A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details

Decision details

Single Equalities Scheme Annual Report 2013 - 2014

Decision Maker: Leader of the Council

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Purpose:

Approval for the Single Equalities Scheme action plan for 2014 -2015.

Decision:

Matter for Decision: The Single Equality Scheme Annual Report reports on progress against actions for the second year of the scheme (2013/14); highlights some additional achievements during the year; and proposes a number of actions for the third year of the scheme (2014/15)

 

Decision of the Leader:

 

The Leader resolved to:

 

       i.          Note the progress and achievements during the second year of the City Council’s Single Equality Scheme.

 

     ii.          Approve the actions for the third year of the City Council’s Single Equality Scheme (as set out in Appendix A of the officer’s report).

 

   iii.          Approve the proposed amendment of the Terms of Reference for the Equalities Panel to reflect the role of the panel in reviewing and quality assuring Equality Impacts Assessments.

 

Reasons for the Decision: As set out in the officer’s report

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected: As set out in the officer’s report

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Strategy and Partnerships Manager.

 

 

In response to member’s questions the Chief Executive said the following:

 

       i.          As part of the process of looking at shared services Equality Impact Assessments (EqIA) would be undertaken to identify any potential issues. Checks and balances would also be in place to ensure the Council’s overall policy objectives were maintained in any shared service arrangements. 

 

In response to member’s questions the Strategy and Partnerships Manager said the following:

 

i.       Whilst the report was specifically responding to the protected characteristics as set out in the Equalities Act, there was a recognition of the impact of socioeconomic factors. It was suggested that this could be set out more clearly in future reports.

ii.     A wider range of information would be discussed at Equality Panel meetings.

 

In response to member’s questions the Chief Executive and the Director of Customer and Community Services said the following:

 

i.       Whilst the report was specifically responding to the protected characteristics as set out in the Equalities Act, there was a recognition of the issues around discrimination against the travelling community.

ii.     Cambridge City Council’s Children and Young People’s Participation Service (ChYpPS) had undertaken work with the travelling community and this had featured heavily in last year’s report.

iii.   The travelling community had been involved in previous Black History Month and the Holocaust Memorial Day events.

iv.   Detailed work had been undertaken by the Head of Strategic Housing on identifying traveler’s pitches. This information could be provided to the committee outside of the meeting.

v.    Agreed to review the work currently undertaken with the travelling community.

vi.   As the Corn Exchange would not become a Trust until March 2015 Councillors would be involved with the Trust Working Group to ensure the equalities ethos of the Council was maintained. 

 

 

In response to comments made by the committee the Leader of the Council said the following:

 

i.       Equalities work had been mainstreamed across all departments to ensure that it was engrained into everything the Council did.

ii.     Culturally the City had achieved a lot with regards to equalities.

iii.   When investigating shared services it was important to ensure that the City Council’s good work on equalities influenced others ways of working.

iv.   Supported a review of the work currently being undertaken with the travelling community.

v.    Protected characteristics are sometimes the factors driving socioeconomic disadvantage. 

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations and endorsed them unanimously.

 

The Leader approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Leader (and any Dispensations Granted):

 

Not applicable.

 

Publication date: 16/04/2014

Date of decision: 17/03/2014