House of Commons - Education and Skills

Select Committee on Education and Skills Written Evidence

Memorandum by Age Concern

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Age Concern England (the National Council on Ageing) brings together Age Concern organisations working at a local level and 100 national bodies, including charities, professional bodies and representational groups with an interest in older people and ageing issues. Through our national information line, which receives 170,000 telephone and postal enquiries a year, and the information services offered by local Age Concern organisations, we are in day to day contact with older people and their concerns.

1.2 Age Concern is pleased that the Communities and Local Government Committee has decided to conduct an inquiry into equality at a key point in the development of policy in this field. We welcome the opportunity to submit evidence, which we have supplemented by appending additional material:

Age of equality? outlawing age discrimination beyond the workplace

— UN Guiding Principles for Older Persons

1.3 We will respond in turn to each of the issues raised in the Committee's terms of reference.

2. ISSUES FACED IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NEW COMMISSION FOR EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS (CEHR)

2.1 The establishment of the CEHR is a welcome development from the perspective of older people. As we said in our response to Fairness for All, the White Paper setting out Government proposals for a new commission:

"Establishing a single Commission for equality and human rights is essential for older people. It will provide machinery to make a reality of the new rights under the Equal Treatment Directive and the Human Rights Act. It will also promote age equality beyond the law, where the challenges are enormous, but so are the possibilities. By spreading a new understanding of fairness and equality in an ageing society, the Commission could trigger a seismic shift in the opportunities for older people ... .. [it] will be able to develop an integrated approach to equality, human rights and cohesion, focused on individuals and relevant to everyone. Age equality, which affects us all, will play a key part in achieving this."

2.2 Age Concern believes that during its first year of operation, the CEHR will need to convince the age sector, including older people and the organisations that represent them, that it has a clear vision of age equality and is committed to working towards it. This will present a challenge for commissioners and staff alike, given that the three existing equality commissions will—understandably—seek to ensure that current obligations are firmly embedded into the CEHR's programme of work. The size of the CEHR's budget will no doubt impose significant operational restraints. A further concern relates to the comparative weakness of legislative protection against age discrimination, creating an imbalance in the legal tools that are available to the new Commission. This is a point to which we return in Paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 below.

2.3 As noted below, we welcome the definition of equality put forward by the Equalities Review in its final report. Within this over-arching concept, there needs to be clear understanding of the meaning of age equality and the CEHR should give early priority to agreeing on a definition—while recognising that this may need to evolve over time. As a starting point, it might be useful to consider the following working definition of age equality that we are using at present:

"An aspiration for every age group, age equality involves four linked principles and achieving age equality involves finding a balance between these:

— equal citizenship—people of all ages should have equality in their relationship with the state: the equal right to live independently; to be treated with dignity and to receive good quality services; and to have personal and collective choice and control to shape public services;

— equality of opportunity—people of all ages should have the same opportunities; for example, recruitment to jobs should be merit-based and there should be equal access to education;

— equality of outcome—where age is irrelevant, people of different ages should experience outcomes that are equal, for example, in accessing social care and treatment for mental health problems. Where age is a factor, preventable differences should be minimised; and

— respecting difference—securing age equality may mean recognising the diverse needs and aspirations of people of different ages and giving appropriate, rather than equal, treatment. For example, older people should be treated differently to allow them the choice to retire.

The concept of equality is closely linked to human rights and sits alongside other central human rights values such as dignity, fairness, respect and autonomy. Likewise, age equality is underpinned by human rights and, for older people, these include the framework of rights set out in the UN Guiding Principles for Older Persons: dignity, independence, participation, care and self-fulfilment.

2.4 The CEHR appears to be considering an approach that would position human rights as underpinning its work. This would emphasise the relevance of the CEHR to the whole nation by reference to people's common humanity, as well as providing a tool to help resolve tensions between equality "strands". We are pleased that the CEHR's draft vision and mission statement endorses the importance of human rights for the organisation. In the absence of goods and services legislation or a public sector duty to promote age equality, human rights has the potential to provide an invaluable legal safety net for older people, especially those who are reliant on public services. Human rights also present a significant but largely unacknowledged framework for driving up the standards of public services. In this context, the pioneering work of the British Institute of Human Rights provides a very useful model. We hope that the CEHR will give its full support to promoting a "human rights culture" within public services. We have two specific recommendations that we wish to make:

— under Section 9(2) of the Equality Act, the CEHR has a duty to promote awareness and understanding of other human rights in addition to the HRA. In this context, we would urge the CEHR to have regard to the UN Guiding Principles for older persons, which are appended to this memorandum. Although the principles are not binding on governments, they are designed to influence national policies on older people—a step that has already been taken in Wales.

3. THE GOVERNMENT'S ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN TAKING FORWARD THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITHIN THE EQUALITIES REVIEW

3.1 We have read the final report of the Equalities Review with great interest, and recognise that it has succeeded in advancing the debate around equality in a number of respects. We are pleased that it has made an impassioned plea for equality, supported by economic, moral and social arguments. We particularly welcome the Review's new definition of equality which is rooted in human rights principles and recognises the worth of every individual. The "Equalities Scorecard" that it has devised introduces an innovative and valuable framework for measuring equality across a wide range of dimensions, including longevity/health and participation—all of which are highly relevant for older people.

3.2 We accept that there will need to be a debate as to whether the ten dimensions that have been proposed for the Scorecard are the best choices. For example, there is an argument that "dignity" should be included as a separate dimension and there may need to be discussion as to whether some parts of the framework might be better combined—for example, longevity and health. We suggest that there should be an open debate about the relative importance of the different dimensions, with a recognition that the balance may need to change over the life course as needs and circumstances change. Likewise, there should be clear guidance about how priorities should be determined, as well as guidance for turning analysis of discrimination into action on the ground.

3.3 However, we believe that the basic approach taken by the Scorecard is the right one and we support the recommendation of the Review that the CEHR should use this framework as a basis for compiling its triennial "state of the nation" reports. We are also pleased that the Review has given its support to a single Equality Act to make the law simpler; and to an integrated positive duty covering all equality groups, with a strong emphasis on the role of public procurement and commissioning to further equalities goals.

3.4 Nonetheless, there are many ways in which the report has missed important opportunities in relation to age equality and older people:

— The Review does not call for legislation to outlaw age discrimination in goods, facilities and services as part of a Single Equality Bill. Similar legislation of course now exists for the other five equality "strands". We deal with this point in the next section of our memorandum, but one consequence of the current imbalance in protection is that the CEHR will be equipped with fewer legal tools in relation to ageism and age discrimination.

— The Review presents survey evidence suggesting low levels of prejudice against people over 70 and shows little understanding of the nature and extent of ageism. The research for the Review showed that people were least concerned about expressing prejudice towards Muslims and gay men and lesbians, and most concerned about being seen to be prejudiced against older people or disabled people. However, there appears to be no understanding of the nature of ageism as "benevolent" or patronising prejudice, or how this can lead to age prejudice being denied by perpetrator and victim alike. Nonetheless, ageism leads to real and persistent disadvantage for individuals and groups who are the focus of it. This is illustrated, for example, by the poor treatment of many older people by the NHS, acknowledged by the Department of Health as being rooted in deep-seated negative cultural attitudes towards older service users.

— The final report of the Review has also perpetuated certain problems with its Interim Report that gave us cause for concern. The concept of "life chances", which is biased in favour of early-life interventions over action later in life, still appears in the narrative of the report. It is clear that this approach has influenced the choice of "persistent inequalities" identified by the Review. These prioritise early years and education; employment; health; crime and criminal justice as areas requiring urgent action and are likely to inform the early work programme of the CEHR. The analysis under each of these headings makes very little reference to the inequalities faced by older people. We believe (and argued in response to the Interim Report) that there should be an analysis of equality that examines the extent to which "substantive freedoms" are maintained over the life course. This would involve seeking to prevent or reduce the harmful effects of "trigger events" whenever they occur in life. It would also focus on the inequalities that older people experience as a result of their age—for example, as a result of biological ageing; age-related institutional and attitudinal barriers; and cohort effects between generations. We believe that an "Equality Scorecard" approach would provide a useful tool for analysing the extent to which people from different backgrounds are able to maintain freedoms throughout their lives.

Age of equality? outlawing age discrimination beyond the workplace

3.5 Although we recognise that the final report of the Equalities Review has made some important contributions to the debate on equality, we believe it is important for the Government to recognise its shortfalls when considering policy options for implementation. There is otherwise a danger that the existing bias towards the three established equality strands will be perpetuated.

4. THE POSSIBLE CONTENTS OF THE DISCRIMINATION LAW REVIEW AND A SINGLE EQUALITY BILL

4.1 Age Concern is calling for the Single Equality Bill to incorporate new legislation to outlaw age discrimination in goods, facilities and services, together with a public sector duty to promote age equality. We would expect these two legislative measures to complement each other, because, following the model of existing public sector duties, public authorities would be responsible for eliminating unlawful discrimination as well as "age proofing" every aspect of their work. If age discrimination in goods and services were to remain lawful, this would considerably weaken a public sector duty on age.

4.2 Our report, Age of equality? outlawing age discrimination beyond the workplace, sets out the arguments for extending the law, supported by wide-ranging evidence of age discrimination—including case histories drawn from a recent survey conducted by Age Concern. We hope that the Committee will find this report of interest. For ease of reference we have appended to this memorandum the summary of the report which sets out the case for change, and therefore do not repeat the arguments here.

Memorandum by the Department for Communities and Local Government

I am writing in response to your letter of 7th June requesting a note setting out the information Meg Munn promised the Select Committee at the evidence session of 5 June.

Questions 85-89

(a) Details of the amount of money spent by the Government on consultants in the establishment of the CEHR, including a full breakdown of amounts paid (and/or allocated) to specific consultancy firms with details of the names of all firms, with outputs and timeframes (Q85-89)

The following table set out the total amounts paid or allocated by consultancy type to establish the CEHR.


Consultant Expenditure	2005-06	2006-07	2007-08	Total

Activity	£m	£m	£m	£m
Recruitment	0.2	0.3	0.7	1.4
Organisational Development and HR	—	0.5	0.4	0.9
Property and Estates	0.1	0.1	0.2	0.4
Branding and business planning	—	—	0.3	0.3
ICT	—	0.4	—	0.4
Legal and Finance	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.2
Total	0.4	1.4	1.7	3.5

Consultants provided expert advice on the areas above at appropriate stages in the implementation of the Commission of Equality and Human Rights. A detail of the contractors and outputs is given at Annex A.

(b). Details of the dates and Ministerial attendance at the inter-ministerial group overseeing the implementation of the CEHR (as referred to in Q103)

Inter-Ministerial meetings have been running in their current format since March 2006. Meetings dates are as follows:

The next meeting is due on 25 June.

Meg Munn has chaired every meeting and each has been attended by Anne McGuire of the Department of Work and Pensions, Harriet Harman and subsequently Baroness Ashton of the Department for Constitutional Affairs now Ministry of Justice, Jim Fitzpatrick of the Department for Trade and Industry following Machinery of Government changes and Lord Adonis of the Department for Education and Science, or by an official on their behalf.

(c) Details of the assumptions made and the basis for the budgetary allocation of £70 million and the start-up budget of £24 million for the CEHR (Q96)

The start up budget of £24 million was based upon an estimation of the preparation and implementation costs for CEHR, including salaries for the implementation team, costs associated with organizational design, accommodation, establishing a new helpline and website, early exit costs and legal advice. Funding contributions were made by the Department of Work and Pensions, Department of Trade and Industry, Ministry of Justice and Communities and Local Government.

The suggested budget of £70 million for CEHR was based on high-level assumptions about CEHR activity and extrapolation from predecessor bodies. The relative increase on the legacy commissions' budgets reflects the expanded role of the Commission in:

— assuming responsibilities for tackling discrimination on the basis of age, religious belief or sexual orientation;

— taking on the overarching responsibility for promoting Human Rights and Equality;



© Parliamentary copyright 2007	Prepared 2 August 2007