EQUALITY, INCLUSION AND DIVERSITY This paper updates and supersedes the chapter on Equalities in the Best Value guide to Planning. 1.Key messages 1.1 Managing equality, inclusion and diversity is an issue for all authorities

and should permeate every aspect of a Best value review of Planning services.

1.2 Access to the Planning service should be socially inclusive – customers

and potential customers should not be disadvantaged through factors such as geographical remoteness, relative household income, access to ICT or lack of communication skills

1.3 Providing an equitable service is not about providing the same service to

everyone – it is about varying the service to meet different needs. It is also about ensuring that everyone has access to the same level, quality and degree of service.

1.4 Understanding the diverse needs of local communities and equipping staff

to deal confidently with this diversity is the key to managing equality, inclusion and diversity for best value in planning

1.5 Planning services must embrace equality, inclusion and diversity,

including human rights, in both service delivery and in its work force to ensure that Best value is delivered

1.6 The challenges of the Equality, inclusion and diversity agenda may be

seen as: raising awareness; leadership; engagement with all groups in the community; organizational capacity and management capability, delivering equal opportunities and effectively monitoring and evaluating action.

2. Introduction 2.1 This chapter aims to offer assistance and signposts for service managers to consider equality, inclusion and diversity in relation to planning services and to understand the subject areas. 2.2 It will draw on the wealth of guidance published by the Audit Commission, the Local Government Association and others and, where possible, from best practice in local authorities (though mostly from services other than planning). 2.3 The chapter will cover best practice in employment but the focus will be much more on users and recipients of a Planning service and how to improve their experience of the service and to incorporate their needs into service delivery.

2.4 It will not repeat advice contained in published guidance produced on, for example, access for disabled people or safer streets in the assessment of planning applications. 2.5 There is a lot of reference in this chapter to engagement or community involvement. For further information on mechanisms for involvement – particularly how to engage with hard to reach groups – you should turn to the chapter on engagement. 3. An overview plus some definitions 3.1 There is a tendency to think of equality, inclusion and diversity either as synonymous or, conversely, as separate issues to be pursued independently. That would be wrong. They are all interlinked but there are subtle differences. Fuller definitions follow. But in essence equality is about power relationships within society in which it is possible to distinguish between “haves” and “have nots”; inclusion – or exclusion as it is alternatively labelled – is about reviving a sense of community in areas where groups within the community are (or are perceived to be) poorly connected with mainstream society; and diversity is simply about difference. Planners, like others working in the public sector, should help promote equality and inclusion whilst at the same time valuing and managing diversity in recognition of the differences that exist between individuals and groups. Action is needed when those differences lead to discrimination or where individuals or groups are disadvantaged. At its most basic level this action - which is supported by a growing body of powerful legislation – involves ensuring that that all individuals and groups, including those in the most marginalized communities have equal access to those things which make up a citizen’s basic social entitlement – housing, education, transport, training etc. But it also means making visible and giving voice to the needs of marginalized communities and ensuring that individuals and groups within those communities contribute to policy and decision making affecting them rather than remaining passively dependent on others. 3.2 According to the Audit Commission there is a single thread that links equality, inclusion and diversity and that is the notion of fairness. It is this that underpins the development of policies and practices that tackle inequalities; it means that all staff should be treated fairly and the needs of all users should be taken into account and that no group should be discriminated against (Audit Commission 2002(a)). The Commission sees managing the wider agenda as about taking on board best practice in employment, within a service, and in service delivery in the following ways

• Addressing inequalities • Recognising and valuing differences • Promoting a skilled and diverse workforce • Meeting the needs of an increasingly diverse population, and • Acting in accordance with legislation.

3.3 Inequality and social exclusion occurs when people suffer from a combination of inter-related problems such as unemployment, poor skills, low

incomes, poor housing, high crime, desolate environments, bad health and family breakdown or any other force or factor that excludes them from the resources, services and opportunities enjoyed by those in the political, economic and social mainstream of society. It’s a dynamic phenomena rather than a static one in that individuals or groups suffer at different times and in different locations depending on a combination of circumstances beyond their control. Dealing with social exclusion effectively requires joined up solutions. 3.4 Warrington Borough Council’s view of a socially inclusive community, for example, is that it is one “in which no individual, family group or area is so excluded as to be unable to participate in the economic, social, political and cultural life of the community” (Audit Commission (2002(b)). 3.5 Groups at particular risk include young unemployed people, lone parents, long term unemployed, people from ethnic minority groups, people with disabilities,older people, the chronically sick, travellers and asylum seekers. To be socially inclusive a service such as Planning should not disadvantage any individual or group due to their personal circumstances such as geographical location or access to the internet, race or language. 3.6 Diversity is a recognition that society is made up of many different social groups with cross cutting bases for identity e.g. gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, property ownership, class and lifestyle. Diversity brings with it a curious mixture of behaviours and outcomes – the likelihood of conflict of interests on the one hand but also the potential for tolerance and a culture of compromise and negotiation on the other hand. 3.7 The Audit Commission has recently distilled four key messages from the current debate on Diversity

• The diversity agenda is not about treating everybody in the same way but about recognising and valuing differences, as noted above, as well as recognising and accounting for inequalities and disadvantage;

• There is a strong business case for action on diversity founded on the need to find the biggest pool of potential employees possible from which to recruit, retain and motivate the best talent, the need for a diverse workforce to deliver services effectively to a diverse community and the need to work within the law;

• There is no real consensus about “what diversity looks like”. There is a need for a shared definition of diversity to enable services, like planning, to set out a clear vision of where they want to be. Without this clear understanding of outcomes there is little likelihood of putting together an effective strategy to achieve them;

• Action on equality and diversity must be managed effectively (Audit Commission (2002(a))

3.8 “Hard to reach groups” is a widely recognised term that is used to describe those groups or communities who experience social exclusion and are generally perceived by agencies as being difficult to engage.

3.9 Discrimination means treating people in similar situations differently, or those in different situations in the same way, without proper justification. 3.10 Community cohesion is also linked to equality, inclusion and diversity. A broad working definition – jointly agreed by the Home office, the Local Government Association (LGA) and the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) – explains community cohesion as “a state of well being that affects the harmony and stability of a given geographical community”. It incorporates, but goes beyond, the concept of equality and social inclusion. It lies at the heart of what makes a strong and safe community. 3.11 A cohesive community is one where there is a common vision and a strong sense of belonging for all; where diversity is positively valued and celebrated; which is rooted in social quality of life chances in housing, employment and education; and where strong and positive relationships are being developed between people from different backgrounds and different places. 3.12 The key themes that seem to be emerging from community cohesion initiatives are: the importance of recognising the uniqueness of localities; getting high level awareness and commitment from political leaders and senior officers; the complexity of making sense of a broad agenda; and the requirement for on going community involvement and consensus building. 4. The Law 4.1 Legislation – the relevant Acts and Regulations are set out in appendix 1 - is designed to ensure that people have equal opportunities although there are some limited exceptions under which it is acceptable to treat people differently because they have a particular characteristic. Specifically it is designed to outlaw four types of behaviour

• Direct discrimination which happens when someone bases their decision on inappropriate reasons such as racial prejudice rather than, for example, on a person’s ability to do the job

• Indirect discrimination which happens when a policy or a practice applies to everyone but causes disadvantage to a certain group such as women unless there are good reasons for it ( this often happens inadvertently)

• Harassment where someone’s dignity has been violated or where someone has been subject to intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive behaviour, and

• Victimization that happens when a person is treated unfairly because they have been involved in making a complaint about discrimination.

4.2 Racial equality, for example, should be at the heart of the planning and delivery of all services. Good relations between people of different racial groups may be achieved by

• Consulting with all groups, including ethnic minority communities, to involve them in service planning and policy development as part of the

requirement to involve people in shaping local services, particularly through partnership working and community development

• Creating opportunities for people from different communities to connect and meet openly and honestly to discuss issues and concerns that affect them all.

4.3 Three organizations have been established to promote equality in relation to sex, race and disability: the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Commission for Race Equality and the Disability Rights Commission. In addition to providing practical advice and guidance both to individuals and employers the Commissions have a role in enforcing the law, carrying out investigations, to issue non discrimination notices and, where necessary, to seek an injunction to prevent discrimination from continuing. 5. Human Rights 5.1 The principles of fair and equal treatment for all and respect for the dignity and value of each person underpins Human rights legislation as much as it does equalities legislation. 5.2 The Human Rights Act, 1998, is a statement of rights that need to be taken into account in the delivery of services. The vision behind the act is that it will bring about a cultural change where service decisions are made with reference to basic rights. The Government expects that public service decision makers will work within the human rights framework. Managers, therefore, need a clear understanding of their objectives under the act and need to carefully balance an individual’s rights against those of the wider community when making their decisions. “…Wherever there are statutory powers or discretions being exercised elected members and officers will have to be extra vigilant when…,for example, in refusing to grant a sex shop licence or imposing unreasonable terms and conditions for such a licence, individuals could challenge the council on the basis that its actions (or inactions) were not proportionate to any recognised “pressing social need” or “necessary within a democratic society”” (Mirza F.N. Ahmad (1999)). 5.3 Historically human rights has focused on fundamental civil and political rights such as the right to a fair trial, to freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of association. These freedoms are designed to safeguard individual rights in their relationship with public bodies and ensure the fair and proper treatment of each person in relation to those rights. In contrast, as outlined in the previous section, equality legislation has centred on social and economic protection, in particular protection from discrimination in employment and in the provision of goods and services. 5.4 The connection between human rights and equalities legislation is sometimes forgotten in the pressures of the “day job”. Evidence suggests that it is the exception rather than the rule that links are made between the two

when policies and practices are reviewed by authorities(Audit Commission, (2003)). Authorities often review the same policies and practices twice for both sets of legislation and may well do so a third time when the new employment directives for age, religion and sexual orientation become law. Service delivery could be improved now if better links are made between the various pieces of legislation. 5.5 Better still if those links are reinforced with reference to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act under which everyone will have the general right of access to information from authorities from January, 2005. This act also requires authorities to have regard to the public interest in allowing access to information and in publishing reasons for decisions. 6. Government Policy and the impact of its wider Modernizing agenda 6.1 The Government’s vision on equality, inclusion and diversity is succinctly set out in Barbara Roche’s forward to “ Equality and Diversity: the way ahead” 6.2 It is “ of an equal, inclusive society where everyone is treated with respect and where there is opportunity for all. Everyone must be able to play their part in social and economic life. We need to tackle barriers to participation and change culture so that equal opportunities and equal treatment become a priority for all. 6.3 We want to see a Britain where there is increasing empowerment of all groups, with economic empowerment a key goal; where attitudes and biases that hinder the progress of individuals and groups are tackled; where cultural, racial and social diversity is respected and celebrated; where communities live together in mutual respect and tolerance, and where discrimination against individuals is tackled robustly” (ODPM (2002(a)). 6.4 The key drivers underpinning the Government’s approach are engagement, inclusion, enhancing the role of the voluntary and community sectors partnership and local leadership (Demos, 2003). 6.5 Engagement – or community involvement – of individuals and groups in the renewal and strengthening of their own communities is at the heart of the agenda. 6.6 The importance attached by Government to engagement can be traced through policy and guidance documents produced over a number of years especially in the fields of urban policy, regeneration and governance. 6.7 It has been key to the Government’s urban and rural policy agenda. The new vision of urban living announced in the Urban white paper (DETR, 2000(a)) and proposed at the urban summit “Delivering on Urban Renaissance” in November 2002 sees “people shaping the future of their community, supported by strong and truly representative leaders”. The Urban white paper states that people should have the right to determine how their towns and cities should develop and sets out a commitment to work with local

people. This aim was linked with better design and planning, better use of space and buildings, more environmental sustainability, creating and sharing prosperity and the delivery of good quality services in health, education, housing, transport, finance, shopping, leisure and protection from crime. 6.8 It has been suggested that the Urban White paper is one of the better expressions of the Government’s joined up approach to delivering its wider agenda (ODPM 2003(a)). It set out in a co-ordinated way the essential aims of community strategies, and renewal and regeneration strategies. It provided a commitment to overcoming poverty, promoting prosperity, achieving better public service through higher investment together with clear targets, reduction of competing policy initiatives and support for engagement to meet a range of purposes connected with these aims. Its key themes were recycling land, improving the urban environment, achieving excellence in leadership, participation and management and delivery of regeneration. It sets out six reasons for engagement:

• It is peoples’ right • It overcomes alienation and exclusion • It makes a community stronger in its self • It maximises the effectiveness of services and resources • It helps to join up the different contributions to development • It helps sustainability.

6.9 The White paper was followed by guidance on Community strategies and Local Strategic partnerships (LSPs) and the Neighbourhood renewal action plan. 6.10 The aim of Community Strategies is to enhance the quality of life of local communities as well as to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. One of the objectives is “ allowing local communities (based on geography and/or interest) to articulate their aspirations, needs and priorities”. Partnerships are required to “ ensure that community and voluntary organizations are in a position to play a full and equal part in multi agency partnership” (DETR, 2000(b)). Partnerships have to involve local people rather than just consult them. The Audit Commission will be looking to build their corporate assessments, through the comprehensive performance assessment process, around the work of authorities in terms of developing and delivering against the community strategy. One of the things that Inspectors will look for is how well the authority has ensured that the community, including hard to reach groups, has been involved in the process. 6.11 The quality of the local environment, and its physical condition, were pinpointed in the Government’s Living Places policy published in 2002 (ODPM, 2002(b)). In combining engagement and local environmental conditions the policy on the one hand highlighted the impact of local spaces on quality of life of local communities and on the other seeks to enlist residents’ active contribution in looking after and improving those spaces. 6.12 Engagement is also seen as paramount in delivering sustainable communities (ODPM, 2003(b)). The Communities Plan has as its aim the

creation of thriving and sustainable communities in all regions providing, at the same time, local people with opportunities to make local decisions about local needs. It is seen as an important tool in delivering community cohesion as well as providing high quality affordable housing, a faster and fairer planning system, regenerating declining communities, tackling social exclusion and homelessness, designing and maintaining attractive, clean and safe towns, cities and public spaces and improved community leadership. 6.13 On the Regeneration front extensive guidance in the late 90’s led to the setting up of Policy action teams in 1998-9 by the Cabinet Office’s Social Exclusion unit to develop a national strategy for neighbourhood renewal. 6.14 The National Neighbourhood renewal strategy, launched in 2001, places “ giving local residents and community groups a central role in turning their neighbourhoods around” high amongst its objectives (Cabinet office (2001)). The strategy aimed to initiate a long term process to ensure that within 10 to 20 years no one would be disadvantaged by where they lived. There are three key elements to the strategy: new policies, funding and targets; better local co-ordination and community empowerment; and national and regional support. 6.15 Mechanisms for empowering communities include LSPs, Neighbourhood management pathfinders and Community Empowerment networks. The latter are designed to serve as a communication mechanism between local government and the community sector to help local authorities meet the requirement for community representation on LSPs. 6.16 There are 88 designated neighbourhood renewal areas in the UK but the principles in the Neighbourhood renewal action plan are commended to all Councils. 6.17 Inclusion is seen as a key principle enabling engagement. 6.18 Emphasis on inclusion stems in part from a desire to reduce material deprivation. The Government has a strategy aimed at eliminating child poverty by 2020 (Opportunity for all, 1999). A number of schemes have been in place for some time to encourage adults and younger people into work (the New Deal programme). The introduction of the working family tax credit and the Minimum wage are intended to address deprivation as well. 6.19 In addition to dealing with those on low incomes the Government’s agenda includes responding those who are socially excluded for other reasons such as age, disability or the area in which they live. 6.20 The Active Community unit (ACU) was created within the Home office, in May 2002, with the aim of making real the Government’s aspiration “ to support strong and active communities in which people of all races and backgrounds are valued and participate on equal terms, by developing social policy to build a fair, prosperous and cohesive society in which everyone has

a stake” (Home Office (1998)). The ACU complements the work of the Community Cohesion unit, set up after the riots in Burnley, Oldham and Bradford in the summer of 2001 to integrate diversity and cultural pluralism with regeneration and race equality strategies at the local level. 6.21 The community cohesion pathfinders programme, launched by the Home office and the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit (NRU) in 2003, and running through to September 2004, is a key element of the Government’s work on Community cohesion. Fourteen authorities or other public agencies are involved in pilot projects. 6.22 Various approaches have been adopted to suit local circumstances. Some Councils are focusing on political leadership (West London alliance, Middlesborough); some on public definition and understanding cohesion (Tameside, East Lancashire partnership); or civic identity (Blackburn with Darwen); others are tackling it through the local economy (again Blackburn with Darwen); or developing social enterprises (3SE for the Greater Manchester authorities) or through third sector involvement (Tower Hamlets). 6.23 Some authorities are working on target services (Leicester’s young black and gifted educational programme) and others on engagement of targets groups and communities to respond to needs and to “build bridges”(Southwark has prioritised young people and decision making; Oldham is working with the health sector); Tewkesbury has worked with travellers; Forest of Dean has supported community bridging events such as photography exhibitions and a large “mingle” conference giving communities the chance too meet anywhere and mix. 6.24 Cohesion is a 2004 beacon theme with six authorities sharing experiences – Barnet, Tower Hamlets, Rochdale, Leicester, Tewkesbury and Cheshire Fire Services. 6.25 Local Authorities are also represented on the Policy action teams looking at aspects of the Social Exclusion Unit’s National strategy for Neighbourhood renewal. They are involved in the New deal programme and/or with one of Central Government’s specific initiatives such as Sure Start, Education or Health Action zones. 6.26 The Neighbourhood renewal strategy is key to tackling social exclusion in deprived neighbourhoods. A Neighbourhood is defined as a single, natural community, usually less than 4000 households. The focus of the strategy is joining up public services – through neighbourhood management – and engagement with the community. 6.27 ODPM has introduced the concept of what it calls the “inclusive environment” (ODPM 2003(d)). It is an environment that can be used by anyone regardless of age, gender or disability. It is made up of many elements such as the attitudes of Society and individuals, the design of products and communications and the design of the built environment itself. It recognises and accommodates differences in the way people use the built

environment and provides solutions that enable everyone to participate in mainstream activities equally, independently with choice and dignity. 6.28 Enhancing the role of the voluntary and community sectors is crucial in the Government’s strategy for facilitating both engagement and inclusion. 6.29 The Government entered into a formal compact with the Voluntary and Community sectors in order to promote the capacity and involvement of the latter in achieving its objectives (Home office (1998)). Local compact guidelines were launched in 2000. Many Councils have now developed a compact with local voluntary and community sector organisations intended to clarify roles and functions as well as expectations and ways of working. 6.30 HM Treasury’s cross cutting review and the Strategy Unit’s report “Private action, Public benefit” both highlighted the importance of building the capacity of voluntary and community organizations and increasing public confidence in the sector to deliver public services (HM Treasury (2002); Cabinet office (2002)). The Government has set a target of increasing voluntary and community sector activity, including increased community involvement in decision making, by 5% by 2006. A community capacity building review has looked at the range of Government support for community capacity building and will be recommending ways in which the range of community involvement initiatives could be better co-ordinated and made more effective. 6.31 The Government has also sought to enhance the role of smaller

organizations who work within communities through funding via grant programmes such as the Community Empowerment fund which supports Community Empowerment networks, Community Chest to fund schemes so that communities can run their own projects and the Active community funding packages.

6.32 Partnership is singled out as the mode of governance best suited to engaging stakeholders across the community in tackling cross cutting problems. Most new area based initiatives since 1997 are grouped around the framework of multi agency partnerships from LSPs and “Excellence in Cities” clusters to the New Deal for Communities and Sure Start. 6.33 LSPs are the most visible mechanism for engagement. They are specifically tasked to outreach, especially to excluded communities, to make them more aware that they have a chance voice their views and to influence service providers. Methods to be used include capacity building and training to increase the involvement of hard to reach communities. 6.34 LSPs are expected to draw on existing community networks and to build on the Government’s compact with the Voluntary and Community sectors via local compacts. Used effectively they should pull together various strategies impacting on community cohesion. They should look at how the agencies represented are complementing one another in actions on the ground or

where they are pulling in different directions. They should also be able to repair community relationships where these have broken down. 6.35 Local leadership is the final element driving the agenda. One objective of local government reform is to enhance the role of Councils and Councillors. On the basis of their status as locally elected representatives, DTLR’s white paper of 2001 asserts that “thriving communities and strong democratic leadership go hand in hand”(DTLR, 2001). The white paper adds that it expects local authorities to ensure that all community groups should take part in decision making: “Resources are finite, and communities’ views and priorities can diverge and conflict. Consensus cannot always be reached, and so choices and compromises have to be made. That can mean creating winners and losers, trading short term losses for long term gains, or foregoing one set of opportunities to exploit another… 6.36 Democratically elected Councils provide the means for expressing and resolving these conflicts, for ensuring that differing points of view are heard and understood, for promoting understanding, and for making tough choices. Councils are then responsible for explaining those choices and will be held to account to them by local people” 6.37 The White paper set out a new performance framework with Central and local Government working together to secure improved performance around the four key principles of public service reform – a framework of national performance standards, giving more successful Councils more freedom to act, more flexibility to act to improve local services and expanding choice in services options available and in who provides the services. 6.38 This performance framework reinforced the statutory provisions in the earlier Local Government Acts of 1999 and 2000 which amongst other things set up the Best value regime, the new political decision making structures, elected Mayors, LSPs and Community strategies and the power of well being. It is also reflected in the Comprehensive performance assessment regime and in the statement of shared priorities between Central and Local Government and the local and national Public service agreements (PSAs) the aspirations and performance targets of which embrace the equality, inclusion and diversity agenda. 6.39 Part 1 of the 1999 Act requires that services provided are responsive to the needs of citizens as well as being fair and accessible to all who need them. Circular 3/03 reinforces this by stating that providing good services to the majority of local people may not be enough to secure best value (ODPM, 2003)): “The way in which services impact on all sections of the community needs to be addressed explicitly….The Audit Commission’s report on equality and diversity highlights the relatively poor performance of authorities in respect of

key indicators, and concludes that these considerations need to be better integrated into all aspects of delivering, monitoring and inspecting services…. 6.40 A user and community focus to (best value) reviews is…vital. Users and others in the community can provide useful information on how well current services are working and how they may be improved. It is particularly important that authorities seek out the views of all potential users, including those who have been traditionally under represented, and other hard to reach groups”. 6.41 Finally, informal leadership is encouraged, too, via mechanisms such as the Department for Education and Skill’s “Community champions fund” – a scheme which looks for energetic individuals within the community to take an entrepreneurial approach and inspire others to make change happen on the ground (www.dfes.gov.uk/communitychampions/about/index.cfm). 7. Planning and equality, inclusion and diversity 7.1 The Profession’s recognition of the value of diversity and its efforts to engage with all sections of the community is not new. Planners can be justly proud of the steps that they have taken thus far. 7.2.The Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) has been in the forefront of action. 7.3 Three areas of activity stand out. 7.4 The first is the institute’s efforts to promote diversity and opportunity within the Profession. Through its Equal Opportunities Panel it has championed Black and Ethnic Minority representation and gender equality in planning as well as a wider debate on equality and diversity through its “Planning” magazine. Though started by the Planning Inspectorate the RTPI and others are supporting the “Tomorrow’s Planners” initiative the aim of which is to attract 500 trainees from the Black and Ethnic minority community into the Profession over a 10 year period (Planning, 2004). 7.5 Secondly the Institute has delivered Planning Aid since 1973. Started against a background of community opposition to urban motorways and comprehensive redevelopment, Planning Aid was established to link the need for free and independent planning advice for disadvantaged communities with qualified planners wishing to provide “pro bono advice and support”. Many of the clients of the Planning Aid service find it hard to make their voice heard on planning matters. But Planning Aid is about more than just providing advice and is also about building up the capacity of local communities to enable them to play a full role in the planning and management of their communities, neighbourhoods and areas. The Planning Officers’ Society has joined with the RTPI and the LGA in producing a Concordat to promote Planning Aid. 7.6 Thirdly it has actively publicised the efforts that Planners in mainstream services have made to engage all sections of the community, including hard

to reach groups, by highlighting best practice and initiatives around the country. In “Planning with Communities” it has pulled together case studies on the use of new technology, community advocacy, use of appropriate engagement techniques, community responsibility, working in partnership, community institutions, community strategies, neighbourhood community strategies (RTPI, 2002). Some Authorities are working hard in this area. Harborough is a good example. 7.7 The publication of the RTPI’s document corresponded with the emergence of the Government’s modernizing agenda for planning which mirrors its wider modernizing agenda for the public sector but with particular emphasis on engagement or community involvement and inclusion. 7.8 The Planning Green paper highlighted the Government’s concern that the Planning system was failing to effectively engage the community or to integrate planning with other local strategies (ODPM (2001)). It set out a series of reforms aimed to deliver the Government’s housing, economic development, transport and rural regeneration strategies in a sustainable way. Its key principles included creating and sustaining mixed and inclusive communities and enabling local communities to be involved much more positively than before in planning decisions. Its aim was not just to make better decisions “adding value to communities through better design” but decisions that elicit more widespread understanding and consent as a result of more widespread involvement by the community in reaching them. “We want a culture which promotes planning as a positive tool: a culture which grasps the opportunities to improve the experience of planning for those affected by its decisions”. 7.9 The new emphasis on spatial panning is seen as a key plank in building cohesive communities. Planning policy in future is intended to be rooted in a “sense of place” – the village, town, suburb or neighbourhood to which people relate. Regional Spatial strategies and Local Development frameworks(LDFs) provide the land use element for partners’ strategies. The reformed planning system should be able to build on the existing tradition of Planners working with partners to provide those partners with a positive tool to inform the delivery of environmental, regeneration and social policy objectives in a given geographical area. 7.10 Local Development frameworks and the assessment of major planning applications will be supported by a statement of Community involvement setting out benchmarks for community participation in the process and decision making including the range of local community groups who need to be involved. It is fundamental to the reforms that more effective public engagement should be at the heart of development plans. “We want to empower local people to feel they can participate in a system that is really interested in their views. We want to change the culture of planning from one of objection to one of constructive participation”. In parallel with this is recognition that communities are diverse and that the views of all should be heard and should influence policy and decision making. Conversely the rights of individuals should be taken into account. No section of the community

should be discriminated against and those within the community presently excluded from active participation should be engaged with. It is clear that one of the tests of the effectiveness of the Planning system in the future will be the extent to which all sectors of the community are engaged and empowered. 7.11 Key to success in achieving the Government’s objectives is the forging of greater links between LDFs and LSPs. Recent research for the ODPM has identified considerable scope for integrating or at least aligning elements of Community strategy and LDF processes especially in terms of community engagement, monitoring and intelligence sharing and, particularly, as far as engagement is concerned, through using common mechanisms to reach the more marginalized communities (ODPM (2003(e)). 7.12 Changing the culture of Planning to ensure more effective community engagement is enshrined in “Delivering Planning” (National Planning Forum, 2004). Community Involvement in Planning is also one of the three themes of the draft Planning Policy statement 1 (ODPM, 2004(a)). Amongst the key policy messages in the statement is one around the need for the planning system to be transparent, accessible and accountable, and to actively promote participation and involvement. This message aligns with the objectives of the Aarhus convention on access to information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters. Community involvement is seen as engagement with all. “Planning authorities should build a clear understanding of the make up, interests and needs of the community in their areas. The “community” will be made up of many different interest groups, relating to a particular place, issues, values or religion, for instance. Some of these will be well established and represented. But some groups may be less well equipped to engage with the process. Individual groups may not be homogeneous, for example large and small businesses may differ. An inclusive approach is needed to ensure that different groups have the opportunity to participate and are not disadvantaged in the process. Identifying and understanding the needs of groups who find it difficult to engage with bureaucratic processes such as the planning system is essential”. 7.13 Accompanying the draft policy statement is a separate paper “Community involvement in Planning” which sets out the Government’s objectives on community engagement in Planning (ODPM, 2004(b)). The document sets out the case for community involvement in planning, the key principles involved and how it might happen in practice. Amongst the key principles are sustainable development, access to information, participation, peoples’ rights in Planning, understanding communities as well as operational principles - when and how it should occur in the planning process. 7.14 As part of the case for engagement the paper stresses that involvement leads to outcomes that better reflect the views and aspirations and meet the needs of the wider community in all its diversity. Involvement also helps promote social cohesion by making real connections with communities and offering them a tangible stake in decision making. The paper also highlights the barriers to effective engagement that, in future, will need to be removed:

• The costs of participation for local communities (and for the planning authorities running engagement exercises)

• The complexity of many of the issues • Planning can seem a remote, bureaucratic process which does not

encourage involvement • The difficulties of identifying and reaching the different groups within a

community • The language of planning, with its reliance on technical expressions

and jargon, can be off putting • The perception that engagement exercises will be captured by

individuals or articulate groups who dominate proceedings. 8. Meeting the needs of diverse groups in a planning service 8.1 Planning is changing because governance and society is changing. Strategic plans now have to be negotiated with a range of public, semi public and private bodies if they are to be implemented. At the local level planning can no longer operate on a “one size fits all” basis. Diversity is at the core of the changing relationship between planners and their communities and engagement, and with it inclusion, is now clearly seen as at the heart of the planning process. But inclusion does not just happen it has to be worked at and that means that time and money will have to be invested into planning with communities. 8.2 Planning is not alone. Delivering the wider equality, inclusion and diversity agenda requires Councils to address issues of equality between and inclusion of all service users. Equality depends on the recognition that different people have different needs and this means providing a different service for different people. “ …people may contact the Council to pay their Council tax, to find a school for their child, to obtain a skip licence, for example, but rarely will the main purpose of the transaction be about an equalities matter. However, central to the quality of any transaction between staff and residents will be the sensitivity with which the request is received and understood and the flexibility of the service then offered to meet the special set of circumstances the resident has. If the Council is to provide services that are a good fit to the needs of its residents, then its sensitivity to the diverse needs and views of all those residents is central” (Audit Commission (2001)). 8.3 The prospect of providing different services for different people in an environment that is bound by statute and often under resourced is a daunting one for planning managers. However, despite a pessimistic recent overview of the response of Councils’ performance so far in facing up their statutory duties on equal opportunities (Audit Commission (2002(a)), there are services in the country that are designing and re-designing delivery to improve their equality and diversity records and who are achieving success. The delivery of best value and the process of review provide an opportunity to develop and mainstream equality and diversity activity. In the next two sections there are

suggestions as to how equality and diversity might be managed more effectively and how the BVR process can be used to help this. 8.4 However, before leaving this section these are some thoughts that the Profession should reflect upon. 8.5 The change from public participation (led by Planning authorities and built around the assumption that their plan, prepared earlier, already represents the basis for consensus) to engagement in which diverse groups and agencies come together to exchange information, explore ground and negotiate in an attempt to reach consensus requires that planners may need to rethink their attitude to process and decision making. 8.6 Effective engagement also requires good people skills including an understanding large group dynamics; the ability to listen, communicate, negotiate, manage conflict; and knowledge of alternative methods and techniques of creatively solving problems in a group. Planners may need to revisit their skill set and their training programmes to equip themselves for more effective engagement. 8.7 Local Government Planners may also need to work much more closely with colleagues involved in other community work, community education, social services, housing and education to develop and implement programmes that enhance a common understanding of diversity and create mechanisms for out reach to groups with whom planners have not, historically, connected effectively. 8.8 Above all Planners need to invest more time in understanding more about equalities and diversity. Following a commitment in the Planning green paper ODPM has published research into the extent to which local planning authorities find current planning policy and guidance effective in helping them meet the needs of a diverse population and in promoting diversity (ODPM, 2004(c)). The research considers what’s working, what needs to be improved and how, and how well policies are applied by planning authorities in addition to how decision makers address the issue of diversity. Also whether the planning system can be improved to enable more effective participation by diverse groups at all levels in the process and how planning policies contribute to Government policy on social exclusion and neighbourhood renewal. 9. Managing equality, inclusion and diversity 9.1 The field of managing equality and diversity is still relatively new and monitoring of the success of initiatives has been poor. Whilst there is much evidence of the disadvantage that groups and individuals experience the Audit Commission – which has examined the issue in some depth in recent years – has found relatively little empirical evidence of what works in the field to counteract this but hopefully the ODPM research mentioned in the last section will help. However, the Commission has found several strategies and

approaches that are widely regarded as likely to result in positive outcomes and these are flagged up here. 9.2 This part of the paper, therefore, draws heavily, but not exclusively, on the Audit Commission’s useful review of Best Value Review Inspection reports and the reader is commended to explore the helpful and more detailed advice in that document (Audit Commission, 2002(c)). 9.3 It appears that many authorities need to think through their Corporate approach to the wider inclusion agenda so the starting point for the following advice is that change needs to permeate the whole organisation from top to bottom and from corporate centre to the delivery of individual front line services like planning. However, success in delivering on the inclusion agenda is more likely if the following interlinked conditions for managing equality and diversity are in place. 9.4 Strong and committed leadership at the top which means Members and Officers working together with an explicit commitment to prioritise the agenda. This should include a shared understanding of diversity and what constitutes a socially inclusive society across the Council that is linked to the community plan and supported by a clear policy commitment within the Council. The London Borough of Sutton, for example, has an Equalities and Human Rights strategy setting out their employment practices and their services to the public. This is supported by a series of action plans and is picked up through individual business plans. 9.5 Member roles in leadership, advocacy and scrutiny at neighbourhood, District or Borough and county and regional levels should be clearly defined and operative. There should be clear management responsibility for the agenda that is communicated throughout the organization. Staff should be clear why there is an inclusion strategy and what it is seeking to achieve and how it is linked to continuous service improvement. Inter-departmental networks and working groups (and for smaller authorities joint working groups) should be encouraged and empowered. Members and Senior managers, together, should set the culture (encouraging a “can do” attitude), raise expectations, increase levels of accountability and follow through with action backed up by a commitment for a diverse profile at the top reflecting the make up of the local population in terms, for example, of gender and race. 9.6 Commitment means that all staff should “buy” into the inclusion agenda. Some staff are reluctant to become involved for a range of reasons. For many understanding and meeting the inclusion agenda is seen as yet another task to be added to their current workload. To ensure adequate commitment senior staff should encourage all staff to feel involved and to discuss their concerns including the difficulties of changing attitudes. Joining up initiatives across services is important, as is the application and prioritisation of resources. 9.7 By introducing strategies to recognise, respect and meet the needs of diverse service users, including access to services and monitoring service

use, each service, like planning, should reflect the corporate commitment to inclusion as well as a basic requirement associated with delivering Best value. Corporate, including senior management, endorsement must be translated, via middle managers and team leaders, into clear messages and actions through Management team and section meetings and through service plans and reviews of processes and procedures. 9.8 Celebration of diversity in the community which means ensuring effective links with the main communities of interest vulnerable to disadvantage. Following on from the previous point the Council whilst recognising that equalities and inclusion are distinct should link them at the strategic level and in practical policies and initiatives including service delivery, procurement and grant giving policies. There should be effective mechanisms in place for monitoring compliance and policy impact and for tackling discrimination. 9.9 Adopt a strategic approach in which Council actions reflect an analysis of diversity and of the economic, social and political processes that need to be tackled to create an inclusive community. The wider community should be involved in defining outcomes desired and what should be monitored and evaluated and in assessing the effectiveness of policy interventions. Relevant data should be collected (see below) and existing services analysed. A programme of action aimed at reinforcing diversity and inclusionary processes and tackling exclusionary processes should be in place and should be monitored and evaluated. The programme should be explicitly resourced with targeted priorities. 9.10 Mainstream equalities and diversity (and human rights) into all activities of the Council, relating to service delivery and the internal workforce, but must be careful to ensure consistency of approach. Clarity about outcomes and priorities helps to focus the work. It also enables staff and communities to understand why the agenda matters and to assess whether it is being achieved. This includes providing a clear corporate vision that is cascaded from the Corporate Plan and Best Value Performance Plan, where links with other strategies such as anti poverty are made, through to service plans and is based on needs identified from research. The evidence base might include checking local conditions against national information about key areas of inequality or exclusion; local monitoring of service access, complaints, residents’ surveys, consultations about specific services, best value reviews and equalities impact assessments and reviews; and, supplementary evidence about experiences, aspirations and the perceptions that diverse groups have of using the Council’s services. Effective mainstreaming requires appropriate structures, process and procedures to be in place. This might include, for example, specific reference to the implications for the inclusion agenda in all committee reports. 9.11 Mainstreaming also means introducing strategies such as staff networks or flexible working which help to recognise and value differences in staff thus demonstrating commitment to diversity within the work force.

Diversity will flourish where Councils consider carefully the best way to provide minority group users with the services that meet their needs. It’s about the best way to make services accessible and sensitive to community needs. The mechanisms for doing this may be centrally driven where services are assisted by translation of policies and strategies into action plans. It’s also about making sure that staff are adequately trained and developed (see below) as well as the existence of a co-ordinated and varied package of procedures around recruitment and retention, promotion and other HR issues as well as for training and development. 9.12 Equality and diversity issues can also be mainstreamed through the Best Value Review process in the following ways

• When scoping, planning, commissioning, implementing and reviewing services, new developments and research

• Through audit in relation to legal requirements and good practice • When addressing the user focus of service design, delivery and

satisfaction • In recruitment, training and conducting and reviewing the results of

staff surveys 9.13 Human Rights should be positively promoted as part of any Equalities strategy. Best practice is about positive rather than negative compliance. In Planning strengthening procedures for public consultation and allowing the public to address committees on planning applications are good examples of positive compliance. 9.14 Enabling front line staff to adapt their practices to the Human Rights Act is one of the key challenges that Planners and others face. Human Rights legislation can help to improve decision making processes in particular by strengthening both the detailed reaching of a decision and the decision making process. This can be done using checklists that require staff to consider how their actions might impact on the human rights of service users. 9.15 Make sure that complaint procedures refer to the Human Rights Act and those managing complaints should check whether the subject matter engages one or more of the specific rights set out in the act and whether or not the Council’s actions are compliant with the act. 9.16 Engage with diverse local communities to build trust and confidence through involving them in policy making and decision taking and to provide up to date information on their composition and opinions. Pay particular attention to the socially excluded and hard to reach groups. Many of these groups might challenge the “hard to reach” label and it might be that those trying to engage them are not putting enough effort into seeking their views (Middlesborough Partnership, 2002). 9.17 There should be active community capacity building amongst both area based communities in deprived neighbourhoods and interest groups. Community groups should be encouraged to work together to address common concerns. There should be representation of disadvantaged groups

on the LSP and other policy formulating structures and such groups should be actively involved in decision making about the corporate vision and strategy, the outcomes sought and the action programmes developed. There should be community based evaluation of strategies. 9.18 It is good practice to seek to co-ordinate engagement activity across the Council. Links between engagement for Community Plans and LDFs were touched on earlier but linking all such exercises centrally ensures they are consistent in approach and that resources and the time and energy of those consulted are productively and efficiently harnessed. There ought to be a Council wide community involvement strategy in place. 9.19 In delivering best value the expectations of planning services could be described as:

• All groups and individuals in the community will be well informed about the service and should have the opportunity to influence its effectiveness

• Consultations on planning applications will be effective and efficient • All will be engaged with and be able to genuinely influence the debate

on forward planning • All will be involved in setting and monitoring performance indicators

and outcomes (ODPM, 2003(d)). 9.20 The Government is supporting a number of initiatives designed to foster engagement in planning. These range from increased financial support for Planning Aid, the dissemination of best practice through the research initiative on Diversity and the setting up of a Planning Advisory service to the publication of a new guide to the Planning system for the public. 9.21 The use of ICT is another key strand of Government support with initiatives such as “UK online” centres for those without access to ICT where wired up programmes are launched to explore the potential for putting ICT in peoples homes and the launch of “UK online.gov.uk” a portal that gives substantial access to Government information through lifestyle episodes such as moving house or having a baby – all designed to counter social exclusion. 9.22 The Government’s target for facilitating universal access to ICT by 2005 has significant implications for Planning services. For more about this, the Planning Portal and the PARSOL initiative (a national project for facilitating on line planning services) and what individual authorities are doing in order to exploit ICT to improve service accessibility see the chapter on e-planning. 9.23 Focus on specific needs where possible, when engaging with local communities, rather than adopt a blanket approach. This will require a clear understanding of target communities needs and the use of data to identify a baseline position from which to prioritise aims and objectives for managing inclusion. This data can often only be acquired through the involvement of users.

9.24 Plan, build and monitor the capacity of the organisation to act. Capacity is limited. Organisations must tackle the wider inclusion agenda whilst meeting other important corporate objectives. Key ways to increase capacity include: linking investment in inclusion to other corporate objectives and making as much use of existing capacity as possible; explicitly identify and allocate resources needed to deliver priorities; and, identify the skills, knowledge and competences needed by Members and staff at all levels and take action to “plug” any gaps through training. 9.25 Equipping Members and staff with skills and confidence to deal with inclusion issues is critical. Introducing training and professional development packages to improve knowledge, understanding and behaviour around inclusion issues should result from a Best Value review if they are not already in place. Managing inclusion issues can be introduced in planning, implementing and reviewing developing people and training programmes as part of the review of the service and significant aspects of such training would include enabling staff to understand:

• Issues around sensitivity to individuals cultures, circumstances, respect for differences in needs in receiving a service

• The authority’s commitment to equalities and inclusion • The impact their work has on effective management of inclusion • The significance of their behaviour at work • The significance for their work of the Council’s wish to endorse and

progress up through the Equality standard for Local Government (of which more later)

9.26 The importance of regular and clear communication cannot be overstated – communicate the Council’s aims for managing inclusion clearly, consistently and regularly to staff and Members. 9.27 Work with others to co-ordinate action. The LSP is a key vehicle to bring the crucial “players” together but it is also essential that organisations work closely together at service delivery level. Partnership working should include developing a shared vision of an inclusive community with clarity about the roles of each organisation involved. It should also include the practical benefits of regular information sharing, joint capacity building, training and deployment of staff, joint budgeting, monitoring and evaluation. 9.28 Monitor performance and evaluate outcomes in the same way that the Council would track other corporate objectives. It will help raise awareness of what is or is not effective. It allows identification of weaknesses and areas for improvement and requires agreement about the type and frequency of data collection. The data needs to be used to inform decisions and be the basis for action plans for improvement. Many authorities fail at one of the first hurdles by not collecting baseline data on their services, including gathering information held in different parts of the Council. 9.29 Relevant targets should be integrated into the Council’s existing performance monitoring arrangements and should be explicitly linked to the achievement of other corporate objectives. Targets should be clearly defined

like those recommended in the City and County of Cardiff’s inspection report into Equalities (Audit Commission, 2003(b)) 9.30 Standards provide a benchmark that help staff and users to understand and track achievement of objectives. Standards should be developed if they are not in place and they should reflect key questions about the effectiveness of the organisation and the service. 9.31 For the Planning Department (or section), for example, is there a clear vision about what Planning is seeking to achieve? 9.32 For service delivery, for example,

• Are users of the planning service representative of the local community?

• Are users needs assessed? • Are users consulted and involved in service delivery? • Are staff culturally competent (are they sensitive to cultural difference

in a positive manner) or competent to respond to a diverse public 9.33 Other useful questions could be focused around access to services, the treatment of service users and their experience and user involvement and consultation. The Audit Commission report mentioned earlier is an excellent source for appropriate questions to ask as is the Commission’s report on Managing Diversity (Audit Commission, 2002(a)). 9.34 Some Councils are further than others in setting standards. Reading Borough Council, for example, use a set of five indicators for equalities. 9.35 There is also the Equality standard for local Government produced by the Local Government association, the Employer’s Organisation, the Commission for Racial equality, the Disability Rights Commission and the Equal Opportunities Commission, with support from the Audit Commission, which details the key methods for integrating equality and diversity into policy development, consultation, service delivery and performance monitoring (Local Government Association et al, 2001). The Standard – which will be referred to in more detail in the next section – is accompanied by a toolkit and guidance on how to apply it (Local Government Association et al, 2002). 9.36 Finally it is important to maintain momentum which is best served by agreeing long term goals for continuous improvement within the Council wide inclusion strategy. There is also a clear link with monitoring and evaluation to ensure that the Council is achieving what it set out to do. 9.37 The Best value review process and comprehensive performance assessment (and perhaps even Investors in People and Chartermark assessments) provide valuable opportunities for a periodic refresh of policy and practices. 10. Advice for use when undertaking a Best value Review

10.1 “ ….a failure to scrutinise equality of access during ( a best value review) may lead to higher costs (through, for example, higher than necessary risk of litigation) and lower quality of service for those users who continue to receive a substandard service (or no service at all)” ( Audit Commission, 1998). 10.2 The Inspectorate’s checklist for an equalities review taken from a Best Value Inspection report on the London Borough of Sutton in 2001 provides a useful flavour of what is being sought at service level (though it needs to be treated with some caution because things have clearly moved on since then):

• The understanding of issues by the strategic directorate and their plans to model commitment and appropriate behaviour through their management teams and beyond

• Mechanisms to ensure consultation with target groups • Information collected by the service group about who uses its services • Evidence of changes to service design to match special needs of

residents • The views of users from the target groups about services delivered by

the service group • Equalities targets and objectives in Business Plans • Equalities targets and objectives in performance measurement • Profile of the staff group and its match with appropriate demographic

features of the resident population • Understanding of the significance for their work of the Council’s wish to

progress up through the Equality Standard for Local Government. • The relationship,where appropriate, with voluntary groups contacted to

support equalities work. 10.3 An important lesson from inspection is that even when the right mechanisms are in place it is critical that all behave appropriately so the service manager should:

• Ensure that managers and staff understand issues around sensitivity, respect and diversity in delivering their services

• Ensure that all managers integrate and take forward equalities issues • Ensure staff understand the authority’s commitment to equalities and

the impact and contribution their work has and the significance of their behaviour to that work.

10.4 The framework for Review sets out the basics of undertaking a review, the intention here is to provide specific advise on how to ensure that the inclusion agenda in service delivery is addressed within the review process. Challenge 10.5 In looking at challenge it is important that the needs of the whole community are first identified, followed by a critical examination of whether the current service is actually meeting those needs. 10.6 Key questions that need to be asked are:

• Is the service being delivered and promoted in a way which reaches the whole community?

• Is the service aware of the diverse nature of local communities and is it contact with those groups?

• What evidence is there that all local communities have been able to influence policy making and decision taking?

• How in tune are Planners with Corporate policy and how effectively are they working with others to achieve Corporate objectives?

• How representative are staff in the service of the diverse nature of the community they serve?

• Are staff supportive of and equipped to deal with the inclusion agenda? • Has an audit in accordance with the Disability Discrimination Act, 1995

been undertaken and has its recommendations been implemented? • Is the link between the inclusion agenda and human rights recognised

and how has the service’s ability to comply with the 1998 Act been addressed?

• Is there a Corporate action plan for promoting race equality and how is it impacting on the planning service?

• Has the authority endorsed the Equality standard for local government and, if so, what is the position of the planning service relative to the Corporate level of achievement of the standard so far and in terms of the Council’s aspirations for improvement?

10.7 Furthermore the authority needs to be aware that input into the review process itself needs to be representative of the diverse local communities. It should not be based on the on the views of the most accessible or articulate groups with in the community. Compare 10.8 The Corporate Health Best Value Performance Indicator BV2 relating to the Equality standard for local government in England and applies to all authorities – if they have adopted it – and provides the framework for a helpful benchmarking measure with scope to learn what other local authorities are doing to ensure the provision of equitable services. 10.9 The Equality Standard comprises five levels in a step by step approach to achieving a comprehensive and systematic approach to dealing with equalities:

• Level 1: the authority has adopted a comprehensive equality policy including commitments to developing equality objectives and targets, to consultation and impact assessment, monitoring, audit and scrutiny

• Level 2: the authority has engaged in an impact needs assessment, a consultation process and an equality action planning process for employment and service delivery

• Level 3: the authority has completed the equalities action planning process, set objectives and targets and established information and monitoring systems to assess progress.

• Level 4: the authority has developed information monitoring systems that enable it to assess progress towards achieving specific targets

• Level 5: the authority has achieved targets, reviewed them and set new targets. The Authority is seen as exemplary for its equality programme.

10.10 National Planning Indicator BV112 used until 2002 set a checklist of planning best practice and question 10 asked whether the local authority has implemented a fair access policy to ensure that different groups have equal access to the planning process. This could still be used as a local indicator. 10.11 Gathering information on race and disability issues can be difficult because they can be sensitive issues but the challenge needs to be addressed to ensure the service is delivering the inclusion agenda. Part of the solution can be found in the biannual satisfaction survey that can be used to analyse satisfaction levels of different ethnic groups and on the basis of gender and age. Consult 10.12 The process of consultation needs to ensure that the most vulnerable, disadvantaged and excluded groups are included. This is likely to mean developing afresh strategies and policies for consultation that recognise the differential participation of a range of groups in standard consultation exercises and moving beyond these to ensure a wider participative framework. This may mean working in partnership with organisations such as the local access group or disability rights group or minority ethnic groups or youth groups or even more mainstream agencies like the Citizens’ advice bureaux and combining this with other out reach measures. Melton Borough Council’s Consultation strategy for their replacement Local Plan explains how it complied with the human rights act and how it intended to make consultation inclusive. 10.13 There will be a need to employ a range of consultation methods to ensure that different types of information and feedback are being collected – see the engagement chapter, 10.14 Advance consideration also needs to be given to the expected outcomes of the consultation process. The outcomes may be multi purpose (i.e. not just for the review itself), such as a consultation forum having the expectation of building confidence and skills in the local population; forging links between the Council and the local population as well as seeking particular information about the planning service and its performance and future development. Compete 10.15 Equality issues must be accounted for in any consideration of procurement options for the service. These matters would need to be included in any resulting service specification document that would form the basis of a tender process.

10.16 Advice on equal opportunities in procurement is set out in Annex C to Circular 3/03 – handling workforce matters in contracting (ODPM, 2003)). 10.17 The Commission for racial equality and others have produced a guide on race equality and procurement that also provides help in this area (Commission for racial equality et al, 2003). 10.18 Finally the implementation plan must allow for monitoring of equality indicators and the performance against them and must also identify any remedial action to be taken in the event of under achievement. 11. Conclusions 11.1 There are a number of basic principles that have emerged throughout this chapter to ensure equality and inclusion in delivering best value. These may be summarised as

• Make all services accessible to all stakeholders, irrespective of their personal circumstances

• Monitor service use • Engage different communities and interest groups in reviewing the

planning service • Always consult with people to find out what they think and how the

service does or could meet their specific needs • Enable all sections of the community the opportunity to influence the

development of policies as well as the resources allocated and the services delivered.

11.2 The inclusion agenda is likely to figure more prominently in the next round of comprehensive performance assessments. The Audit Commission has found that one of the key building blocks for improvement is a good understanding of local context including the diversity of local communities (Audit Commission, 2003©). The Commission’s Strategic Plan consultation identifies Equalities and Diversity as one of the key drivers of corporate management (Audit Commission, 2003(d)). How the agenda is built into assessment is something currently under consideration (Audit Commission, 2004). So – get ahead of the game. 11.3 It is now recommended that you read building the platform for Best Value. Signposts References:

• Audit Commission, 1998, “Better by far: Preparing for Best value” • Audit Commission, 2001, London Borough of Sutton’s Equalities

Inspection report (see Audit Commission web site below) • Audit Commission, 2002(a),”Directions in Diversity

• Audit Commission, 2002(b),”Warrington Borough Council’s Social Inclusion Inspection report (see Audit Commission web site below)

• Audit Commission, 2002©,”Equality and Diversity: Learning from Inspections”

• Audit Commission, 2003(a),”Human Rights: Improving Public Service delivery”

• Audit Commission, 2003(b), City and County of Cardiff’s Equalities Inspection report (see Audit Commission web site below)

• Audit Commission, 2003©,”Patterns for Improvement – Learning from comprehensive performance assessments to achieve better public services”

• Audit Commission, 2003(d),”Strategic Plan 2004-07: Consultation” • Audit Commission, 2004,”CPA 2005 – The way ahead: Consultation on

single tier and county council and district council comprehensive performance assessment from 2005”.

• Cabinet Office, 2001,”A new commitment to Neighbourhood renewal: national strategy action plan”

• Cabinet Office, 2002,”Private action, public benefit: a review of charities and the wider not for profit sector”

• Commission for Racial equality, 2002, “Statutory code of practice on the duty to promote race equality”

• Demos, 2003,”Inside out: rethinking inclusive communities, final report” • DETR, 2000(a),”Our towns and cities: the future” • DETR, 2000(b),”Preparing Community strategies: Government

guidance to local authorities” • DTLR, 2001,”Strong local leadership: quality public services” • HM Treasury, 2002,”Role of the Voluntary and Community sectors in

service delivery” • Home office, 1998,”Getting it right together: compact on relations

between the Government and the Voluntary and Community sectors in England”

• Middlesborough Partnership, 2002,”A framework for engaging with communities: a toolkit setting out how to do it”

• Mirze.F.N.Ahmud, 1999,”Local Government and the Human Rights Act: the silent tide of change” (LG Voice, January)

• National Planning Forum, 2004,”Delivering Planning: a commitment to working together”

• ODPM, 2001,”Planning: Delivering a fundamental change” (green paper)

• ODPM, 2002(a),”Equality and Diversity: the way ahead” • ODPM, 2002(b),”Living places: Cleaner, safer, greener” • ODPM, 2003(a),”Searching for solid foundations: community

involvement and urban policy” • ODPM, 2003(b),”Sustainable communities: building for the future” • ODPM, 2003©,”Circular 3/03 –Local Government act, 1999, Part 1 –

Best Value and Performance improvement” • ODPM, 2003(d),”Planning Aid: a review of its role and prospects for

development”

• ODPM, 2003(e),”Relationship between Community strategies and Local Development Frameworks: Final report”

• ODPM, 2003(e),”Planning and accessibility for disabled people: a good practice guide”

• ODPM, 2004(a),”Consultation paper on Planning Policy Statement 1: creating sustainable communities”

• ODPM, 2004(b),”Community Involvement in Planning: The Government’s objectives”

• ODPM, 2004©,”Planning and Diversity: research into policies and proicedures”

• Planning, 2004(a),”A positive highway to better services” (20th February)

• RTPI, 2002,”Planning with Communities: Good practice guide” Other useful references:

• Audit Commission, 2004,” The journey to race equality: Delivering improved services to local communities”. This provides a framework to help public services think through what race equality means for their localities and to manage their approach better.

• Audit Commission, 2004,”The journey to race equality… a self assessment tool”. The tool will help in facilitating discussions with local agencies about where they are now and what needs to improve. It helps public sector organisations to assess current performance in race equality and identify and challenge the barriers preventing progress.

• Business in the community, 2004, “Business Action on Neighbourhood Renewal” (www.partnershipacademy.org.uk) celebrating black and minority ethnic business and community support for neighbourhood renewal.

• Commission for racial equality, et. al, 2003, “Race equality and procurement in local government: a guide for authorities and contractors”

• Employers Organisation, current, ”The equality standard for local Government” (www.lg-employers.gov.uk)

• Fabian Society, 2001, “Responsibility for all: A national programme for social inclusion”

• Home Office, 2004,”Building Civil Renewal: A review of Government support for community capacity building and proposals for change”.

• IdeA, 2002,”Taking forward community cohesion in Leicester” • IPPR, 2002, “Reclaiming Community” • LGA, et al, 2002, “Guidance on community cohesion” • LGA, 1998, “No quality without Equality: Best Value and Equality” • ODPM, 2003, “Participatory Planning for sustainable communities” • ODPM/Home Office, 2003, “Building cohesion into Regeneration and

Renewal” • Planning, 2003, “Managing differences: how to use diversity to achieve

, equality” (21st February), • Planning, 2003,”Equality and Diversity” (7th February)

• Scottish Executive, 2002,”Your place, your plan: A white paper on Public involvement in Planning”.

Pointers from Inspection reports: The summaries and recommendations of the following other Inspection reports may prove useful:

• Sefton MBC – Social Inclusion unit, 29th January, 2002 • Sedgefield BC – Equity and Equalities, 5th March, 2002 • Hyndburn BC -- Race relations, 12th July, 2002 • London Borough of Richmond – Access to services, 21st June, 2001

These reports, and those listed in the reference section may be viewed on www.audit-commission.gov.uk. Look out for:

• National Planning and Diversity Research project findings on the ODPM website (expected late Spring, 2004)

• The Equalities section in IdeA Knowledge (see website address below – click on knowledge/Improving the Council). Its content is currently limited to sections on race and gender equality. There are other sections on equality impact assessments and local performance indicators. The advice is backed up by a small number of case studies.

• DIALOG – the Diversity Action in Local Government unit – provides information for local authority managers on legislative developments and good practice in equality matters (www.lg-employers.gov.uk).

Other useful websites:

• Improvement and Development Agency: www.idea.gov.uk • Equal Opportunities Commission: www.eoc.org.uk • Commission for racial equality: www.cre.gov.uk • The Disability website: www.disability.gov.uk • The Disability Commission: www.drc-gb.org.uk • Home office: www.homeoffice.gov.uk • Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: www.odpm.gov.uk • Royal Town Planning Institute: www.rtpi.org.uk

Appendix 1 – The law 1.1 Local authority service provision is covered by the Equal Pay Act, 1970, the Sex discrimination Act, 1975, the Race Relations Act, 1976, the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA), 1995, several of which prohibit direct and indirect discrimination in the provision of services. The DDA introduced new measures

that aim to end discrimination experienced by the disabled in employment, access to goods, facilities and services and property rights. Planning services should already have made reasonable adjustment to enable disabled persons to receive the service. 1.2 Local authorities have a duty under section 71 of the Race relations Act to make appropriate arrangements to securing that their various functions are carried out with due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful racial discrimination and to promote equality of opportunity, and good relations, between persons of different racial groups. 1.3 The Race Relations (Amendment) Act, 2000, added a new positive duty to promote race equality and good race relations, as well as outlawing racial discrimination in any of a Council’s functions. It covers not only employment but the provision of goods, facilities and services. A code of practice on the duty to promote race equality was published in 2002 and is designed to help authorities meet this duty (Commission for Racial Equality, 2002). 1.4 The pace of regulation, with the prospect of further legislation, has accelerated recently. The UK has signed up to three EU Directives to tackle unfair discrimination:

• The Race directive (2000) is the most extensive in scope. It prohibits race discrimination in employment, training, the provision of goods and services (including housing), education and social protection. The Race Relations Amendment Act outlined above stems from this.

• The Employment directive (2000) covers employment and vocational training only. It prohibits discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, religion, disability and age.

• The Equal Treatment directive (1975) prohibits sex discrimination in the fields of employment and vocational training. The 1975 Act stems from this. An amendment to this directive was published in 2002.

1.5 The Equal Pay Act Amendment Regulations, the Sex discrimination Act Amendment Regulations and the Race Discrimination Act Regulations came into force in July 2003. 1.6 The Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations and the Employment Equality (Religion and Belief) Regulations came into force in December, 2003. 1.7 The Disability Regulations come into force in October, 2004. 1.8 New legislation is to be introduced to outlaw discrimination, in employment, on grounds of sexual orientation, religion and age. The current intention is that the Equal Treatment directive is implemented at the end of 2005 and that the Age Regulations will come into force by the end of 2006.