of being subjected to coercive practices including the use of Taser. BMH UK has joined with legislators in calling for a statutory ban on the use of Tasers against people detained under the Mental Health Act. See the report here: https://www.thejusticegap.com/must-ban-tasers- mental-health-system/
Evidence for submission to Runnymede Trust - 8th March 2021 This submission argues for the use of Restorative practice as a means of tackling racism in the education sector – schools, colleges and universities. First, this submission will consider what is currently being done to tackle racism and discrimination within the education system. It will then set out the Restorative model as a more effective way of tackling racism and discrimination within education. Next, it will consider the research behind the use of the Restorative model tackling racism in education by changing adult-student relationships (reducing exclusions) and changing student-student relationships (reducing bullying). Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policies in education reflect the stance and language set out in the Equality Act 2010, calling for zero-tolerance to discrimination against the nine protected characteristics. The intention to eliminate discrimination is widely accepted but is this the most effective route to achieve the desired outcome? Translating these policies into practice in a school or college community requires collective ownership of the principle of ‘protecting’ characteristics which have been historically ill-treated (Mitchell, 2020). The traditional UK education system views transgression of rules as unacceptable behaviour, requiring punishment. This is embedded in a hierarchical system where the teachers hold the rule book and use their power to enforce those rules when they are broken. As a social construct racism (Hodson, 2016), direct or indirect, is complex: produced by and affecting the individuals immediately involved in an incident and also the product of and affecting the ecological system of a school (Song et al., 2020). This points to the limitations of treating any incident of racism in isolation when it is part of a much more complex and integrated system. Similarly, a focus on rules for behaviour and punishments for transgressions, does not enable the voice of the harmed party to be heard, but tends to reiterate theoretical protections which may not translate to practical everyday steps for improvement of the whole cultural system. The Restorative Model aims to repair harm by communicating, understanding and learning. Through third-party support, a space is created for both parties to explore what happened, and change their relationship with the harm. The person who has caused the harm has an opportunity to reflect on their actions. The person who has experienced harm can be heard safely and explore what they need for the harm to be repaired. Staff involved in the process gain an opportunity to learn about the feelings of those involved to strengthen motivations for improving their community. The Restorative Model builds relationships and promotes shared responsibility for harm, reducing the likelihood of defensive denial of racism when it is a matter of ‘proving guilt’ or ‘insufficient evidence’. The traditional system is often also discouraging for those reporting harms enmeshed with racism and unsatisfactory outcomes lead to even less reporting. Instead, the Restorative model seeks to equip participants with the principles, language and confidence for dialogue, in which all perspectives, and insights can be considered.
Exclusions In 2018-19, there were 438,300 temporary exclusion in the United Kingdom, which was a 7% rise on the previous year (Harris, 2021). Within these, the highest percentages of temporary exclusions in ethnic groups demonstrated that Gypsy/Roma (21.26%), Irish Traveller (14.63%), Mixed White/Black Caribbean (10.69%), Black Caribbean (10.37%) were amongst the highest. In comparison, 5.8% of those temporary excluded were White (Department for Education, 2021). This article also highlights an increased use of ‘isolation rooms’ or ‘reflection rooms’ within schools, with the students who subject to these forms of punishment saying they were made to sit in silence and had to put their hand up to move. These young
people reported that they did not see isolation as an opportunity to reflect or reintegrate into the classroom but likened it to ‘prison’. Given that a significant proportion of prisoners experienced exclusion at school this could this be the gateway to reduced life chances disproportionately affecting young people who experience racism. Although official guidance is that isolation should be used ‘... no longer than is necessary and that their time spent there is used as constructively as possible’ (Department for Education, 2016) the evidence from young people does not confirm that this is being followed in practice.
However there is significant evidence that Restorative Practice contributes to reducing exclusions. For example a school serving communities in the bottom 10% of the indices of deprivation, has achieved an Ofsted assessment of ‘Outstanding’ and the Quality Mark of the UK Restorative Justice Council. Its Principal confirms the impact year on year after stating in 2019: “Through prioritising relationships using Restorative Practice, both student-student and adult-student, and focusing on hope, happiness and social justice, our school has not only increased its achievements, but also over the last two years shows a TWO THIRDS REDUCTION IN FIXED-TERM (temporary) EXCLUSIONS. Since introducing Restorative Practice we’ve made NO PERMANENT EXCLUSIONS. If a student breaches the parameters of what the school community can contain, they are enabled to face up to and learn from what they have done, and every effort made to continue with them. If a change of school is inevitable, then the compass is set for a new beginning based on learning, rather than condemnation and shaming.” (School Principal of Mounts Bay Academy RJ Working, 2019). There has been more research conducted in the United States than in the United Kingdom and much of the data suggests that that when the Restorative model is implemented in an effective way, there is a positive impact on behaviour, relationships between staff and pupils and a reduction in exclusions. One example (Ingraham et al. cited by Song et al., 2020) is a three-year study of implementing the Restorative model in schools with the aim of achieving equity in school discipline which found there was an 85% reduction in behavioural referrals, reductions in parent concerns about their children, empowered parent and youth to take on leadership roles, and strong cultural and social validity. Fania Davis, Founding Director of Restorative Justice of Oakland Youth has written about the positive impact of ‘Interrupting the School to Prison Pipeline through Restorative Justice’ (Davis, 2016). She quotes data from the work completed in Restorative schools compared to other schools demonstrating effectiveness; between 2011-2014 graduation rates increasing by 60 percent, suspensions of African-American students for defiance decreasing by 40 percent and 88% of teachers stating that Restorative practices were very or somewhat helpful in manging difficult student behaviours in classrooms. Restorative practice conceptualises racism as a form of harm, both interpersonal and systemic, and seeks to equip both teachers and students with the language, knowledge and skills to address this. From the Runnymede Trust paper, ‘Them and Us’ (Asare, 2009), it highlighted, specifically in less ethnically diverse secondary schools, teachers not recognising the importance of this issue in their school and responding to occurrences with punishments. Teachers spoke about treating all pupils the same, being ‘colour-blind’ and not recognising the value of discussion about racism and the associated historic and current harms it has caused. Treating racist incidents as one-off events fails to recognise the bigger picture and buries the problem more deeply. To reduce and eliminate racism, we need to create a culture of personal accountability, in ways that are tested and managed, as Restorative practice has demonstrated.
Bullying As well as the Restorative model being used to restore and enhance relationships between staff and students within a school community, Restorative practice can be used to improve relationships between students where there may be division and inequality, expressed through bullying or other harmful behaviours. Thompson & Smith (2011) cited by Brown (2018) in ‘Bullying; A Review of the Evidence’, highlights some of the evidence of using the restorative approach in UK schools; stating that ‘... rates of success in stopping bullying were highest in schools with consistently Restorative approaches (79 per cent) and lower in schools that were inconsistently Restorative (64 per cent) or not Restorative at all (58 per cent)’. The Department of Education (2001) cited by Restorative Justice Council also found that 97% of teachers rated Restorative approaches as effective in dealing with bullying. Importantly, the Restorative model does not prescribe outcomes, but empowers the harmed party and enables their voice to be heard. This has relevance for the leadership and teamwork of young people with lived experience of harm, those not traditionally selected for roles such as ‘school council’ and could shift the axis of the way that racism is understood in schools. Conclusions Based on the evidence of effective implementation of the Restorative model within education, this could provide a route to positively impact bullying and exclusion, which the data demonstrates disproportionately affects black and ethnic minority groups. Conceptualising racism as a form of harm, both interpersonal and systemic, fits within this model as a harm against identity, and suggests new ways to work toward eliminating racism in educational institutions.
References: Brown, K. (2018) ‘Bullying: A review of the evidence’, Education Policy Institute, 12 November [Online]. Available at https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/bullying-a- review-of-the-evidence/ (Accessed 8th March 2021) Davis, F. (2016) ‘Interrupting the School to Prison Pipeline Through Restorative Justice’ HuffPost, 10 May [Online]. Available at Interrupting the School to Prison Pipeline Through Restorative Justice | HuffPost (Accessed 8th March 2021) Department for Education (2021) Temporary Exclusions gov.uk [Online]. Available at Temporary exclusions - GOV.UK Ethnicity facts and figures (ethnicity-facts- figures.service.gov.uk) (Accessed 8th March 2021) Department for Education (2016) Behaviour and Disciplines in schools: Advice for headteachers and school staff [Online], London, Department for Education. Available at Behaviour and Discipline in Schools - A guide for headteachers and school staff final draft.docx (publishing.service.gov.uk) (Accessed 8th March 2021) Equality Act 2010 c.15. Available at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents (Accessed 8th March 2021) Harris, J. (2021) ‘‘It’s like being in prison’: what’s behind the rise in school exclusions?’, Guardian, 30 January [Online]. Available at ‘It’s like being in prison’: what’s behind the rise in school exclusions? | Schools | The Guardian (Accessed 8th March 2021)
Hodson, G. (2016) ‘Race as a Social Construction’, Psychology today, 5 December [Online]. Available at https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/without-prejudice/201612/race- social-construction (Accessed 8th March 2021) Mitchell, D. (2020) ‘Zero Tolerance and Tackling Racism Restoratively in UK Education’, Restorative Justice Council, 16th October [Blog]. Available at https://restorativejustice.org.uk/blog/zero-tolerance-and-tackling-racism-restoratively-uk- education (Accessed 8th March 2021) Restorative Justice Council, Department for Education guidance: Preventing and tackling bullying – highlights restorative justice [Online]. Available at https://restorativejustice.org.uk/resources/department-education-guidance-preventing-and- tackling-bullying-%E2%80%93-highlights-restorative (Accessed 8th March 2021) RJ Working (2019) Restorative Practice Creating Change Report 2019 [Online]. Available at news & events - RJ Working (Accessed 8th March 2021) Samuel Y. Song , Jacqueline M. Eddy , Heather M. Thompson , Brian Adams & Jennifer Beskow (2020) Restorative Consultation in Schools: A Systematic Review and Call for Restorative Justice Science to Promote Anti-Racism and Social Justice, Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 30:4, 462-476, DOI: 10.1080/10474412.2020.1819298
Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD)
March 2021
1
The Bell Foundation is a charity which aims to overcome disadvantage through language education. The Bell Foundation works with a range of partners to produce robust, evidence- based research. We are responding to this call for evidence to share research that indicates that Article 5 of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) is not being adequately met for people who speak English as an Additional Language in regards to education and criminal justice and access to justice.
Education1
The role of language in the educational achievement of pupils from ethnic minorities Research demonstrates the ‘most prevailing inequalities in education in England are those associated with socio-economic status, ethnicity, and gender’ (Strand, 2014). In 2019, 33.5% of primary school aged pupils were of minority ethnic origins, and 31.3% of secondary school aged pupils (DfE, 2019). However, evidence demonstrates that educational achievement framed exclusively in terms of social class, ethnicity or gender are insufficient and that more nuanced data is required to identify at-risk groups (Strand, 2014). The evidence establishes the need for looking at more granular data and evidence: where factors such as language and time of arrival are necessary to identify at-risk pupils within a single ethnic category (Strand, 2018) (Hutchinson, 2018). Research demonstrates that a primary cause of underachievement is a lack of proficiency in the English language (Strand et al, 2015) (Strand, 2018) (Strand, 2020). The evidence shows that proficiency in English can explain 22% of the variation in EAL pupils’ achievement compared to the typical 3-4% that can be statistically explained using gender, free school meal status and ethnicity (Strand, 2018).
The evidence demonstrates that in order to achieve in line with their English speaking monolingual peers, EAL pupils must reach a certain level of proficiency in English (Strand et al, 2015) (Strand, 2018) (Strand, 2020). This is needed for the child both to comprehend the content of the lesson taught by the teacher, and to express their understanding and knowledge of that subject.
Within minority ethnic groups, speaking English as an Additional Language is a risk factor for under-attainment. This risk is more pronounced within particular ethnic groups, and amongst specific first languages. Research demonstrated that while EAL students were on average 0.60 points or two National Curriculum (NC) months2 behind their monolingual English- speaking peers from the same ethnic group at Key Stage 2, this gap was substantially larger among White Other (2.43 points), Any Other ethnic group (1.43 points), Black African (1.17 points) and Pakistani (1.12 points) students. At KS4 while there was no overall EAL gap in Best 8 score, there was a large EAL gap within the White Other ethnic group (26 points for Best 8 score, 49% vs. 70% 5+A*-C) and the Black African ethnic group (17 points for Best 8 score, 58% vs. 69% 5+A*-C) (Strand et al, 2015). The figure below illustrates the Best 8
1 NB: The ethnicity identity labels used in this submission are those used in the National Pupil Database and not necessarily the preferred terms of individuals
2 National Curriculum (NC) months was the unit of measurement of underachievement in place in 2015
2
score difference between pupils who speak EAL and pupils who speak English as their first language (EF) by ethnic group using 2013 data.
Within an ethnic minority, first language is also a factor in attainment. After accounting for student background such as low socio-economic status in the White Other cohort, there are minimal differences in achievement between English, Russian, Spanish, French and Italian speakers. However Romanian, Turkish and Portuguese speakers are all around 1.75 points (7 NC months) behind English speakers in the White Other cohort, and Lithuanian, Polish and Albanian speakers around 1 point (4 NC months) behind English speakers at Key Stage 2 (Strand et al, 2015). At Key Stage 2, six language groups have attainment below the national expected standard even for children who had arrived in English state-funded schools as infants; these are Pashto, Panjabi, Turkish, Portuguese, Czech and Slovak (Hutchinson, 2018) Within the Black African cohort attainment difference by first language was marked at Key Stage 4. In terms of Best 8 score, Yoruba and Igbo speakers again score slightly above their English speaking peers, while Portuguese (-44), Lingala (-32), Somali (-29), Swahili (-24) and French (-23) speakers all scored significantly below the mean for Black African English speakers (Strand et al, 2015).
Research has demonstrated that minority ethnic groups who speak English as an Additional Language are at greater risk of underachievement when they arrive late into the school system, this is because it takes on average over six years to reach competency in English (when a child can access the curriculum) for pupils who arrive New to English (Strand,
3
2020). At Key Stage 4, late-arriving children with Pashto as a first language continue to have extremely low attainment. Those arriving in year 9 achieved an average grade of between F and E in Attainment 8, falling to an average grade of G for year 11 arrivals3. This is in stark contrast to children with Chinese as their first language, who achieved an average Attainment 8 grade of between a B and a C if they arrived in year 9, falling to D for year 11 arrivals. (Hutchinson, 2018)
The data strongly demonstrates the complexity of understanding attainment risk for children from ethnic minorities, where proficiency in English, first language, ethnicity, and socio- economic status needs to be considered in order to identify children at risk of underachievement and ensure adequate support is provided.
Despite the central role that proficiency in English plays in the attainment of children who speak English as an Additional Language including children from ethnic minorities, schools in England are not required to assess or track the progress of proficiency in English. Regular assessment of EAL pupils is standard in many English speaking countries, including Canada, Australia and the United States of America, and reporting is statutory in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (Hutchinson, 2018) (Strand, 2018). Research notes the effectiveness of policy in the United States which requires ‘rigorous annual targets for Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students to reach proficiency, and testing and reporting requirements to support this’ (Strand, 2020).
‘The abolition in 2011 of dedicated resourcing and specialist support for this group of learners has meant the absence of any national oversight or provision of professional qualifications, staff development and specialist roles for teachers and other school staff working with children with EAL’ (Hutchinson, 2018) . This was flagged as a concern in the 2016 in the UK NGOs’ Alternative Report Submission to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination with regard to the UK Government’s 21st to 23rd Periodic Reports. It has now been ten years since this funding was removed and the effect on EAL provision in the school system is notable. By 2018 the number of Local Authorities with no central EAL spending had increased from 39 to 72 since 2011-12 (Hutchinson, 2018). In 2019, references to pupils who speak English as an Additional Language were removed from the Ofsted Inspection Handbooks, further de-prioritising the education and integration of ethnic minorities in England. Despite evidence from schools of the need for training in teaching in diverse classrooms (OECD TALIS, 2019) (Foley, 2018) the new Initial Teacher Training Core Content Framework which launched in 2020 did not provide minimum content for trainee teachers to learn to support linguistically and ethnically diverse children. In 2021 Ofsted scrapped the National Lead Role for English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL), EAL and Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller.
Recommendations:
The following changes to education policy are recommended to address the inequity in educational provision and access to the curriculum for children who speak EAL and whom are often from an ethnic minority group.
3 Under the 2018 point system an F is 1.5, an E is 2 and a G is 1
4
To better identify pupils at risk of underachievement schools will need to regularly and statutorily assess the proficiency in English of EAL pupils. Formative assessment of proficiency in English will be necessary for teachers to develop appropriate support strategies for pupils with EAL to enable them to catch up with their monolingual peers and access learning. Teachers need to receive training to build their skills and expertise in teaching approaches to support the language development needed for EAL pupils to catch up with their English-speaking monolingual peers The evidence regarding the risk of late arrival demonstrates a need to introduce a ‘late arrival premium’ in the national funding formula for schools as the current funding provision for pupils arriving late into the English school system is inadequate. This funding would help address the large attainment differences between those arriving in Year 7 and those arriving later in Year 10 or 11 (Hutchinson, 2018)
Criminal Justice
Language barriers for people from ethnic minorities when accessing justice The 2017 the Lammy Review explored the treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) individuals in the Criminal Justice System. It found that despite making up just 14% of the population at the time, BAME men and women made up 25% of prisoners, while over 40% of young people in custody were from BAME backgrounds. It noted ‘there is greater disproportionality in the number of Black people in prisons here [across England and Wales] than in the United States’ (Lammy, 2017). The review found evidence of differential treatment at the Crown Court where ‘BAME defendants were more likely than White defendants to receive prison sentences for drug offences, even when factors such as past convictions are taken into account’ (Lammy, 2017). It also raised concerns that there was a systematic de-prioritisation of race noting that policy bears ‘only passing mentions of race, ethnicity or religion’ (Lammy, 2017).
Currently, no national data is collected on the number of offenders who speak EAL. Similarly, it is not known how many victims of reported crimes speak EAL. However, 2011 census data does capture English language skill by ethnicity. For example, it indicates that 16% of people recorded as Asian Bangladeshi and 11% of people recorded as Asian Pakistani have little to no English, whilst the Lammy Review notes that Asian women are more than twice as likely to proceed to Crown Court after a CPS charge than white women. This gives an indication of how there is likely to be intersection between ethnicity and English language needs creating additional barriers in access to justice for people from minority ethnic groups. The Bell Foundation has commissioned research from the Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research, Victim Support and the Centre for Justice Innovation to explore how language barriers impact individuals’ experiences of the criminal justice system – whether as victims, witnesses, suspects, defendants or convicted offenders
The preliminary findings identified language barriers to equity in justice for defendants and offenders including (Language barriers in the criminal courts, 2020):
Archaic, complex language of the criminal courts which can be confusing even for the native speaker
5
Availability and quality of interpreter services including interpreters speaking a different language or no interpreter arriving in court at all Effective participation and access to justice is compromised with defendants unable to give their best evidence, and following sentencing, offenders not understanding the terms of their probation, undermining their ability to comply
Prisoners who are speakers of languages other than English face communication barriers in prison and when preparing for rehabilitation and release into society. Within the prison context, prisoners without knowledge of English, may not be able to understand instructions or basic information, putting safety and wellbeing at risk. Offenders may also not be able to access prison education, which supports their rehabilitation. At the moment, whilst prisoners are screened on entry for literacy and maths there is no routine screening for English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) needs on entry to the prison.
In a national survey of Victim Support staff and volunteers, 87% reported that victims with English as an additional language have additional barriers (Language barriers in victim care, 2020). The research indicated language barriers in victim care and support for people who speak EAL and whom are often from ethnic minorities including:
Patchy provision of translation and interpretation services including interpreters who speak a different language than the victim, and written communication that is not always available in victim’s first language Quality of interpretation was also raised as a concern for example when interpreters answer questions without even asking the client. In a national survey of Victim Support staff and volunteers 59% were concerned with the quality of translation. Providers raised concerns regarding the impact of interpretation on the support relationship reporting that the ‘outcome of the job is not the same’ for victims who speak EAL and whom are often from an ethnic minority Providers raised concerns regarding the lack of training and guidelines with one police officer noting “Some cultures have negative sounds, or body languages that perhaps I don’t understand. I need to be aware of culture. I need to be aware of language problems... It should be included - understanding religions, perhaps, cultures, how a family works”. 76% of providers in the national survey wanted further training.
Recommendations
The Bell Foundation recommends the following policies to address both the negative effect on victims’ engagement and access to the Criminal Justice System, and the inequity in access to rehabilitation for offenders who speak English as an additional language and who will often be from an ethnic minority group:
Prisons should screen for ESOL levels on arrival to enable ESOL provision that addresses rehabilitation needs of offenders The Criminal Justice System requires high quality interpreters for victims and defendants to be available at each stage of the process Staff across all levels of the Criminal Justice System, from police officers, victim services, court officers and prison and probation staff should receive training in the cultural and linguistic needs of persons from ethnic minorities
6
References Carroll, C. et al (2015), A Prison within a Prison: The provision of ESOL education and training for prisoners and ex-prisoners
Foley, Y, (2018) English as an Additional Language and Initial Teacher Education
Hutchinson, J. (2018) Educational Outcomes of Children with English as an Additional Language
Lammy, D. (2017) The Lammy Review An independent review into the treatment of, and outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic individuals in the Criminal Justice System
Strand, S (2014) Ethnicity, gender, social class and achievement gaps at age 16: intersectionality and ‘getting it’ for the white working class. Research Papers in Education 29:2
Strand, S., Malberg, L. and Hall, J. (2015) English as an Additional Language (EAL) and educational achievement in England: An analysis of the National Pupil Database
Strand, S. and Hessel, A. (2018) English as an Additional Language, proficiency in English and pupils’ educational achievement: An analysis of Local Authority data
Strand, S and Lindorff, A. (2020) English as an Additional Language: Proficiency in English, educational achievement and rate of progression in English language learning
The Bell Foundation, (2020) Language barriers in victim care and support - preliminary findings
The Bell Foundation, (2020) Language barriers in the criminal courts – preliminary findings
7
The Unity Project (TUP) 277a Upper Street Islington, London N12TZ www.unity-project.org.uk [email protected]
Response to open consultation on ethnic disparities and inequality in the UK1 Question 10: Can you suggest other ways in which racial and ethnic disparities in the UK could be addressed? In particular, is there evidence of where specific initiatives or interventions have resulted in positive outcomes? Are there any measures which have been counterproductive and why?
The Unity Project
The Unity Project is a charity that specifically and exclusively assists destitute migrants who have Limited Leave to Remain (‘LLTR’) subject to the condition that they have no recourse to public funds (‘NRPF’) to apply to have the condition lifted (this application is referred to as a ‘Change of Conditions application’ or ‘CoC application’). We have assisted over 250 families with this application in the current year.
The ‘no recourse to public funds’ (NRPF) policy
The ‘no recourse to public funds’ (NRPF) policy is counterproductive in addressing racial and ethnic disparities in the UK.
We are aware that other organisations have raised concerns about the discriminatory impact of the NRPF policy in their submissions to this review. It is also already well documented, for example in our research (which shows that almost everyone affected by the policy is non-white, and mostly from 2 Commonwealth countries), and in several independent reports related to health outcomes in the 3 pandemic (which recommend suspending the condition to combat racial inequalities). The discriminatory impact of the policy has also been the subject of ongoing litigation challenging the policy’s lawfulness.
The Policy Equality Statement on NRPF
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-uk-call-for-evidenc e/ethnic-disparities-and-inequality-in-the-uk-call-for-evidence 2 https://www.unity-project.org.uk/research 3 For example, see SAGE report of July 2020 https://www.independentsage.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Independent-SAGE-BME-Report_02Jul y_FINAL.pdf and Baroness Lawrence report of November 2020 https://www.lawrencereview.co.uk/ - both recommend suspension of the NRPF condition
The Unity Project (TUP) Company number: 12365154 Charity number: 1191462 Registered address: 277a Upper Street, Islington, London N1 2TZ Regulated by the OISC (ref no. N202000086) To supplement these submissions and reports, we particularly want to raise our concerns about the 4 inadequacy of the government’s Policy Equality Statement (PES) in relation to the NRPF policy. This was updated in April 2020, five years after its initial publication, as the result of litigation.
The PES does not show any intent to remedy the policy’s discriminatory impact, which has therefore continued over the long and difficult months since its publication. In fact, the PES seems to seek only to justify the policy’s discriminatory impact. In so doing, the Home Office reveals apparent misunderstanding of and/or disregard for the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED). The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) last week published a report that found that the Home Office did not comply with section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (the PSED) when developing, implementing and monitoring hostile environment policies; the NRPF policy offers a case study of these past and ongoing failings.5 The PES insists that any discriminatory impact is acceptable, as the policy ‘pursues legitimate aims... and is a proportionate means of achieving those aims’. These ‘aims’ are briefly set out in the introduction (pp.4-5). The PES adopts a perfunctory approach to explaining why the policy is a proportionate means of achieving these aims, if indeed it can be said to do so at all.
Specifically, the PES is lacking in the following respects. Whilst not all of these issues relate directly to race, all our relevant in that (a) racial disparities intersect with factors such as gender and (b) they suggest that the impact in terms of race has not been properly considered, let alone understood or addressed:
1. The PES does not fully consider the impact of the NRPF policy. The PES is determinedly focussed solely on the operation of the Change of Conditions application procedure, rather than the problems which give rise to the need for the Change of Conditions procedure in the first place. It apparently negligently assumes that this specific aspect of the NRPF policy is non-negotiable, and the only aspect of the policy which can be changed. 2. The PES admits that data ‘is not available’ about the impact of the policy on, for example, people with disabilities or people who are pregnant. The PES does not express urgency or certainty in seeking to improve Home Office data collection in order to assess the policy’s impact, settling for vague expressions of intent such as ‘We want to find a way of providing this kind of information.’ Months later, recent attempts to extract such data reveal no improvement.6 3. Some data is available. In these cases, it is the analysis and response that is lacking, again appearing part of determined effort to avoid the conclusion that the policy is discriminatory. In relation to race, there are at least two notable examples of this:
4 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/8805 31/Policy_Equality_Statement__PES__21_April_2020.pdf 5 https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/home-office-failed-comply-equality-law-when-i mplementing-%E2%80%98hostile-environment%E2%80%99 6 See, for example, the response to parliamentary questions on 15th and 16th September 2020: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2020-09-09.87474.h&s=No+Recourse+to+Public+Funds#g 87474.q0; https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2020-09-10.88240.h&s=no+recourse+to+public+funds#g88 240.q0
The Unity Project (TUP) Company number: 12365154 Charity number: 1191462 Registered address: 277a Upper Street, Islington, London N1 2TZ Regulated by the OISC (ref no. N202000086) a. The PES states that there is no ‘evidence that the imposition of the condition of NRPF, when imposed, impacts distinctly upon a person depending upon their colour’. It is unclear how this conclusion has been drawn, given that the data shows that a combined 50% of applicants in the cases reviewed were of Nigerian and Ghanaian nationality, and the PES states that ‘in the light of most applicants being Ghanaian or Nigerian and their children sharing in this identity there is disproportionate impact on adults and children sharing the characteristic of being in this particular racial group’. Regardless, the PES’ proposed response to the disproportionate impact on certain ‘racial groups’ is to take account of (undefined) ‘specific circumstances relating to the need to access public funds that are linked to the protected characteristic of race (colour)’ in deciding CoC applications. The PES therefore seems to either deny or ignore the fact that the data suggests that non-white people are more likely to be destitute as a result of the policy, and therefore need to apply for recourse to public funds. It fails to acknowledge that once the CoC application is being considered, it is already too late. b. A similar confused rationale is applied specifically to applications from (parents of) black British children, who again make up a significant proportion of overall 7 applicants. The PES even goes so far as to imply that these children may in fact ‘benefit’ from the operation of the policy, as their applications are more likely to succeed than those of adult applicants without children.8 4. The PES does not account for intersectionality - there is no express understanding of the way that characteristics such as race and gender may overlap to exacerbate disadvantage.
Conclusion
Racial and ethnic disparities in the UK could be addressed by ending the NRPF policy. Far from seeking to understand or address this, the government (as evidenced by the PES) seems intent on denying and/or justifying the way the policy currently exacerbates these disparities.
Submitted on behalf of The Unity Project by:
Caz Hattam Project Coordinator 30/11/20
7 Note, 90% of the families involved in our research had at least one British child: https://www.unity-project.org.uk/research 8 It is perhaps relevant to note that a similar rationale is also applied to women. The available data shows that there are an equal number of men and women on the so-called ‘10-year-route’ with NRPF. The PES acknowledges that (a) ‘significantly’ more women apply to have the NRPF condition lifted, and (b) female applicants are more likely to be successful in their applications (note, our research shows that well over 90% of applicants are women: https://www.unity-project.org.uk/research). This suggests that more women than men are destitute as a result of the policy, and therefore need to and are eligible to apply for recourse to public funds. Again, this possibility is not explored by the PES. In fact, it even goes so far as to imply that women may in fact ‘benefit’ from the operation of the policy, as their applications are more likely to succeed than those of their male counterparts.
The Unity Project (TUP) Company number: 12365154 Charity number: 1191462 Registered address: 277a Upper Street, Islington, London N1 2TZ Regulated by the OISC (ref no. N202000086) UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
ABOUT UNISON
UNISON is the UK's largest public service trade union, with over 1.3 million members. Our members work delivering public services in local government, healthcare, education, police and justice, community sector and utilities, for public and private employers.
UNISON has 185,000 Black members, mainly working in education or care settings, delivering frontline services, many are low-paid.
In UNISON, ‘Black’ – with a capital B – is used to indicate people with a shared history. ‘Black’ is used in a broad political and inclusive sense to describe people in the UK who have suffered from colonialism and enslavement in the past, and continue to experience racism and diminished opportunities in society. As such, this submission uses the term Black in place of the acronym BAME, or the term ethnic minority.
We welcome this timely opportunity to respond on behalf of our members to the UN CERD via the Runnymede Trust. As demonstrated by UNISON’s and others’ research, slow or no action from Government has had a material impact on discrimination and injustices suffered by Black workers in the UK; we welcome the opportunity to develop some of the solutions on behalf of our Black members specifically and Black workers more broadly.
RACISM IN THE ECONOMY AND WORKFORCE – OCCUPATIONAL SEGREGATION
COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on Black workers and Black communities. Occupational segregation, such as in the care sector, means historically disadvantaged groups have borne brunt of the pandemic, as both workers and service users. A majority are low-paid, with many on insecure contracts. One-sixth of the social care workforce in England, for example, is not originally from the UK.
Over and above occupational segregation, UNISON is concerned about reports from members on inequality in deployment, redeployment, furloughing and redundancy, within occupations and across sectors. Research shows that Black workers experience discrimination at every stage of the employment process, from recruitment to redundancy.
The COVID pandemic has shone a spotlight on inequality experienced by Black workers. Their vulnerability during the pandemic is linked to the long term and toxic combination of job segregation, leading to over-representation in lower paid and insecure jobs – a position supported by the Kings Fund - and the experience of long-term structural racism in the workplace.
Black workers are left in sectors with limited career and salary prospects and on insecure contracts. Even where this is not the case, they are left to navigate racism in their work, with clients, colleagues or managers not wanting to work with them, limiting the scope to demonstrate competence and therefore career and salary progression
Research by UNISON and the Labour Research Department showed that between 2010 and 2019, the proportion of Black local government staff redundancies was
UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION higher than the overall proportion of Black staff. This research showed that between 2010 and 2019, the proportion of Black local government staff redundancies was higher than the overall population, something exacerbated by the economic fallout of the pandemic.
UNISON has been at the forefront of campaigning for measures to address the gender pay gap, and latterly, the ethnicity pay gap. Whilst some progress has been made to address the gender pay gap (which arises in no small part because of occupational segregation), over the same time period, virtually no progress has been made by Government to address the ethnicity pay gap.
IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON BLACK WORKERS
UNISON’s submission to the Women and Equalities Select Committee inquiry into the unequal impact of Coronavirus (Covid-19) on people with protected characteristics highlighted how Black workers have been adversely and disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 crisis. UNISON would therefore welcome a UN ruling on the Government’s policy failures in relation to Black workers, particularly in light of the Government’s review of the Human Rights Act.
Occupational segregation arising from systemic racism means Black workers are concentrated in lower paid, frontline roles, with many on insecure contracts – a fact reflected in our membership. In addition to occupational segregation, Black workers face racism and unconscious bias at work, exacerbating risk. This has been a barrier to raising concerns and accessing safe working conditions, including home-working, redeployment, consideration for furlough, appropriate PPE and social distancing.
I have been asked to leave my maternity ward and work on a ward with COVID-19 patients. Although I am willing to do so, I am scared due to my sickle cell condition. My manager is aware of this. Why have they asked me to go?
Within the context of COVID, UNISON conducted a survey of its Black members in June 2020, at the height of the pandemic. It received over 10,000 responses, and evidenced how Black workers are more exposed to the virus due to their roles as non-priority keyworkers.
The survey showed that more clear, specific action to tackle institutional and structural discrimination in the workplace was required. Black workers are not a homogenous group: their experience is also impacted by factors including gender, age, disability, health, immigration status and socio-economic status.
Asked about testing for COVID-19:
54% were not confident or unsure whether they could access testing if needed, with only 24% very confident they could access testing 20% of respondents said they had continued to go to work even when they were concerned they may have been infected with COVID-19 or been in contact with someone who had it A worrying 34% did not know or were not sure how to raise concerns about risk faced by themselves, their colleagues or service user.
UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified structural disparities, entrenched disadvantages and discrimination in the workplace. It is positive for economic, mental and physical wellbeing that vaccines have been developed and rolled out. However, UNISON is concerned that, because Black frontline staff are more likely to be in casual employment, they are less likely to be offered early vaccination.
As the Government and employers develop a strategy to manage the fallout from the virus in the workplace, UNISON calls for:
Employers’ risk assessments to consider job roles’ exposure to the virus, irrespective of contract type or job role, and to make these specific to individual workers A comprehensive package of support that offsets income foregone and paid time off in the case of clinically extremely vulnerable workers or self-isolating for zero hours contracts, agency or on outsourced workers Requirement to ensure workplaces are COVID-secure, including adequate PPE, particularly for peripatetic workers Care workers and outsourced workers to have same rights and protections as NHS/local government staff, including proper sick pay, equivalent annual leave, paid breaks, unsocial hours payments, pensions, learning opportunities and job security.
I'm long-term agency staff. If I don't work, I don't get paid. Eventually, my work did furlough me, but I was still working, and therefore exposed, after many people were working from home. I got mildly ill, but don't know if this was the virus or just a normal cold. I could have antibodies, but I just don't know. That's the problem.”
MIGRANT WORKERS AND IMPACT OF HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT DURING THE PANDEMIC
Many migrant workers have worked on the COVID frontline during the pandemic, in the health and social care sectors. They have continued to do so despite facing some of the most onerous and expensive immigration controls in the world. Many schemes announced by the Home Office to support migrant workers in health and social care continue to exclude the lowest paid, leaving them fully exposed to the impact of the pandemic and to the Hostile Environment.
We go through painful experiences to work and live in the UK. Apart from paying all these exorbitant immigration fees, our immigration status defines what kind of treatment we should get. This became more visible during the pandemic, where a lot of us migrants filled in the absences of colleagues, who were mainly British. I feel that sacrificing my life is part of my work permit and visa application. I feel that my employer will not renew my visa if I will raise a complaint. Why is it that mostly migrant health workers died of Covid? I always thought that this is racism and indeed it is.
Migrant workers face additional financial burdens during the pandemic because they have NRPF immigration status and cannot rely on the safety net colleagues have been
UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION able to in order to support themselves and their families, highlighting the two-tier system resulting from the hostile environment in the workplace.
UNISON particularly seeks a suspension of NRPF, at least during the pandemic and following recovery, indefinite leave to remain for all COVID-19 key workers and an end to the surcharge, and a dismantling of the hostile environment, to ensure migrant workers are treated with dignity and respect in the workplace.
PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITY DUTY – FIT FOR PURPOSE?
The Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) came into force in 2011, with the intention to promote equality of opportunity for people with protected characteristics and those without. Clearly, in the case of Black workers, this is experienced both as an employee and as a member of British society. In June 2020, UNISON wrote to Prime Minister Boris Johnson (attached) following Public Health England’s report, and called on Government to implement the recommendations of a number of reports including:
The Lammy Review into the treatment of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic individuals in the criminal justice system The McGregor-Smith Review into Race in the Workplace The Racial Disparity Audit Report Wendy Williams’ Windrush Lessons Learned Review Review the failure by successive Governments to implement the 2010 Equality Act’s public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities as it relates to race as a protected characteristic.
It's very subtle, they are able to manifest it especially in times of promotion, how the next incompetent fellow is always better than you that are qualified, but you are not friends or family. I have experienced some sort of discrimination when there was errors in my pay check and after pointless email from my manager to the payroll, I took the matter into my hands, I was treated so rudely and the person I dealt with was very condescending. I have also experienced regional directors bullying managers into bullying staff.
UNISON has a range of evidence from surveys of healthcare staff that backs up the issues highlighted by NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) data. As part of UNISON’s 2019 UK-wide “Never OK” survey on unacceptable behaviour at work, four in ten Black UNISON members in healthcare reported being subjected to racist behaviour at work from patients, members of the public or colleagues. The most common experiences were:
Being treated as inferior or less skilled because of race, nationality or native language Being given unfair or inappropriate work; “jokes”, “banter” or name calling Not formally reporting what was happening as they felt nothing would be done by their employer, with the behavior affecting confidence, physical and mental wellbeing and two-thirds considering looking for a new job.
UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
As a watchdog, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), whose role it is to uphold the Duty, has no teeth. For Black workers, it is essential Government provides meaningful funding to enable the regulator to fulfil its statutory functions around enforcement of the PSED with regard to race, ensuring minimum protections to workers and clarity for employers.
Within the context of COVID and the hostile environment, such an approach would have the added benefit of ensuring a more robust application of the PSED in developing Government policy, what was needed was proper enforcement of existing duty, perhaps limiting a recurrence of Windrush and the hostile environment. Government policies which have targeted Black workers and citizens purely on racial grounds, have had demonstrably calamitous outcomes for those affected and wider society.
RACE AND LOW PAY IN THE NHS AND CARE SECTORS
The Government’s own data on the NHS workforce suggests that Black staff are over- represented in the lower pay bands, and increasingly under-represented at higher grades. For England, figures from 2019 show that 18% of the total non-medical workforce in England are from Black, Asian, Chinese, Mixed or Other groups. In bands 1-4, the figure is 27% of the workforce, compared with 22% of bands 8a-9, and only 7% for senior manager grades.
UNISON undertook a pay survey of NHS staff across the UK in December 2020, with further analysis conducted of the 1,200 responses from staff in bands 1 and 2 who identified their ethnicity. There were key differences in terms of financial hardship between those band 1 and 2 staff who identified as Black, and those who identified as belonging to white groups:
A fifth (20%) of the Black respondents had used payday loans in the last year, compared with 9% of the white respondents 47% had sought financial help from friends and family, compared to 36% of white respondents Double the proportion, 8% had used foodbanks, compared to 4% of white respondents 17% had used debt advice services, compared to 12% of white respondents 94% said they worry about how they can balance their household budget if pay does not improve, compared with 84% of white respondents Two-thirds (67%) said they were thinking about leaving their current job but wanted to remain in NHS employment, compared with 54% of white respondents.
Care workers have been viewed by the Government as low skilled and long been undervalued. Now they are paying the highest price, along with the vulnerable people they care for, many from Black backgrounds.
UNISON RESPONSE TO RUNNYMEDE TRUST CALL FOR EVIDENCE: 2021 CONVENTION ON ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
Recent work from the Living Wage Foundation suggested that in England, at the start of the pandemic, three-quarters of care workers were not receiving the real living wage. With Skills for Care highlighting that “BAME staff” comprise 21% of the social care workforce compared to 14% of the wider population, a ratio reflected in UNISON’s data, the challenge is to ensure salary and pay progression, along with better employment terms and conditions, for Black NHS health and social care workers.
“My experience regarding racism cut across members of staff and service users. Some services users decline to go out with you because they don't like you or are not comfortable with you as a black person. I heard a lot of comments made to black men who are staff and staff also refuse to greet you. Sick pay was half my wage when l had to self-isolate due to Covid symptoms.”
1. Can you suggest any further key issues that the VAWG Strategy needs to address?
Safety4Sisters (S4S) is a dynamic frontline VAWG organisation based in Manchester with a North West reach. Established in 2009 S4S was set up to respond to the imposed barriers and discriminatory practices that migrant women survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) experience including harmful practices, so called HBV/A and immigration abuse. The majority of women we support are excluded from safety and protection and remain at risk of violence and harm due to multiply levelled forms abuse and discrimination in relation to their uncertain immigration status/NRPF. This includes interpersonal, family and community abuse- but in conjunction with this our approach addresses structural inequalities, immigration control and trans-national threats. S4S provides specialist NRPF Refuge Accommodation (Abonsh House) alongside intersectional advocacy and access to therapeutic support, well-being group activities, training, and development. Our work has been developed in consultation with Black and minoritised women, and our Migrant Women’s Support Group are central to the development of our strategic work and campaigning.
The women who use our services are all migrant women, primarily those with insecure immigration status subject to the no recourse to public funds condition. They report multiple and simultaneous forms of abuse including the intersecting forms of harmful traditional practice, trafficking, domestic slavery, and domestic and sexual violence.
Ms P fled her husband home after being forced into a marriage with him in Pakistan and subsequently joined him in the UK. He quickly subjected Ms P to sustained physical abusive, as did his mother and father. All subjected her to coercively controlling behaviour. She was forced to sleep on the floor, denied sanitary essentials in a bid to humiliate her and treated as a slave. The family deliberately withheld her immigration documents and delayed securing her status leaving her an overstayer whilst preventing her from contacting her parents. After a particularly brutal attack, she fled and with legal advice claimed asylum and submitted an application as a victim of trafficking. She has since been successful with both submissions.
As a specialist black and minority majority led service, we are concerned that the decision to create two separate strategies on Domestic Abuse (DA) and Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) is going to further exclude the needs of women who are fleeing gender-based violence, leaving them without protection. This approach fails to take into account the lived experience of black and minority victim/survivors of violence who experience violence as a spectrum of overlapping forms of abuse. In consideration of this, we feel it is imperative that the VAWG Strategy addresses the following key issues.
● The strategy should include a definition of VAWG that tackles the intersecting spectrum of gendered violence experienced by black and minoritised women and girls and must be firmly rooted within an international human rights framework. ● Therefore, the definition must give specific and nuanced consideration to violence that black and minoritised women experience through different social and cultural lenses. This includes for example, harmful practices, immigration abuse, and so-called honour-based violence. ● The strategy should give attention to VAWG as a gendered crime that disproportionately affects women and girls, and that oppresses black and minoritised women and girls in distinct ways. ● Thus, the strategy should include a definition of No Recourse to Public Funds and how this restriction can impact on victim/survivors who are subject to violence. The definition should emphasise how the rights of migrant women must be upheld by statutory and voluntary organisations, making reference to key legislation including the Children Act. ● When migrant victim/survivors have not received equitable support, safety and protection from services who have a duty of care to do so, there must be stringent accountability measures. This should not only be locally and regionally but nationally; the strategy should include a robust system of national accountability, based on established quality standards within the VAWG sector, to ensure survivors of all forms of VAWG can access the specialist support services they need particularly outside of London where there is a lack of specialist services and resources including those responding to the needs of BME and migrant women. ● Women seeking asylum are more likely to have experienced gender-based violence because of their past experiences of persecution and conflict; and the precariousness of their economic and social circumstances during flight from their country, and after arrival in the UK .The strategy needs to be reflective of the specific needs of women seeking asylum including those in-Home Office accommodation and recognize the distinct challenges that the women face in relation to accessing appropriate services included in and throughout the dispersal process.
● In particular, there needs to be a better recognition of and assessment of policy development around image based sexual abuse (and online harms) and how this can be perpetrated in a way that creates distinct and intersecting risks for black and minoritised victim/survivors- including honour-based violence. ● The strategy should emphasize the need for better support to be available to black and minoritised sexual violence victim/survivors, which cannot be met through generic ISVA Models. There is a continued need for specialist intersectional advocacy. ● The strategy should recognize the integral role of specialist by and for services in supporting marginalised victim/survivors of VAWG, who are not adequately reached by statutory or mainstream support services. As a result, there should also be the recognition of the need for long term and sustainable funding for specialist services. ● The strategy should ensure that the collection of comprehensive, comparable and disaggregated data on VAWG across government – at a minimum data must always be collected on the protected characteristics and immigration status for both victim and perpetrator and their relationship. Data should also be regionally collected, so there can be a comparative analysis of victim/survivors access to safety and protection in a regionalised context.
Rubina came to the UK from Bangladesh on a student visa and married her first husband. He was abusive and she left him and claimed asylum. She subsequently found out that he had uploaded pornographic images of her on a porn site which she reported to the police, but no further action was taken. She also said she was concerned about taking this further as she had insecure immigration status. Her asylum application was refused and so were her subsequent appeals. She then met her second husband and had a religious marriage only. He was extremely violent, physical emotionally and sexually, subjecting her to horrendous sexual abuse and violence. Her would withhold money from her, was coercively controlling knowing that she had insecure immigration status. He treated her as a slave and her health was significantly impacted upon due to the abuse including suffering from incontinence due to the severity of the sexual abuse and frequent rape Eventually, Rubina’s second husband forced her to leave the property and Rubina was forced to find sanctuary at her friends’ house. She was seen on the street by her husband. He pursued her and attempted to get her to come home with him, in effect he as trying to abduct her. She did not report this incident to the police because she was scared to as she had insecure immigration.
What service users say: ‘Once my husband didn’t like the way he had had sex with me. Actually, he said I had had a choice of the way he had had sex with me, but he didn’t like it anyway. So, he made me undress and stand outside in the rain. I was naked and had to stand there in the cold and dark. I was so scared of him that I stood in full view of everyone naked and didn’t resist”.
“I expected in this country, in this first world country that you would believe me, celebrate my courage. You are angry because I am not broken enough. I am sorry if didn’t know I was supposed to be blogging, taking selfies of the abuse”
‘I have to bear the stigma or divorce, he raped me all the time, he asked his friends to have sex with me and my family didn’t care, they just said ‘what can we do, you have to stay with him, he is your husband’
‘People do not know what has happened to us – domestic violence is no less than fleeing from a war- it’s terror’
‘ I am proud of my confidence given by S4S. I am double minded when I joined this group but after joining this group and become a strong person’
‘The second time I was in hospital due to miscarriage because of him but I still didn’t speak out because he would be violent. The medical practitioners questioned the bruises on my body, but I did not speak up. Immigration, its because of this. This is the fear of immigration – it’s so big, it’s so on top of us’
‘This group is more important than the tablets. For the national health service, we are just patient records but at Safety4Sisters we are human beings, we are women, we have needs and we are whole’.
2. Are there any groups of victims/survivors that have been excluded from the strategy scope or that need further emphasis?
‘If I was able to have public funds I wouldn’t of stayed I would’ve left the violence and gone far away - I would’ve found safety and protected myself’
It is essential that the VAWG Strategy tackles the systemic barriers facing black and minoritised women particularly those from migrant communities. We would stress the need for an intersectional approach in doing this, by understanding that black and minoritised women/girls face multiple inequalities that can lead to distinct patterns and experiences of oppression. The strategy should give specific consideration to the experiences of migrant women who have NRPF, and the intersect between immigration status and violence, and how migrant victim/survivors with NRPF, many living in extreme poverty well below the poverty level, are less likely to be able to access safety and protection due to discrimination and a lack of equitable support. At Safety4Sisters deliver holistic intervention prioritizing prevention, safety and recovery/re- settlement through multi-pronged support combining medium-long-term advocacy, emotional support including counselling/group-activities and emergency refuge accommodation and wrap around support. These women are caught at the intersection of multiple oppressions, resulting in multi-layered vulnerabilities. They are hardest-to-reach as their insecure status drives them underground. Their needs are complex, requiring long-term advocacy beyond crisis-intervention.
• Migrant women and women considered to have uncertain immigration status. Many of these women have faced immigration abuse and have no documentation because of the abuse they have faced from British nationals and other perpetrators. Having no access to public funds makes them more vulnerable to repeat perpetration and other forms of exploitation. It makes them vulnerable to homelessness, destitution and labour/sexual forms of exploitation. Women report facing a stark choice whether to leave the abuse and face destitution or stay within the abuse - such choices are a reality for women subject to the NRPF rule and significant hamper their ability to leave abuse. Across the northern areas, there are scant resources to support women in such situations and few specialist BME VAWG service able to assist as well as a paucity in legally aided immigration services.
• Given the high levels (66%) of asylum cases that are initially refused, women seeking asylum are reliant on quality professional evidence however, with few services to turn to , fewer that will responds to their gendered and intersectional needs, women seeking often miss out on crucial risk assessments, civil and criminal legal measures, protection orders and other safety and protective arrangements essential for supporting their claims. • We have experienced an increase in number of women reporting multiple forms of VAWG DV and sexual abuse who have complex immigration cases and are not able to apply for the Desticture Domestic Violence Concession (DDVC). These women cannot gain access to the DDVC and therefore are largely refused access to the refuge services providers who otherwise may accept their referral. Such women are left destitute or have to turn to friends/acquaintances some exploitative in order to sofa surf of have a bed for the nit. Some are forced to rely on religious institutions.
100 per cent per cent of the women referred to us and who wanted a refuge space had initially been refused one due to the NRPF condition. – Safety4Sisters statistics between April-July 2020.
Fanta was referred to Safety4Sisters by an Immigration Aid Unit. who was in contact with Fanta who was street homeless in Manchester and had been referred to them a week earlier by Manchester Homeless Department. Fanta entered UK in 2019 on a visitor visa from Nigeria with her abusive husband. Fanta experienced severe and prolonged abuse and when she got the chance to escape, she left him to find her sister in the North West. However, Fanta didn’t find her, and a female stranger found her wandering the streets lost so she let her stay in her house while she continued to look for her sister. At this point Fanta then met Mr X at a bus stop and moved in with him because she had nowhere to go and she has No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) barring her from accessing safe accommodation and welfare support. As soon as she moved into to his house, Mr X became violent, abusive and became very controlling knowing she had NRPF and insecure immigration status as her visa had expired. Mr X goaded her that without secure immigration, he could treat her with impunity, that the police would not assist her and that the Home Office would ‘deport you back to her country’. On one occasion Fanta was taken into hospital overnight because he kicked her in the stomach when she was pregnant, and she started bleeding. She eventually lost the baby. The health care practitioners asked her whether she was a victim of abuse and she did not report this for fear that they would inform the police and they in turn would report her to the Home Office. After a violent incident where he had threatened her with a knife and attempted to strangle her, Fanta called the police who took her to a council run women’s hostel. A few days later Fanta was told to present at the local Homelessness Department who said they said they had no housing duty to her because she was NRPF (despite her having just fled domestic violence and still bleeding heavily after losing her baby) they advised that Social Services would ring her if she waited in the reception area. Fanta waited and the office closed, and so she left and miraculously found a police station at 10pm that night. The police took her back to the council’s women’s hostel (for one night/ emergency bed) and the next morning she waited for Social Services to ring her again. They did eventually ring her and told her to go to their NRPF office but she had no money, was bleeding heavily and the office was near to the area she had left Mr X and she had no idea if the police had found him or not. It was at this point she then met a man on the street who actually helped her and took her back to his sister’s house. They could not accommodate her for more than a couple of days and so 2 days later she was on the streets again. We received the referral from the Immigration Unit and arranged for her to come to our office sending her a taxi. She was traumatised and exhausted and S4S gave her a new phone in case Mr X tried to contact her as well as essentials such as sanitary pads, food, clothing. S4S booked her into a nearby bed & breakfast and eventually found space in a women’s refuge which we paid for until she was able to put in an application for asylum support. She was able to access advocacy and our specialist Migrant Women’s Group.
“I feel safe now, I know more about my rights, I could talk to them (S4S) because I felt safe and supported and that they understood. The Safety4Sisters community is important, we encourage one another, share experiences and they told me to be strong, I thought I was the only one before I met everyone”
“The worker pursued my case called to find out about the housing, supported me when I gave my statement and treated me as good as a daughter”
● Pregnant migrant women who are considered within the strategy, as identification of abuse can be identified and/or escalate at this point. Migrant women continue to face poorer pregnancy outcomes than the general population. ● Black and minoritised women at risk of homelessness or rough sleeping as women, are at increased risk of experiencing abuse, control and coercion within this environment. They face a lack of specialist support and are often housing in mainstream gender-neutral accommodation as we have seen under the ‘A Bed Every Night’ strategy as part of the ‘Everyone In’ programme in Manchester. ● Sex workers, women at risk of sexual exploitation- including survival sex work and women who are forced into prostitution particularly those from migrant backgrounds. ● Black and minoritised women/girls within the LGBTQ+ community: There needs to be consideration that violence can happen in same sex relationships, with awareness raising of coercive control, including other types of abuse, such as financial, from wider family members or friends known to the couple. Lack of information awareness within the LGBTQ+ communities around issues of VAWG crimes may be having an impact on their vulnerabilities. ● Black and minoritised Transwomen and gender non-conforming or non-binary people are unable to access services that meet their needs. ● Black and minoritised disabled women and women with learning differences who experience specific forms of violence such as abuse from carers or specific forms of exploitation. Their kinship or care network is often unrecognised and thus the forms of violence and harm they experience is not assessed or documented as domestic and sexual violence. ● Black and minoritised women who are from communities who mistrust the police or professionals because they are marginalized or have experienced a history of institutional discrimination, such as targeted stop and search. Women we work with report a great fear of reporting or coming to the attention of authorities. Abusers have already primed women to fear agencies such as police as part of the abuse maintaining that women will be sent back to country of origin should they do so. ● Young black and minoritised women, who may be navigating complicated family dynamics, cross cultural abuse and high levels of online abuse, and fall into a transitional age of vulnerability (16-19).
‘I can’t really talk about the rape and violence from my ex-husband to my counsellor (in a LGBTQI service) and they don’t really understand the impact of being an asylum seeker. I just speak to Safety4Sisters.’
3. How prevalent is VAWG in the areas you serve, and how have you responded to this need?
Key statistics Since April 2020 we have services 163 calls of advice assistance and advocacy 36 women have been taken on as long-term support cases since 2020 by our only dedicated Advocacy worker Safety4Sisters have spent £7,000 on interpreting costs including subsiding other mainstream services to ensure women access to their services since lockdown commenced on 24th March 2020. Since lockdown Safety4Sisters spent approximately £20,000 to pay for refuge rent and costs for women with no recourse to public funds so that they didn’t remain homeless or have to return to the violence. We have paid approximately a further £15,000 on Bed and Breakfast/emergency accommodation for women who cannot get into refuges or find alternative accommodation due to NRPF. Safety4Sisters have paid for private culturally competent therapeutic counselling as NHS waiting lists are too extensive and do not necessarily meet the intensive therapeutic needs of the women. We have set up partnership arrangements with GMIA and Europia to ensure high quality legally aided immigration audience in reaction to the increasing number of EEA women presenting. We have provided approximately £3000 per month since April 2020 for emergency COVID emergency subsistence, food vouchers, data and emergency payments for women.
We have observed a significant rise in black and minoritised women and girls being subject to specific and intersecting forms of violence, including sexual violence, immigration abuse, domestic slavery and exploitation during the pandemic. However, this rise fails to be reflected in reporting levels and subsequently arrests and successful prosecution. Underreporting of violence experienced by black and minority women and girls (through different cultural lens) is often as a result of a lack of competent assessment, specialist support available and inconsistent regional response;
● Certain forms of violence such as sexual violence and immigration abuse remain vastly under reported crimes because of a lack of specialist services, appropriate multi-agency expertise or a lack of multi-sectoral response when reported. Women report that their immigration status overrides subsequent response from agencies and leaves them without support on legal and judicial redress as well as victim support. ● 100 % of the women we supported in 2019 reported being subjected to immigration-based abuse, which is often under assessed as a risk, as well as their experiences of domestic, sexual and other forms of gendered abuse intersecting with honour-based violence/abuse and prevents victim/survivors from accessing support. Immigration abuse often means that victims are pushed from pilar to post as many services are not able or willing to deal with women. We regularly hear from agencies stating that they cannot accommodate victims of abuse with insecure immigration as they are unable to take on the financial risk posed by the uncertainty of her immigration case. In some cases, this condition is part of the commissioning arrangements and a requirement. This in turn means BME migrant women, despite the greater and disproportionate exposure to and impact of VAWG have far fewer options available to them
“I was scared worn out and thought I couldn’t do anything about it because I didn’t want him to report me to immigration. He said …..I would be sent back” – Safety4Sisters service user
● In particular, specialist by and for services have observed an increase in victim/survivors from European communities being impacted by immigration abuse, which is exacerbated by Brexit. There are numerous barriers for victim/survivors and their children who access support from our services in securing their rights after Brexit. These barriers are imposed on the women we support and largely stem from the design of the settlement scheme/process, which results in numerous victim/survivors without regularise status in the UK and/or having NRPF. In conjunction with the lack of legally aided immigration lawyers EEA women and those dependent on EEA nationals are finding themselves with insecure status. ● The Hostile Environment has escalated during lockdown, with the provision of schedule 1 in the 2020 Immigration Act repealing the rights of many migrant women including those who have been trafficked and those seeking asylum- and increasing migrant women’s status precarity and vulnerability to exploitation and abuse. ● The women that we work with are disproportionately living with existing and underlying health conditions. 53 per cent of women surveyed at Safety4Sisters reported that they are living with a chronic or long-term illness. Analysis by The Lancet (2020) shows that 29.1 per cent of the British population as a whole have an underlying health condition. This evidence was collected via a survey of 14 women individually interviewed in July 2020 with the Safety4Sister Migrant Women’s Group – a group of migrant women with NRPF and subject to immigration control. With relation to mental health - 100% of women in the Migrant Women’s Group stated that their mental health had suffered greatly under lockdown ● We have inconsistent protocols and policies across different local authorities and regions and need. This could be remedied by more effective safeguarding and local partnership arrangements ensuring that they include specialist by and for organsiations. ● There is often a failure to collect and record uncommissioned community based or specialist services’ data. This results the concerns of migrant victims/survivors are ignored or under reported as these services support the majority of migrant women, ● Covid has increased both the prevalence and severity of violence and abuse. Specialist by and for services have observed a significant increase in demand for support, both from agencies and victim/survivors directly, since the pandemic. However, many authority commissioning arrangements means that additional COVID-19 funding is disproportionally distributed to commissioned services. At present Safety4Sisters has no local authority funding directly to suport the advocacy work with women nor our refuge and we are reliant on donations and other funding sources. ● COVIC19 has had a devastating impact on women’s physical and mental health including an increase in women reporting suicidal ideation . One survivor didn’t have money for phone credit so was out of contact with us for 2 weeks until she borrowed some money from a friend. During this time, her mental health seriously deteriorated, and she is currently thinking of taking her own life. A survivor of violence, she says, “‘This just feels like the time to go – what have I left? I cannot go out. I cannot use the usual methods I had to take my mind away from my hell!’ ● Not only has there been a noticeable increase in demand, but there has also been an increase in risk level upon initial assessment leading to an increased number of cases being discussed within MARAC. ● There has been an increase in online abuse and harm, with aggressive behaviours reported in all aspect of social media. This is reported as being more prevalent within those with mental health needs or learning difficulties.
4. Are there any other forms of gendered violence that need to be included/further emphasised in the strategy scope?
It is essential that the VAWG Strategy emphasizes that black and minoritised, including migrant women and girls experience violence as a spectrum of overlapping forms of abuse, which are often experienced and perpetrated through many different social and cultural lenses. As a result, victim/survivors often experience sexual and domestic violence, alongside and within harmful practises such as immigration abuse, domestic slavery, trafficking, exploitation and so-called honour-based violence/abuse. The strategy must give specific consideration to the fact that many migrant victim/survivors are hidden and excluded as victims, due to institutional racism and discrimination. Thus, we consider that the following forms of gender-based violence should be emphasised in the strategy scope. ● These multiple intersecting forms of violence and abuse are often compounded by black and minoritised women’s experiences of structural inequality and for migrant women more specifically their experiences of immigration abuse and the deliberate manipulation of their immigration status which is used to threaten women and inhibit them from accessing safety. ● Migrant women often additionally experience racism and are unable to access the support, welfare systems and legal tools they need to escape abuse and can report violence without fear of immigration enforcement fostered by the hostile environment. ● There is real concern that migrant women will fall through the gaps in VAWG and associated policies procedures and legislation. To do so renders extremely vulnerable women outside the scope for protection especially those who cannot access the DDVC whom we are increasingly coming into contact with. Their needs are complex, often requiring long term interventions and wrap around holistic suport that at best cannot be addressed nor met fully under the government’s Support for Migrant Victims Scheme given the complexity, length of suport required and multiple forms of interventions required including emotional group suport, counselling, sexual and domestic abuse suport, as well as their experiences of harmful traditional practices and extreme isolation impact on their mental health. ● Institutional violence perpetrated through the Hostile Environment; since the introduction of this as a national immigration policy in 2012, the number of women that have been deported following reports of domestic abuse has risen from 12% to 30%. ● As a result, there is the need for full inclusivity and Strategic leads on reforming law and practice to ensure survivors of VAWG are not unjustly criminalised, but instead receive equal access to support and protection.. ● There is a need fora strategic leads for deaf and disabled migrant survivors to ensure equitable full inclusivity and access to appropriate support. ● Specific forms of sexual violence that involve a breach of consent must be better considered in the strategy this should include better monitoring of the prevalence and nature of racialised sexual harassment, to which Black and minoritised women are subjected and a better positioning of imaged based sexual abuse/online harm as forms of sexual violence. ● Continual technology related abuse evolutions: o Tech inequality and exclusion for black and minoritised migrant victim/survivors, and how this can impact their meaningful engagement with specialist support services and their ability to safeguard themselves within private spheres, e.g contacting the police independently. o Image based sexual abuse o A whole system approach to VAWG should include educating potential victims on the dangers of using social media, dating apps etc and demonstrate what steps they can take to protect themselves. ● When considering the very distinct experience and perpetration of gendered violence, the strategy must also dismantle the gender neutralisation of service provisions. Many black and minoritised women are unable to safely access gender neutral services and could face further threats or retributions from communities by doing so. ● A challenging of myths and stereotypes in relation to black and minoritised women is an essential part of any preventative or intervention work. This needs to be done across society with accessible and effective communication campaigns and community responses that challenge perpetrator behaviour. There needs to be critical change across all systems including schools, communities, health, welfare, social services as well as the criminal justice system (CJS). ● Recognise the integral role of specialist ‘by and for’ ending VAWG services who need to be sustainably funded for their prevention and community work. In the North of England, a higher number of migrant women need support in these regions as these are dispersal areas, but there is a lack of ring-fenced funding for migrant women or specialist black and minoritised women’s services. Are there gaps in local provision or approaches that you feel need to be improved in local provisions?
As a specialist by and for service, we have observed through both strategic and front-line work, that local support provisions can be exclusionary. Many black and minoritised victim/survivors who are migrants and are perceived by services to have uncertain immigration status come to our service after being turned away from organisations with a duty of care to provide support. Furthermore, black and minoritised organisations are often excluded from local partnership arrangements. There is also a lack of a unified approach regionally to gendered violence, for example, there is no incorporation or initiation of consistent regional strategies and policies around issues such as sexual exploitation and NRPF.
● The Strategy needs to have a greater focus on the holistic view of VAWG and how victims/survivors are supported in wider contexts than the criminal justice system alone. This includes areas such as mental health support, tackling inequalities including racism, and an understanding of the effectiveness of perpetrator rehabilitation programmes, which women have told us can lead to them being abused in other ways. Improved prevention and early intervention as an integral part of the response to VAWG throughout the strategy and its delivery. ● There is a lack of specialist mental health support available for black and minoritised victim/survivors; o Lack of qualified multi-lingual, women of colour therapists that have a level of cultural competency. o Most mental health therapeutic services can have long waiting lists when women are at their most vulnerable and if this is not accessed initially, they become reluctant to engage later when they have time for reflection. This includes accessing support for children. o Lack of therapy that operates in a trauma informed way and addresses-imposed barriers of access and stigmatisation of support. The women that we work with are disproportionately living with existing and underlying health conditions compounded by the current pandemic. 53 per cent of women surveyed at Safety4Sisters reported that they are living with a chronic or long-term illness. Analysis by The Lancet (2020) shows that 29.1 per cent of the British population as a whole have an underlying health condition. For this reason, Safety4Sisters has to be especially vigilant about how we offer our services and support at the current time, as over half of the women we work with are at increased risk of severe Covid–19 symptoms if they are infected.
‘Racism is a public health issue… it is the underlying driver that puts people from ethnic minority groups at the centre of the pandemic.” = Safety4Sisters service user
“I have stopped with my counsellor – she doesn’t understand the asylum and everything and I am too tired to tell her, I feel like I have to explain everything from my background and my country.” - Safety4Sisters service user
This group - ‘This group is far beyond the family because with your family you can’t say things in front of your father or brother. You are not free you can’t say the things really mean you are always stopped and prevented; your voice is taken away from you’. ● Specialist support of young black and minoritised women and girls and gender specific intervention work is poorly funded leaving young women particularly vulnerable and at risk of sexual exploitation and abuse ● Assessments of migrant women in areas where there is a lack of black and minoritised statutory sector workers, or a lack of informed cultural competence are patchy and can often be inadequate. This means that the levels of risk black and minoritised women/migrant women face are often poorly assessed leaving women without access to safety and protection. ● Often victims of abuse are removed from the family home. This is an expensive solution and causes further disruption to children’s lives where they are present. More needs to be done to provide protection to women in their home using Civil Orders and police powers. ● A lack of ring-fenced funding for specialist services led ‘by and for’ Black and minoritised women, Deaf and disabled women and LGBT+ survivors. o There should be a return to long-term grant funding for VAWG provision o There should be an end to competitive tendering where it is not required o All funding and commissioning processes for VAWG must recognised and value specialist support provision and adhere to equality duties.
Are there areas of good or specialist practice in the areas you serve that you feel highlight the good work of services locally in relation to prevention, support and recovery of victim-survivors?
As a specialist by and for service, we deliver a holistic wrap around model of care for black and minoritised migrant women and girls who have been subject to gendered violence. In contrast to many mainstream services, we support women and girls from crisis point through to meaningful recovery. 100% of our service users have uncertain immigration status and have NRPF, thus, an integral part of our work is providing institutional advocacy to ensure that their support needs are being fully and equitably met.
Currently Safety4Sisters provides best practice when working with migrant victims of abuse to a multiagency audience in addition to our joint Practitioner Guidance written in conjunction with the Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit. We have set up the Northern BME NRPF to address the regional issues for BME migrant women with insecure immigration status including the lack of services, resources and local authorities responses to meet their needs.
Specialist by and for organisations in across the north provide the following support to marginalized black and minoritised victim/survivors. o Specialist provision of refuge accommodation for women with NRPF (charitable funded but a referral pathway for statutory agencies). o Specialist intersectional advocacy that supports sexual violence victim/survivors both in crisis and those who have experience historical trauma. o Advice and helpline for agencies supporting women with NRPF and survivors directly. o Capacity building support for statutory services who do not have the expertise to support black and minoritised women o Holistic support that sustains women’s safety and prevents repeat victimisation o Offer safe social networks to reduce isolation and increase mental wellbeing. Specialist by and for organisations in this region contribute the following to the sector, external agencies and professionals; o Multi agency police training in harmful practices, so called HBV and immigration abuse. o Multi agency training in ways to support women who have uncertain immigration status and migrant women’s rights. o Local inter-agency embedding VAWG campaigning such as the 16 Days of Activism and Reclaim the Night which increase levels of awareness and prevention. o Identify gaps in support for black and minoritised victim/survivors and bring in charitable and trust funding, donations and voluntary support to meet needs. ● Specialist by and for services in the area have detailed and effective case management systems, with advanced policies and procedures relating to equality, service user involvement, GDPR and confidentiality. ● Despite exclusion from many multi-agency partnerships, specialist services ensure that high risk black and minoritised victim/survivors (that would not otherwise be identified by external services) engage in safeguarding arenas like MARAC. ● Specialist support services increase the chance of women and girls staying safe and achieving positive outcomes. o A good practice example being that in 2013 Imkaan, Rape Crisis England & Wales, Respect, SafeLives and Women’s Aid formed the Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) Sector Sustainability Working Group to promote the sustainability of specialist independent, local organisations within the sector. ● Safety4Sisters have funding raised to ensure that women who are homeless as a result of gender abuse are not rendered destitute– this includes women pre DDVC coming through and those not able to avail the DDVC. Since April 2020, our organization has spent approximately £20,000 on refuge rental costs for women who would otherwise we be turned away from mainstream refuge services. ● Abonsh House is the first refuge dedicated soley to single migrant women experiencing gender violence who have no recourse to public funds in England. This essential service set up in October 2020 provides much needed suport for women who would otherwise be refused the essential gender specific, intensive refuge and holistic suport necessary for women to start their journey from abuse. ● Our specialist Migrant Women’s Support group supported women who have experienced abuse who are subject to immigration control to simultaneously address the impact of abuse which they have so often not received as their immigration status has superseding their experiences as a victim. ● VAWG services in the area that have VAWG specific accreditation from Women’s Aid, Rape Crisis, Imkaan and Respect- a good example is our PCC funding specialist ISVA and IDVA and how we can strengthen and increase reporting. We have a very active twitter account with a great reach with a high level of interaction - @safety4sisters
Our website – www.safety4sisters is regularly updated and contains our latest report Locked in Abuse, Locked Out of Safety - The Pandemic Experiences of Migrant Women
CERD 2021: Civil Society Call to Evidence Written Evidence from The Children’s Society
About The Children’s Society The Children’s Society is a leading national charity committed to improving the lives of thousands of children and young people every year. We work across the country with some of the most disadvantaged children and young people through our specialist services. Amongst the children and young people we support are children, young people and families who are subject to immigration control or whose access to services is restricted by immigration legislation. We place children and young peoples’ voices at the centre of the work that we do. We continue to do all we can to support the collective effort to face the Covid-19 crisis, and to ensure the social and economic effects of the coronavirus are not felt in the lives of our children in the years ahead.
Introduction This submission focuses upon the disproportionate impact of the ‘hostile environment’ and the UK’s immigration policies on the BME community. It addresses the 10 year route to settlement, the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) condition, and the elimination of legal aid for immigration matters. The hostile environment and these policies have stifled the enjoyment of individual rights, perpetuated financial hardship, and fostered wider racial discrimination across society. At times of crisis, they have spiralled families and young people into destitution, and at their worst, these policies have destroyed lives. In maintaining these policies, the UK fails to uphold its obligations under the CERD, particularly Article 5 to guarantee the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights and equal treatment by the justice system without discrimination on grounds of race, colour, national or ethnic origin.
Ten-year route to settlement In 2012, the UK made reforms to its Family Migration Rules, the most significant establishing a 10-year route to settlement for those seeking to remain in the UK on a human rights basis, specifically family and private life grounds. This route – for families unable to meet such requirements as the minimum income threshold – requires four costly
© The Children’s Society 2020 1
application for leave to remain of 30 months each before permanent settlement can be sought. (Those families who meet the income threshold proceed on a 5-year route and incur half the cost.)
A Home Office Policy Equality Statement (PES)1 on the issue of the 10-year route to settlement and the NRPF condition sets out that the majority of applicants on this route are of nationalities from the African and Asian regions. In 2014, 79% of applicants were from these regions. In 2019, 73% of applicants were from Nigeria, Ghana, Pakistan, Jamaica, and Bangladesh. Likewise, research conducted by The Children’s Society found 71% of the grants of leave under the 10-year route between 2012 and 2019 involved 10 nationalities, all but one was from the African and Asian regions and most were former British colonies.2
Families on this route face exorbitant immigration fees, which must be paid every 30 months, alongside the Immigration Health Surcharge. Currently, the costs of these applications is £1033 for each family member with a fee of £2389 for the culminating application for settled status.3 By our calculations, a single parent with two children who began the process in 2012 would pay more than £23,300 to secure status for her family.4 These are families who in the first instance couldn’t meet the income threshold, facing crippling fees.
Through our services, we see such families face mounting debt or become homeless as they struggle to afford these repeated fees and to secure their futures. Often they are forced to seek status for the wage earner, leaving their children without status. Perversely, families on the 10-year route, who are predominantly of nationalities from the African and Asian regions, are forced to pay double the rate for settlement than families meeting the income threshold who are on the 5-year route. These punitive policies perpetuate financial hardship, spiral families into debt and impinge the exercise of economic, social and cultural rights.
NRPF Intertwined with the 10-year route is the ‘no recourse to public funds’ (‘NRPF’) policy. The Government’s policy is that most people applying to enter or remain in the UK will have the NRPF condition applied to their status until such time as they have secured permanent
1https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/880531/Policy_Equalit y_Statement__PES__21_April_2020.pdf, pp. 10-11. 2 https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-11/a-lifeline-for-all-report.pdf, p. 17-18. 3 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visa-regulations-revised-table/home-office-immigration-and-nationality-fees- 2018. 4 https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-11/a-lifeline-for-all-report.pdf, p. 22
© The Children’s Society 2020 2
settled status. The NRPF condition prevents persons subject to immigration control from accessing most mainstream benefits such as child benefit, tax credits, Universal Credit, income-related Employment and Support Allowance, income support, local welfare assistance schemes, housing benefit and social housing. Those who are undocumented in the UK also have no recourse to public funds.
While workers and those on student visas are less likely to need access to welfare support, those most acutely affected are the undocumented or those on the 10-year route. In fact the establishment of the longer 10-year route in 2012 has meant these children and families are impacted by the NRPF condition for far longer, often enduring a decade of poverty or destitution.
The Home Office does not publish race or ethnicity data5 for those on the 10-year route affected by NRPF conditions. Available research again suggests that NRPF conditions in such cases have a disproportionate impact on Black, Asian and ethnic minority individuals.6 Analysis The Children’s Society conducted of case notes from our services, aligned with data from the NRPF Network and Home Office, and showed that the majority of families in these circumstances are from former British colonies, namely Nigeria, Jamaica, Ghana, Bangladesh, Pakistan and India.7 Indeed, many families are in the UK as a result of historical, colonial and community links.
Our research found these policies perpetuate the financial hardship faced by these families, subjecting them to long-term poverty (unable to afford essentials or pay rent), cycles of homelessness, destitution, and mounting debt. Even before the pandemic, families reported struggling to pay for essentials like food, utility bills, rent, and clothing with nine out of the eleven families interviewed reporting using food banks.8 They often experience mental ill- health and poor well-being as a direct consequence. And when crisis hits, they are critically unable to access the much needed safety net.
These policies also perpetuate wider societal racial discrimination. For example, when their circumstances are so dire their child is deemed ‘in need’ and qualifies for support from their local government (often as little as £3 per person per day), these migrant families often face
5https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/880531/Policy_Equalit y_Statement__PES__21_April_2020.pdf, p. 10 6 Woolley, Agnes, “Access Denied: The costs of the ‘no resource to public funds’ policy”, June 2019 available: https://learningforcitizenship.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/39102-accessdenied- thecostofthenorecoursetopublicfundspolicy.theunityproject.june2019.pdf, cited in Pinter, Ilona, “To break entrenched cycles of child poverty and discrimination in the UK, we need more than tweaks to government guidance,” June 2020 available: https://learningforcitizenship.wordpress.com/2020/06/08/to-break-entrenched-cycles-of-child-poverty-and- discrimination-in-the-uk-we-need-far-more-than-tweaks-to-government-guidance/. 7 https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/sites/default/files/2020-11/a-lifeline-for-all-report.pdf, p. 27. 8 Id. p. 31.
© The Children’s Society 2020 3
gate-keeping practices. We supported a migrant, single mum, who upon seeking support from her local government when destitute and homeless was falsely told her young daughter would be taken from her if she could not provide shelter for her child.9
The Covid-19 pandemic has spotlighted the unjust impacts of the NRPF policy on the BME community, with families unable to access the safety net due to their immigration status, even when they, and society at large, faces crisis. A significant majority of the parents of these families are ‘key workers’, deemed essential for the country during a pandemic. They are NHS catering staff, NHS cleaners, lab technician assistants, domiciliary carers and support workers in care homes. Many are on zero hour contracts or single mums with childcare responsibilities. During the pandemic, the Government have sought to re- emphasise their commitment to the NRPF policy and point to available measures as the reason why no further support is needed. In practice these measures offer little to no help for many families struggling right now.10
Many of the children in these families are British or have only ever known this country11, and yet their life chances are dictated by their parents’ immigration status. The cumulative negative effect of the NRPF condition and these immigration policies on the BME community is to perpetuate intergenerational poverty, allow children to grow up in long-term destitution and blight their future prospects.
LASPO Alongside the above, in 2012 the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) removed legal aid for all non-asylum immigration matters. While the equality and impact assessments conducted at the time did not consider the impact specifically on commonwealth communities, they did reveal that there would be an overwhelmingly disproportionate impact on BME individuals.12 The government estimated that 92% of clients (excluding unknowns) who would be affected by the change in the scope of the immigration category would be from BME groups.13 Yet, it was decided that individuals in immigration cases should be capable of dealing with their immigration application and should not require a lawyer.
9 Id. pp. 33-34. 10Joint Briefing, ‘Support for children and families with no recourse to public funds during the pandemic,’ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a1UXj1Qb6ACJHJuCdG6ZqXt06kxhe2tK/view. 11 Id. 12https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20111013060745/http:/www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/legal- aid-reform-eia.pdf. 13 See Id. table 5.
© The Children’s Society 2020 4
Recent information of client ethnicity in legal aid matters for the financial year 2019-2020 confirms these past estimates.14 Across all categories of law, clients from an ethnic minority made up 25% of those getting legal help in comparison to 40% of clients who were recorded as White. However, when immigration matters are at issue, ethnic minorities constituted 88% of the clients, in cases where ethnicity was known.15 BME clients overwhelmingly sought legal aid for immigration matters, while their white counterparts sought such legal help for family law and mental health matters.
Conclusion Not only are the rights of BME persons infringed by hostile UK immigration policies, their ability to fight for their status or to seek redress has all but been removed. And while the Government allegedly seeks to learn lessons from the experience of the Windrush generation, their acknowledgement that the above policies disproportionately impact those from African and Asian backgrounds provides no reassurance that the Government is seeking to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination and improve upon its past.
14 See Tables, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/legal-aid-statistics-january-to-march-2020/legal-aid-statistics- england-and-wales-bulletin-january-to-march-2020#further-information, specifically table 11.4 ‘Legal help client diversity volumes by category of law, 2019-20’. 15 In 54% of immigration cases ethnicity was unknown, 41% were from an ethnic minority including Asian/Asian British, Black/African/Caribbean/Black British or Mixed/multiple ethnic groups compared with 5% of clients who were White.
© The Children’s Society 2020 5
Traveller Movement Submission – Civil Society Report
Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) people continue to face exclusion and discrimination in the fields of health, education, housing and employment, and are subject to negative stereotypes and stigmatization in the media. Despite a lengthy inquiry by the women and equalities committee in 2019 and a commitment by the Communities Minister1, a national strategy to tackle these inequalities has not materialised. COVID-19 has exacerbated all existing inequalities and created new ones, these must be addressed urgently2. Further, the government has exacerbated and further enflamed public anti-Traveller rhetoric by initiating a bill to criminalise unauthorised encampments3.
A concluding observation from the UN CERD report in 20164 urged the UK government to implement a comprehensive strategy, in consultation with members of Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities, to ensure a systematic and coherent approach in addressing the challenges that members of these communities continue to face in the fields of health, education, housing and employment. This is not yet been implemented or even put out for consultation.
Key recommendation: The government must implement without a delay a cross government national strategy5 to remove barriers to inclusion and tackle long held inequalities for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people. This must include all key social indicators/policy areas and must have specific, measurable outcomes with coherent data collection. Key recommendation: The UK Government should abolish proposals to criminalise trespass and quash plans to strengthen police powers.
Media and Incitement to Racial Hatred
The media has long been an area of concern when it comes to the depictions and portrayals of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people. A recent example of this is a programme called ‘Dispatches: The Truth about Traveller Crime’ aired by Channel 4 in 2020. In the aftermath it resulted in a spike of online hate speech6 and despite receiving over a thousand complaints7, the broadcast regulator Ofcom has yet to disclose the outcome of its investigation.
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-national-strategy-to-tackle-gypsy-roma-and-traveller- inequalities#:~:text=Communities%20Minister%20Lord%20Bourne%20has,Gypsy%2C%20Roma%20and%20Travelle r%20communities.&text=The%20department%20has%20also%20funded,through%20the%20Controlling%20Migration %20Fund. 2 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7275183/ 3 https://committees.parliament.uk/work/153/legislative-scrutiny-police-powers-and-protections-bill/ 4 https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=CERD/C/GBR/CO/21- 23&Lang=En 5 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-national-strategy-to-tackle-gypsy-roma-and-traveller- inequalities#:~:text=Communities%20Minister%20Lord%20Bourne%20has,Gypsy%2C%20Roma%20and%20Travelle r%20communities.&text=The%20department%20has%20also%20funded,through%20the%20Controlling%20Migration %20Fund. 6 http://bucks.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/54649/Rain-Report.pdf
The IPSO code of conduct does to cover complaints against a group of people. Clause 12 of its code of practice declares that the press ‘must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s race, colour, religions, sex, gender identity’ etc, but buried in the handbook that accompanies the code is the explanation that this ‘does not cover generalised remarks about groups or categories of people’.
The 2016 concluding observations requested that the UK take effective measures to combat racist media coverage, taking into account the Committee’s general recommendation No. 35 (2013) on combating racist hate speech, and ensure that such cases are thoroughly investigated, and where appropriate, that sanctions are imposed.
Recommendation: the national strategy to tackle GRT inequalities must include a strand on addressing anti-GRT racism in the media. Too often UK press is at the helm of perpetuating anti- Traveller rhetoric, hate and discrimination. Recommendation: IPSO should update its Code of Conduct (clause 12) to cover generalised remarks about groups or categories of people. This will prevent media outlets from publishing articles that make generalised racist comments about groups of people with protected characteristics. The government must include more stringent observance of timely complaints reporting by the broadcast regulator Ofcom.
Hate Crime and Discrimination
Gypsy, Roma and Irish Traveller people experience very high levels of racism and discrimination. A report by the Traveller Movement in 2017 found 91% of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people surveyed had experienced discrimination8, while a YouGov poll found that one in four British parents found it unacceptable for their child to have a playdate with a Gypsy or Traveller child, and one in four would be unhappy if a close relative had a relationship with a Gypsy or a Traveller9. The EHRC’s Barometer of Hate also found Gypsy, Roma and Travellers were the only protected characteristic group for which the most frequent response was openly negative (44%)10. While research by GATE Herts found that most Gypsies and Travellers have experienced hate crime, the majority are reluctant to report these crimes to the police11. This is largely due to the pervasiveness of everyday racism, but also longstanding mistrust of the police based on decades of mistreatment and discriminatory practices. This negative perception of the police was
7 https://www.travellerstimes.org.uk/news/2020/07/pressure-mounts-ch4-after-truth-about-traveller-crime-complaints- set-be-investigated 8 https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/userupload/equality-human-rights/last-acceptable-form-of-racism- traveller-movement-report.pdf 9 https://www.irishpost.com/news/nearly-half-british-people-unhappy-relative-relationship-irish-traveller-new-poll- 136321 10 https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/national-barometer-of-prejudice-and-discrimination-in- britain.pdf 11 https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Recognise-Report-Resolve.pdf
supported by Traveller Movement research12 which found widespread evidence of racism, discrimination and the belief that Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people are inherently criminogenic and the ethnicity is treated as a risk factor13.
Recommendation: Since race hate crime amounts to 82% of all reported hate crimes nationally14 it should be mandatory for all the UK CJS agencies to include the 2021 Census racial, ethnic and national group categories in their monitoring systems. Recommendation: the Government should include a definition of anti-Gypsyism15 in the next Hate Crime Action Plan.
Criminal Justice and Access to Justice
Gypsies, Roma and Travellers are enormously overrepresented in the criminal justice system. The 2017 Lammy review helped bring Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people into the broader discourses of the disproportionality, treatment and outcomes of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic people in the criminal justice system16. Although none of the 35 recommendations were aimed at Gypsies, Roma or Travellers, it did highlight that they experience some of the worst outcomes8.
Gypsy and Traveller men make up 6% of the prison population, whilst Gypsy and Traveller women make up 7%17. However, this is widely considered inaccurate and self-reporting has shown that 12% of women in prison identify as Gypsy or Traveller9. Roma were not included in the 2011 census so are not included in the statistics. Additionally, the absence of Roma from official monitoring has meant that it is impossible to analyse whether sentencing decisions or reoffending rates are proportionate.
As an overall picture, Gypsies and Irish Travellers are more likely to have poor experiences of detention. The 2019/2020 HMIP prisoner survey some notable comparative data stands out18:
• 64% of Travellers recorded having mental health problems compared to 46% of non- Travellers • 53% recorded having a disability compared to 35% of non-Travellers • 66% of Travellers have children under the age of 18 compared to 47% of non-Travellers • 37% said they had been prevented from making a complaint when they wanted to compared to 28% of non-Travellers
12https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/userupload/criminal-justice/TTM-Policing-by-consent_web.pdf 13https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/Written%20submission%20from%20the%20Traveller%20Moveme nt%20and%20the%20Gypsy%20Roma%20Traveller%20Police%20Association%20GRTPA.pdf 14 https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8537/CBP-8537.pdf 15 https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/Position%20paper%20AntiGypsyism_final.pdf 16https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/643001/lammy- review-final-report.pdf
17 https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/360/360.pdf 18https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/927361/hmi- prisons-annual-report-accounts-201920.pdf
• 29% of Travellers recorded drug and alcohol problems compared to 17% of non- Travellers • 24% had spent one or more nights in the segregation unit in the last 6 months compared to 9% of non-Travellers • 62% of Travellers reported feeling unsafe compared to 47% of non-Travellers.
Recommendation: It should be mandatory for all of the UK Criminal Justice System agencies to include the 2021 Census racial, ethnic and national group categories in their monitoring systems.
Police and the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities
Traveller Movement research Policing by Consent found19 that the relationship between Police and Traveller communities is fraught with difficulty and mistrust, with Gypsy, Roma and Traveller ethnicities treated as a risk factor. Not only are Travellers less likely to report crime to the Police, there is evidence to suggest that Police officers use racist or derogatory language toward Traveller communities. Further Traveller Movement research found that, of the 44 police forces in the UK, only 9 record Gypsies, Roma or Travellers as ethnic groups, meaning that they cannot therefore be ethnically recorded as victims of crime. This is institutionally racist, and must be rectified as a matter of priority.
Recommendation: Police forces should implement the 18+1 census categories across all 44 police forces nationwide as a matter of priority.
Recommendation: Police forces must build trust and confidence among the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities by improving the police’s commitment to respond effectively to complaints of crime, including hate crime.
Political Rights
Anti-Gypsyism, or anti-Traveller rhetoric has for decades been a staple of British politics. Similar in its manifestations to Islamophobic or anti-Semitic discourse, its prominence in parliamentary debates is a cause for concern as the consequences are worryingly similar. Politicians are frequently the source of discriminatory or racist abuse against Gypsies, Roma or Travellers. When MPs and other parliamentarians refer to Gypsies, Roma or Travellers in the chamber as an ‘invasion’ or like ‘a disease’ they serve only to dehumanise and increase the public’s opposition
19 https://travellermovement.org.uk/criminal-justice?download=49:jun-2018-policing-by-consent-understanding-and- improving-relations-between-gypsies-roma-irish-travellers-and-the-police
towards Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people20. Research has shown that racist or derogatory language by politicians against minority groups can lead to a spike in hate crimes, whilst racist and irresponsible reporting in the media can, and often does, lead to a backlash against all community members21. Parliamentary debates should be solution focused, and not merely a platform for venting prejudice against ethnic minority groups. The role of an elected representative is to represent all their constituents, inclusive of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities.
Recommendations: The Government must revise the Parliamentary Code of Conduct to include specific references to hate speech so that who abuse their position by using hateful language face sanction. This sets an example to other parliamentarians, but also to wider society about what is or isn’t acceptable to say when discussing minority ethnic or religious groups. Political Parties and Independents should also make similar changes and adjustments to include specific references to hate speech in the Codes of Conduct for their own parties.
Civil Rights
While there are no official statistics on voter turnout among Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people, our work has shown this to be low and government proposals to introduce a voter ID law will likely create further barriers to democratic participation. Decades of international studies show that restrictive identification requirements are particularly disadvantageous to certain voter groups who are less likely to possess approved ID for a variety of socio-economic and accessibility reasons. Voter ID reforms could therefore affect young people, older people, disabled people, transgender and gender non-conforming people, BAME communities and the homeless. Furthermore, Government departments do not know who will be hardest hit by mandatory voter ID plans despite government declaring there is no impact on any demographic group. Freedom of Information requests to the Home Office, Passport Office and Department for Transport show that data on possession of passport/driving licence ID by ethnicity is not centrally held22. Finally, the Equalities Impact Assessment conducted on pilot schemes for this policy failed to consider Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people.
Recommendation: The government should scrap the proposed Voter ID bill. It will prevent marginalised people including GRT, from exercising their democratic right to vote. The UK doesn’t have an issue with voter fraud. The proposed Voter ID bill is ‘a solution seeking a problem’.23
Education
20 https://www.politicshome.com/thehouse/article/discrimination-and-abuse-against-gypsies-and-travellers-remains- widespread 21 https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/13036/html/ 22 https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/has-the-government-misled-parliament-over-voter-id/ 23 https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/why-voter-id-is-a-solution-seeking-a-problem/
In 2016, the committee noted its concern at continued reports of racist bullying and harassment in schools across the State party, as well as at the disproportionate rate of exclusion from school of pupils belonging to Gypsy, Traveller, Roma or Afro-Caribbean communities. It also recommended the UK “Strengthen efforts to eliminate all racist bullying and harassment in the State party’s schools, including by requiring schools to collect qualitative and quantitative data on bullying and exclusions from school on the grounds of race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin, and to use the data to develop concrete strategies.”
The longstanding issues surrounding education for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils has been well documented and there is decades of research detailing this. During the pandemic existing issues have become exacerbated and we have seen the emergence of new needs. Failure to address these could see Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils being set even further behind than many already are.
In the 2017/18 school year, the highest permanent exclusion rates were among Gypsy and Roma pupils (0.36%) and Traveller of Irish Heritage pupils (0.29%)24. Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children have the lowest attainment of all ethnic groups throughout their school years25 26. They are less likely to remain in education after the age of sixteen than pupils in any other ethnic group27. In 2014, only 3 to 4% of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people aged 18 to 30 accessed Higher Education28.
Bullying remains a serious issue and contributes to the early school leaving of these pupils as well as the numbers being excluded for retaliation after the school failed to act on it. Bullying, from peers and teachers, continues to be a significant issue which, along with a lack of curriculum representation, results in pupils feeling a lesser sense of belonging29. For Gypsy, Roma and Traveller children the impact of missed education as a result of COVID-19 is a big concern and long reaching, especially when factoring in the higher levels of digital exclusion and reduced educational support30.
Recommendations: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller history and culture should be included across the curriculum.
24 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/absence-and-exclusions/pupil- exclusions/latest 25 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/early-years/attainment-of- development-goals-by-children-aged-4-to-5-years/latest#by-ethnicity 26 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/11-to-16-years-old/gcse-results- attainment-8-for-children-aged-14-to-16-key-stage-4/latest#by-ethnicity 27 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/education-skills-and-training/after-education/destinations-of- school-pupils-after-key-stage-4-usually-aged-16-years/latest#by-ethnicity 28 https://www.cfey.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/KINGWIDE_28494_proof3.pdf 29 https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/TTM%20Barriers%20in%20education_web.pdf# 30 https://travellermovement.org.uk/briefings?download=240:august-2020-traveller-movement-submission-to-covid-19- committee-life-beyond-covid
Recommendations: Schools and the Department for Education should adopt the term anti- Gypsyism and make a renewed effort to tackle ethnicity based bullying. Recommendations: The national strategy needs to include recommendations and support in education in order to bridge the attainment gap, drive down exclusions and improve future opportunities.
Health
Gypsy, Roma and Traveller ethnic categories are not included in the NHS data dictionary31 and therefore we don’t have appropriate data to hold the government accountable for the health inequalities they people face.
• Almost a third of GRT reported that they had experienced discrimination within the health care system32 33 • GRT live on average 10 - 12 years less than the general population , in some areas even 25 years less34 35 • High infant and maternal mortality rates • 42% of Gypsies and Travellers are affected by a long-term condition, as opposed to 18% of the general population36 37 • 57% of Gypsies and Traveller smoke compared to matched comparators 21.5% 38 • Gypsies and Travellers suffer higher levels of stress, anxiety and depression • The suicide rate in the Traveller community is six times higher than in the general population and seven times higher among young Traveller men39
Nomadic Gypsies and Travellers are still facing difficulties in registering to GP practices because of the lack of fixed abode. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on Gypsies, Roma and Travellers. Those living on caravan sites live and interact with extended families and often share facilities and therefore the virus can spread more easily on sites. Government guidance for
31 https://travellermovement.org.uk/phocadownload/userupload/health/briefing-about-data-dictionary-traveller- movement-ARCHIVE.pdf
32 Traveller Movement (2017) The pervasive discrimination and prejudice experienced by Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. http://travellermovement.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/TMreport1J-FINAL.pdf 33 Baker, M, (2005) Leeds Baseline Census 2004-2005 Gypsies and Travellers. Leeds: Leeds Racial Equality Council 34 Leeds Community Healthcare, NHS Trust (2018) Gypsy and Traveller Community and a Queen’s Nurse tackle health inequalities in Leeds. https://www.leedscommunityhealthcare.nhs.uk/gypsy-and-traveller-community-and-a- queens-nurse-tackle-health-inequalities-in-leeds1/ 35 Ministerial Working Group on tackling inequalities experienced by Gypsies and Travellers, 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reducing-inequalities-for-gypsies-and-travellers-progress-report 36 Parry, G., Van Cleemput, P., Peters, J., Moore, J., Walters, S., Thomas, K. and Cooper, C. (2004): The Health Status of Gypsies & Travellers in England Report of Department of Health Inequalities. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield 37 Parry, G., Van Cleemput, P., Peters, J., Moore, J., Walters, S., Thomas, K. and Cooper, C. (2004): The Health Status of Gypsies & Travellers in England Report of Department of Health Inequalities. Sheffield: The University of Sheffield. 38 EHRC, Cemlyn et al. (2009) Inequalities experienced by Gypsies and Travellers: A Review. https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/research_report_12inequalities_experienced_by_gyp sy_and_traveller_communities_a_review.pdf 39 All Ireland Traveller Health Study 2010 https://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/AITHS_SUMMARY.pdf
people living on sites was published too late into the pandemic and has potentially had an impact on the infection levels among numerous Gypsy and Traveller families. There are a lot of misinformation and conspiracy theories circulating online about COVID-19 and COVID- 19 vaccines, and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people are as subjectable to it as anyone else. This misinformation breeds vaccine hesitancy and skepticism towards safety measures. Furthermore, Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people not being included in the data dictionary means that we don’t know how many have had COVID-19 and how many have lost their lives as a result.
Recommendations: Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people must be included in the NHS Data Dictionary.
For further information, please visit our website: https://travellermovement.org.uk/
Contact details: Patricia Stapleton [email protected]
THE RUNNYMEDE’S TRUST SHADOW REPORT ASSESSING THE GOVERNMENT’S
IMPLEMTATION OF THE UN CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF
RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.
USDAW WRITTEN SUBMISSION
MARCH 2021
Women and Equalities /Reports/2021/Usdaw written submission to the Runnymede Trust’s shadow report on the implementation of the UN CERD 2
UNION OF SHOP, DISTRIBUTIVE AND ALLIED WORKERS WRITTEN SUBMISSION TO THE RUNNYMEDE TRUST’S SHADOW REPORT
We very much welcome the Runnymede Trust’s engagement with civil society organisations including Trades Unions to shape their shadow report assessing the Government’s implementation of the UN Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. Together with the Trust we believe it is vital that the voices and experiences of BAME workers and communities are heard and represented in this process.
We are the UK's fifth largest trade union representing workers in retail, food and chemical manufacturing and distribution. We have over 400,000 members of which around 17% are BAME. We have national and regional events specifically for our BAME members and the aim of these is to reach out to BAME members and to ensure the Union is addressing their specific concerns.
In our submission we focus on the impact of the coronavirus pandemic and the Government’s response on Usdaw’s BAME members.
We believe it is a striking feature of the current narrative around the disproportionate impact of the crisis that the voices of BAME workers have been largely absent. We represent a substantial number of BAME workers, a large proportion of whom have been working through the crisis providing an essential service to their local communities. We therefore believe we are well placed to offer evidence on the lived experience of BAME workers in key roles and sectors of the economy.
We would like to share evidence of both a quantitative and a qualitative nature.
In early April 2020 Usdaw conducted a survey of over 7,000 of our members to better understand their experiences of working through the current crisis. In several respects there are striking differences between the experiences of BAME and White members which are suggestive of many of the wider social and economic inequalities underlying the disproportionate health impact of Covid-19.
In October 2020 Usdaw organised a gathering of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) members via Zoom in October to give them the opportunity to share their experiences of living and working through the pandemic. The experiences shared at this event by BAME activists reflected and reinforced the survey findings
Job Roles
A far higher proportion of BAME respondents told us they worked in sectors other than those where the Union is well organised including the fast food sector, cleaning and security roles. One fifth of BAME members compared to only 1.5% of white members worked in sectors and roles far less likely to be highly unionised. They are therefore far less likely to be benefiting from the work done by Usdaw officials to negotiate safe working practices, pay protection and job security during the crisis.
Verbal Abuse
We asked our members to tell us if they had experienced verbal abuse in the workplace since the start of the pandemic.
Our BAME members were more likely to report being threatened – 28.3% of Black members compared to 17.3 of white members.
3
This difference is significant (more than a quarter of Black members compared to less than a fifth of white members) and is, we believe, accounted for by the following factors:
• The roles performed by BAME members are those that are more likely to bring them into conflict with the public – ie acting as marshals/security policing entry into stores and social distancing in store.
• BAME workers are being targeted by those who believe the racist narrative surrounding the virus. Again, this demonstrates that BAME workers are in higher risk roles both in terms of exposure to risk and to abuse at work. The erosion of social distancing in shops means BAME workers are being exposed to even greater risk and abuse as they try to enforce this.
• BAME members are almost twice as likely to have experienced physical violence than white members – 16.3% BAME members experiencing violence compared to 8.7% since the 'outbreak'.
Time Off Sick or to Self- Isolate
Higher numbers of BAME members have taken time off sick or self-isolated than white members – more than a third compared to just over a quarter but there are very significant differences in terms of financial security whilst away from work.
More than half (53.8%) or one in two BAME members reported that they did not know what they would be paid during a period of sickness or self-isolation compared to just over a quarter (or one in four) of white members. This is strongly suggestive of an economy where BAME workers are in less secure work and less well organised workplaces or feel less able to ask their employer about what they are entitled to. More than twice as many Usdaw BAME members report not receiving any pay during this period than white members.
Casualisation and the lack of employment rights that goes with it have undoubtedly had a disproportionate impact on BAME workers. As far back as 2014 TUC research found that temporary working increased by 25% amongst Black workers and only by 10% amongst white workers over the previous four year period. In 2014, one in ten Black workers were in temporary employment compared to just 6% of white workers. And in 2018 TUC research showed that 15% of young BAME workers were on non-permanent contracts compared to 8% of young white workers. The fact that young Black workers were almost twice as likely to be experiencing low paid, insecure forms of work helps set the scene for why the current crisis has disproportionately affected BAME workers.
Our evidence also illustrates the pressing need for reforms to Statutory Sick Pay both in terms of its low rate and eligibility criteria. You must be an employee to be entitled to SSP and earn above the Lower Earnings Limit both of which knock many BAME workers out of entitlement.
In our survey BAME members were also less likely to receive both full average pay and full contractual pay whilst away from work with less than 2% of BAME members in receipt of full contractual pay during sickness absence compared to more than a fifth (22.6%) of white members – more than twenty times less likely.
BAME members were also:
• Three times as likely not to know what they were supposed to be being paid.
• Less likely than white members to receive full pay during furlough.
4
Racism in the labour market means BAME workers are far more likely to be employed in lower paid roles and several studies show that employers are more likely to top up the wages of those in the middle/higher end of grading structures as they are perceived to be of greater value to the business.
Having a Voice at Work
Similar numbers of BAME and White members had raised concerns with their employer – over two thirds which clearly reflects the high levels of concern that workers have about whether they are safe at work during the crisis.
However, BAME members are significantly less likely to be satisfied with their employer's response (just over a third reported being completely or mostly satisfied compared to almost half of white members) than white members. This suggests that concerns raised by BAME workers are not addressed as rigorously as those raised by white members.
Because so many BAME workers are on precarious contracts in unorganised sectors they feel far less able to raise concerns or where they do these are more likely to be ignored. Usdaw recently represented one such member on a zero-hours contract who after raising concerns about poor social distancing at work found his hours cut from an average of 40 a week down to eight.
The experience of a Black Usdaw rep in a large food manufacturing site in the North East of England is indicative of many of the issues described above.
The majority of workers there on the factory floor are employed by an agency and are from the BAME communities. The permanent contract roles are in the office, admin and management roles where staff are in the main white.
At the beginning of the crisis mangers were very slow to respond. Workers were still working on the production line only one metre apart and due to lack of public transport were travelling to work together in one van with 6 or7 people in it.
Staff were disciplined for taking time off sick under the absence manager procedure and so felt compelled to come into work when unwell.
The situation has been improved now thanks to the hard work and persistence of the Usdaw reps on site but for several weeks in the words of one rep 'the company got their priorities wrong and we had high rates of infection amongst Black workers on the production line'.
What does Usdaw believe is needed?
We need robust and urgent action to tackle racism in the labour market and the casualisation through which it finds expression. The root causes rather than the outcomes of poverty and decades of systemic discrimination must be considered and addressed.
As the TUC and many others have pointed out we have witnessed countless inquiries with many recommendations, that if implemented would have improved Black people’s lives. Black communities have lost faith in the UK government taking this issue seriously or taking action to protect Black lives.
Continued warm words are not enough and action is needed today. Employers, governments, public bodies and regulators must be held to account for failures in their duty of care and legal responsibilities.
5
Action must include:
The establishment of an independent statutory race equality body, well-resourced and modelled along the lines of the former Commission for Racial Equality.
The right to a minimum contract of 16 hours per week for everyone who wants it.
The right to a normal hours' contract so that where workers are regularly working over their contracted hours this has to be guaranteed in their contract.
A ban on zero-hours contracts – there is a real danger that, as the impact of coronavirus begins to show on the economy, more BAME workers in particular will feel forced to take zero-hours contracts as they have no other options. We need to ban zero-hours contracts, once and for all.
Casualisation has shut many BAME workers out of this most basic of rights. Sick pay needs to be paid from day one, at the workers' normal pay rate, and it should be paid to all workers.
An increase in the minimum wage to £10 for all workers.
Compulsory race equality audits and a statutory duty on employers to tackle the inequalities they reveal.
The restoration of the following sections of the Equality Act repealed by the Conservative Government: i) Statutory discrimination questionnaires. ii) Third part harassment. iii) The power of tribunals to make wider recommendations
Furthermore Usdaw supports the TUC’s call on the UK government to:
• promptly implement all the recommendations from the Windrush Lessons Learned Review
• urgently act to pay compensation and provide free independent legal support for citizenship applications – two years on and victims of the Windrush scandal are still waiting for the promised compensation.
• fully implement the Lammy Review of the criminal justice system from 2017
• fully implement the recommendations of the government Race Disparity report
• fully implement the recommendations from the McGregor Smith report
• act on all of the proposals contained in Baroness Doreen Lawrence’s report An Avoidable Crisis.
• bring into force Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 – the Public Sector Socio- Economic Duty in England: this is already enacted in Scotland and Wales
• ensure all workers, regardless of immigration status, can claim rights at work
6
• ensure all migrants are able to access social security support on the same terms as UK citizens by ending no recourse to public funds
• ensure all migrants, including undocumented migrants, can access the NHS free of charge
• establish an independent judge-led royal commission or public inquiry into the government’s handling of the pandemic with a particular focus on Black deaths due to Covid-19 and the contributing factors
Call for Evidence: Civil Society Submission on the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
Women’s Resource Centre, March 2021
About WRC
About the Women’s Resource Centre WRC is a unique charity which supports women’s organisations to be more effective and sustainable. We provide training, information, resources and one-to-one support on a range of organisational development issues. We advocate decision makers on behalf of the women’s not-for-profit sector for improved representation and funding. Our members work in a wide range of fields including health, violence against women, employment, education, rights and equality, the criminal justice system and the environment. They deliver services to and campaign on behalf of some of the most marginalised communities of women.
For more information on our work, please contact:
Vivienne Hayes, Chief Executive
Email: [email protected]
For more information about this report please contact:
Kiran Dhami, Policy Team
Email: [email protected]
1
Migrant women
‘Hostile environment’ policies, austerity, and the coronavirus pandemic have hit migrant women the hardest in the following ways:
No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF)
While Local Authorities have an obligation to support vulnerable people with NRPF, they receive no funding from central government to do this. When EU free movement ends, EEA nationals will also then become subject to the UK’s Immigration Rules, meaning that those that fail to obtain leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme and future arrivals may also be at risk of destitution if they are excluded from mainstream services.1 NRPF is a gateway to a host of personal and socio- economic problems.
Client A has NRPF, two children, barely speaks English and was sex trafficked into prostitution by her perpetrator who takes her money. She is unable to access a bank account due to lack of Identification.... She sought support from the Children’s Society about childcare and immigration but had to provide her own interpreter. Her family has lived in three different B&B’s during lockdown, moving due to unhabitable conditions including water leaks, rat infestations and overcrowding. This has meant she has missed vital post from the Home Office. As Client A does not have 3 years residency, she is unable to access any courses. [WAITS]
Due to the continuing funding crisis facing refuge services, most are unable to cover housing costs without benefits or other funding in place; only 5% of refuge vacancies are accessible to women with NRPF.2 The options facing women with NRPF unable to access a refuge space are shocking – homelessness or being forced to return to the perpetrator... A quarter of the women we support in our No Women Turned Away project, which provides specialist casework support to women facing barriers to refuge access, are women with NRPF. [Women’s Aid Federation of England]
Detention centres and asylum system
Homelessness, hunger, inability to access basic needs and even longer delays to asylum applications since the start of the pandemic has meant that many women asylum seekers are facing severe physical and mental health crises.3 Not being able to work and having to subsist on £39.634 a week is a disastrous policy that undermines our human rights.
80% of the women we have supported, who have been referred/self-referred whilst in detention or have been given ‘home return’ notification, have had their cases mishandled by solicitors making them vulnerable to detention - even when their cases are evidenced. 100% of women we have worked with who have been detained have accessed therapeutic support to specifically address the re-traumatisation of being imprisoned in detention as survivors of VAWG, including domestic slavery, and trafficking where they have been imprisoned as part of the abuse. In detention they received no additional assessment of mental health support. [Angelou Centre]
1 https://www.nrpfnetwork.org.uk/-/media/microsites/nrpf/documents/policy/policy-issues-and-nrpf- overview.pdf?la=en&hash=C78B5C26A9AF924764084F0CA6D31D651BBF8FAD 2 Women’s Aid (2020) The Domestic Abuse Report 2020: The Annual Audit, Bristol: Women’s Aid. 3 Sisters Not Strangers coalition (2020) Hear us: The experiences of refugee and asylum seeker women during the pandemic 4 This was an increase from £37.75 announced as a COVID measure. Groups like The Refugee Council called this “deeply insulting.” There was an announcement in October 2020 of an extra £8 per week on clothing, travel and non-prescription medication for those in full-board accommodation under section 95 or section 4(2) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. It will not apply to those who are on s98.
2
Refuges are rejecting asylum-seeking victim/survivors despite guidance outlining that Migrant Help can cover the cost of refuge space as they would for other accommodation. There is a routine lack of understanding about migrant women seeking asylum rights, and a presumption of NRPF despite seeking asylum status. [Angelou Centre]
Access to legal aid
In June 2020, new rules5 came into force that further limited access to legal aid for immigration and asylum cases by making it financially impossible for lawyers to take on complex cases. Victims of trafficking and LGBT+ asylum seekers will be the worst affected. These rules came in before a full consultation had taken place, and without a full impact assessment being carried out.6
SBS struggles daily to obtain access to high quality, legal aided advice and representation for survivors of domestic abuse, particularly since changes to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishing of Offenders Act in 2013...We are increasingly compelled to complete Exceptional Case Funding applications, which only serve to delay access to legal advice and representation. [Southall Black Sisters]
Healthcare.
The excessively high number of deaths the UK has suffered from the COVID pandemic has highlighted the deep, existing structural health inequalities in this country.7
Black women face five times more risk of dying in pregnancy or up to 6 weeks postpartum compared with white women...NHS charges are a big barrier to minoritised women accessing healthcare. Maternity Action took the government to court over their charges to pregnant women but the courts rejected it…Doctors of the World reported that a £500+ NHS debt gets reported to the Home Office after 2 months, placing their immigration status at risk...This is a deterrent for many of the poorest families from the African diaspora from accessing healthcare, thus causing health problems to deteriorate. [Mama Health and Poverty Partnership]
Tax and welfare policies
A regressive tax system and punitive welfare system disproportionately affects Black and minoritised women.
Over twice as many disabled or retired Black, Asian and ethnic minority women and men reported that they had recently lost support from the government (43% and 48%) than white women and men in these groups (13% and 21%).8 [The Fawcett Society]
5 Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020. Even before this minoritised women who are subjected to VAWG including so-called honour-based violence, forced marriage, and trafficking, will continue to face barriers to legal support with a 56% drop in the number of asylum and immigration legal aid providers since 2005. Refugee Action and NACCOM, (2018) Tipping the Scales: Access to Justice in the Asylum System. 6 https://www.legalcheek.com/2020/06/new-legal-aid-rules-threaten-access-to-justice-for-asylum-seekers-and-vulnerable- migrants-young-lawyers-warn/ 7 A third of people critically ill with COVID-19 are from ethnic minorities, even though they make up only 13% of the population (Mama Health and Poverty Partnership and WRC submission to Mayor of Manchester p.2) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/health-inequalities-covid-ucl-government-policymaking. WRC (2020) The Crisis of COVID-19 and UK Women’s Charities, Survey Responses and Findings found that minoritised people, and women in particular, face increased barriers to accessing healthcare because of things like extra caring responsibilities and more limited access to computers. It also showed that 84% of the respondents said that a decline in mental health was one of the three most pressing issues for BME women. 8 Joint Coronavirus research from The Fawcett Society, Women’s Budget Group, LSE and Queen Mary joint research (2020), BAME Women and Coivd-19 – Research Evidence.
3
Race, Women and Poverty
Rates of destitution were rising even before the pandemic9, although the pandemic is likely to push an extra two million families into poverty.10 Lone mothers, migrants with NRPF, and BME women are increasingly at risk.11
During the first lockdown a quarter of Black, Asian and ethnic minority mothers reported that they were struggling to feed their children (24%).12 [The Fawcett Society]
The MHaPP helpline received over 100 calls per week from [Black/African] women and families living in destitution. 95% of our service-users are poor-income families, 75% are struggling to meet household bills, 85% are worried about feeding and clothing their children. Over half had been denied benefits in the last year, and 35% reported waiting more than 5 years for an asylum decision, meaning they couldn’t legally work in all this time. [Mama Health & Poverty Partnership]
Women and the Criminal Justice System
There is discrimination and harm to women survivors in asylum and immigration proceedings.13 There is still a disproportionate number of black and minoritised women in prison,14 facing greater likelihood of imprisonment than men for first offences and non-violent offences, higher rates of remand and poorer outcomes on release.15 There is a disproportionate number of Black victims of domestic and sexual abuse in some London boroughs.16 Nationally, only 37% of BME women who experience violence make a formal report to the police.17 Distrust of the police is high.18
A recent investigation into the first ever police super-complaint submitted by SBS and Liberty found that the police practice of sharing the data of migrant victims with the Home Office causes significant public harm and recommended immediate suspension of the practice. Without this, we are not confident the practice will stop. [Southall Black Sisters]
9 Joseph Rowntree Foundation Destitution in the UK reports. Relative child poverty, which is a good indicator of socioeconomic deprivation amongst adults, increased by 600,000 between 2011/12 and 2018/19, Social Mobility Commission report (2020) referenced here: https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/2020/06/22/fact-checking-claims- about-child-poverty/ with an additional 200,000 since the pandemic. Institute for Public Policy Research 10 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/09/covid-driven-recession-likely-to-push-2m-uk-families-into-poverty 11 The research into destitution was carried out by the Institute for Social Policy, Housing, Equalities Research at Heriot- Watt University, its third such study since 2015. Around 1m households experienced destitution in 2019, up 35% since 2017, equivalent to 2.4 million people. These rates were likely to have doubled in recent months. 88% of BME women’s organisations WRC surveyed reported that increased poverty was a main cause for concern for their service-users, which is a higher rate than non BME organisations. Almost a third of women’s organisations in our survey reported that access to Universal Credit was an urgent and critical need for their service-users. There was a 15% variance in the number of BME organisations that reported an increase in poverty as the main issues affecting their service-users compared to non BME women’s organisations. The survey also showed that there is a more urgent need for emergency supplies to basic living needs such as safety, food and personal care. Over half of BME women’s organisations we surveyed said homelessness was a pressing issue for their service-users. See WRC (2020) The Crisis of COVID-19 and UK Women’s Charities. Survey Responses and Findings.
12 Joint Coronavirus research from The Fawcett Society, Women’s Budget Group, LSE and Queen Mary joint research (2020), BAME Women and Coivd-19 – Research Evidence. 13 https://domide.colmex.mx/Archivos/Doc_5136.pdf 14 http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/Counted%20Out.pdf 15 Prison Reform Trust (2017) Why focus on reducing women’s imprisonment? London: PRT 16 https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/annex_1_-_evidence_pack.pdf 17 https://www.sistersforchange.org.uk/project/bme-women-victims-of-violence-in-the-uk/ 18 https://www.voice-online.co.uk/news/uk-news/2020/08/20/two-thirds-of-minority-ethnic-people-in-britain-believe- police-are-biased-against-them/
4
Intersectionality and substantive equality
Women facing disadvantage and barriers because of racism is not easily seen in government data, which only disaggregates data into separate equalities strands. This makes minoritised women – who would be in both categories - invisible. It is not surprising then that the references to BAMER women in the UK State Report 2018 are ‘add-ons’; nor is it surprising that it shows a total lack of awareness that women are present in all of the equalities groups.
Violence and Abuse
The economic fallout of the pandemic has meant a higher risk of violence and abuse, especially for BME women who are more likely to be disproportionately affected by domestic abuse.19
The government did supply some emergency funding to frontline domestic violence services, after Southall Black Sisters launched a legal challenge against the government for their failure to provide emergency funding for abused women during the pandemic. However, there was no ring-fenced funding for organisations supporting migrant women and those with NRPF. The extra funding that was released, while welcome, was still a drop in the ocean of actual need.20
There is limited provision of specialist refuges and services for BME women because they are usually smaller organisations, that cannot compete on an equal footing with larger, or generic organisations to win local authority contracts. This is putting them under enormous funding pressure, and many BME organisations have had to close over recent years.21
Another worrying development is that, as part of the Prevent agenda, the Home Office and Counter Terrorism Police are seeking to research the ‘links between suspects of domestic abuse and extreme views, which can manifest into terrorism’. Thirty women’s organisations signed a letter last year expressing deep concerns that this approach sought to give the government’s counter terrorism strategy legitimacy by focusing on ‘safeguarding’ and tackling domestic abuse.
“The Prevent strategy has been heavily criticised for its weak evidence base, which focuses on radicalisation and terrorism as a result of religion and ideology – rather than social, economic and
19 https://www.ksscrc.co.uk/2020/10/29/domestic-abuse-in-black-asian-and-minority-ethnic-groups/ 20 “One member had 52 women on the waiting list for counselling (at the time of the survey) and this reflects the demand and capacity issues facing other BME organisations who deliver specialist therapeutic support provision to black and minoritised women and girls. Concerns exist about the readiness and capacity to respond to the likely surge in cases once lockdown restrictions are relaxed without additional support... Imkaan members entered the lockdown with 39% reduction in funding due to austerity cuts. The impact of this reduction is as follows: one-third reduced staffing capacity, unsafe resident to keyworker ratio at 8:1 (safe levels suggest 4:1), and overstretched management, back office and overheads. Core support to refuges for example, through Supporting People has been reduced by as much as 40% during austerity... With an increased need for clinical supervision for staff, increased investment in the digital environment, PPE and cleaning supplies which require replenishment in refuges, and adjustments for staff working from home including increased mobile costs, there have been no real savings during this [pandemic] period... Two weeks into the lockdown, self-referrals increased by 2 times and 3 times the normal rate and referrals from statutory agencies continued. There were 8x more referrals for NRPF and other insecure immigration status and one organisation experienced an 80% increase. 20% of our member organisations said that they would not have capacity to respond to increased demand, 40% said they would need extra funding, 10% said they would have to refer women elsewhere. The sector remains under-funded.” [Case study from Imkaan, second-tier women's organisation dedicated to addressing violence against Black and minoritised women and girls]
21 https://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Joint-Briefing-for-Meg-Hillier-MP-Debate-EVAW- Imkaan.pdf https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/women-refuge-domestic-violence-refuge-bame-london-black- women-s-project-newham-cuts-a8990391.html
5 political factors. It has fuelled the surveillance and over-policing of black and minoritised communities and, as the UN Special Rapporteur on Racism has made clear, the enforcement of the Prevent duty by teachers, professors, doctors and other professionals has had ‘horrific consequences.’ VAWG organisations led ‘by and for’ black and minoritised women have also documented the racism and severe harm that Prevent has had on the women they support.22
Jobs
Black and minority ethnic (BME) women are around twice as likely as white workers to be employed in insecure jobs.23 Many of these roles are in vital front-line services like health and social care. BME women employed in precarious jobs tend not only to experience heightened job insecurity but also a significant pay penalty. Pay in temporary and zero-hours jobs is typically a third less an hour than for those on permanent contracts.24 This is also the case for self-employed BME women.
Individuals from a BME background had to submit on average 80% more applications to receive a positive response from an employer than a White Briton.25 Muslim women have also expressed that they are more likely to be illegally asked about their marital status, child care plans, and family aspirations in contrast to their White counterparts during interviews.26
African women with limited leave to remain are vulnerable and report being exploited by unscrupulous landlords who demand sexual favours in exchange for rent. [Mama Health & Poverty Partnership]
Recommendations
• The Government should demonstrate its commitment to equality by securing compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty by making it compulsory for public bodies, the government and civil society to undertake thorough Equality Impact Assessments in the early stages of policy making and that it be shown that the findings are acted upon. • Exempt all women subjected to domestic violence, abuse and exploitation in the context of marriage, employment or trafficking from the no recourse to public funds (NRPF) requirement. • Urgently invest into the legal aid system. • The Government should ensure that the rights and obligations contained in ICERD are fully incorporated into UK law. • Drop migrant healthcare charges and immigration checks and conditionalities for accessing NHS healthcare. • Increase funding to Local Authorities for women escaping violence and destitution with no recourse to public funds (NRPF). • Immediately suspend the practice of the police sharing the data of migrant victims with the Home Office.
22 https://www.womensaid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Letter-to-Home-Secretary-Prevent- Domestic-Abuse-Extremism.pdf 23 https://www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/bme-women-and-work 24 TUC, (2020) Poll that showed that 2 out of 5 working mums face a childcare crisis when new term starts. TUC, (2020) Forced Out: The cost of getting childcare wrong 25 https://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/news-events/news/new-csi-report-on-ethnic-minority-job-discrimination/ 26 https://www.enar-eu.org/Forgotten-Women-the-impact-of-Islamophobia-on-Muslim-women
6
• Systematically collect and publish equality disaggregated data to inform policymaking and assess impact • Larger companies should publish redundancy data disaggregated by protected characteristics to ensure accountability against bias and discrimination; and sex and race disaggregated data on deaths in nursing and care homes. • Develop a longer-term funding settlement for VAWG organisations to ensure demand for services across the four nations can be met – including ring-fenced funding for specialist services led ‘by and for’ Black and minoritised women. • Suspend all work that is trying to link terrorist activity and domestic abuse through the Prevent agenda. • Introduce a temporary legal right to access the furlough scheme for parents and those with caring responsibilities who have had these significantly disrupted due to coronavirus restrictions, and people who cannot work because they are required to shield. • Drop the two-child tax credit limit; stop the Universal Credit single payment to couples; keep the £20 per week Universal Credit uplift.
7