Inequality in the UK has long been associated with socioeconomic circumstances, encompassing issues such as poverty, income disparity and wealth gap. 15 years ago, the groundbreaking Spirit Level, by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, demonstrated how socioeconomic inequalities were not just bad for individuals and their families, but for society as a whole. This analysis fed into the Equality Act 2010, but the socioeconomic duty within the Act was not implemented by successive Coalition and Conservative governments, drawing criticism from the UN. Now the Westminster government is consulting on activating this duty.
Academics Stand Against Poverty UK and the Equality Trust held a joint event to explore the importance of responding to the consultation and encouraging academics and practitioners to draw upon their expertise to inform how the socioeconomic duty is implemented in England. In this article, we highlight some of the key issues from the event and call on readers to contribute to the consultation themselves. A recording of the speaker inputs is available on YouTube.
Labour and its ‘poverty of ambition’
In the lead-up to the 2024 general election, ASAP UK worked with academics across the UK to conduct its manifesto audit. The aim of the audit was to assess the various party manifestos against a criterion of flourishing to determine an overall rating of their pledges to tackle poverty. Labour did not score particularly highly in this audit, tallying with its 2015 manifesto, but gaining fewer points than its 2017 manifesto. The score in 2015 was perhaps a surprise. In the lead-up to that election, then-leader Ed Miliband had expressed his interest in The Spirit Level and how it could guide government action. But the manifesto was far more cautious, resulting in a low score. Despite the audit’s similar rating of its 2024 manifesto, one glimmer of hope has been Labour’s manifesto pledge to revive the socioeconomic duty, which is now under consultation.
As such, the consultation to enact the socioeconomic duty within the Equality Act 2010 is an opportunity to encourage greater ambition in tackling poverty and inequality in England and is one that cannot be missed. It offers researchers and practitioners the chance to highlight ways in which public bodies can start to adopt:
- a holistic approach: By considering socioeconomic factors, the duty works towards systemic solutions to inequality.
- a proactive policy design: Authorities can design policies that pre-emptively mitigate socioeconomic inequalities.
- empowerment: Communities facing socioeconomic disadvantage gain greater visibility and voice in decision-making processes.
The ASAP UK audits have historically demonstrated a general lack of ambition to tackle poverty across all parties: this is not specifically a ‘Labour problem’. Establishing this duty could go some way to ensuring that all political parties give considerable attention in future manifestos to the reduction of poverty and inequality.
Intersectionality and the socioeconomic duty
Decisions need to be conducted in the round, considering other equality assessments, financial contexts, etc. However, such a view is built upon a faulty logic. It suggests that different sources of inequalities are competing for policy attention. Rather, we have decades of research to demonstrate the intersectional nature of individuals and communities. Gender, race/ethnicity, age, sexuality, gender identity, disability will not only interact with each other but with socioeconomic status. There is a complex array of identities and positions within socioeconomic structures.
Many of these refer to individual rights-based claims and anti-discrimination law, requiring greater attention to the recognition and protection of certain groups and their citizen rights (legal, political and social). A focus on the socioeconomic duty will ensure that an emphasis on distributive aspects of income and wealth can be brought into this analysis. Combined, this creates a much more powerful mechanism for tackling persisting inequalities and suggesting policy solutions that adopt a well-rounded and comprehensive approach. We cannot implement a style of equality assessments that play different ‘characteristics’ off each other. We need to have an integrated, intersectional approach.
Lessons from across Great Britain
Although the duty was left dormant in England, the devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales activated it in 2018 and 2021 respectively. Furthermore, over 40 local authorities in England have voluntarily adopted the socioeconomic duty as good practice and in response to the crises of inflated living costs and rising child poverty. We can therefore already see several practices that can inform the UK government’s own efforts to ensure the duty is used effectively in policy and practice decisions.
Where the duty has been adopted, it has been incorporated into equality impact assessments and budget proposals to Councillors. This has prompted pause for thought. For example, at Falkirk Council, the duty led to a change of course away from proposed cuts to increases in Early Learning and Childcare (ELC) places, school bus routes, teachers and classes. Consideration of the duty revealed the need to remedy a lack of consultation with those at the sharp end and most affected by the cuts, clarified a negative impact on socioeconomic disadvantage and led to the search for an alternative way to balance the budget, without the unfair consequences. In other examples, the duty has sparked interventions to address lower uptake of healthcare in poorer areas and to enhance the sick pay of low-paid care workers exposed to COVID-19, and has informed the discourse on universal free school meals for primary-school pupils, which are now available in Scotland and Wales.
The duty has led to the greater use of participatory approaches to bring voices of lived experience into the policy process. Poverty Truth Commissions, participatory budgeting and co-production have all played a role in illuminating the human impact of policy decisions that would otherwise have been unknown. In England, voluntary adoption by local authorities and listening to those living with financial stress and poverty have resulted in policy changes. Examples include ceasing the use of bailiffs to collect council tax arrears in favour of debt support, improving the delivery of care-leaver grants, and reversing a policy of automatically removing carpets or flooring in social housing between tenancies, to reduce unnecessary waste and cost to new tenants. However, legal compulsion trumps a reliance on the goodwill of voluntary adoption, which also exacerbates the problematic ‘postcode lottery’, as well as the inconsistency across nations. Commencing the duty in Westminster will send a message that this matters to everyone across Great Britain.
Next steps
The government’s call for evidence is open until the end of June 2025. This is an opportunity to advocate for effective implementation. Researchers with evidence on the duty’s impact or those with adjacent studies on the effectiveness of social policy to address socioeconomic inequalities will be pertinent. Respondents to the consultation can identify enablers of positive impact; for example, calling for clear statutory guidance, training for duty-bearers, ensuring that voices of lived experience and social justice civil society organisations are involved, rights-resourcing so that the public are informed and have access to legal advice, plus an effective monitoring and co-evaluation framework with stakeholders. Adequately funded capacity of the Equality & Human Rights Commission to fulfil its role as watchdog is also vital.
Rectifying limiting factors is also important to maximise the utility of the duty; for example, by expanding the list of public authorities subject to the duty, mirroring the range of organisations under the Public Sector Equality Duty, or at least achieving consistency with the bodies already observing the duty in the devolved nations. Universal coverage without exceptions would resolve a problematic clause that excludes people with no recourse to public funds. To turn the words of the duty into practice, there is a need for helpful data to achieve evidence-based decisions; there is potential for universities to play a role here in sharing research with local authorities and government policy makers. Other implementation pleas include addressing intersectionality – since rates of poverty are heightened for marginalised groups, a sense of urgency on the timescale for activation and the need for future-proofing to protect from rollbacks in the event of a change of administration.
Lee Gregory is an Associate Professor at the University of Nottingham and Chair of Academics Stand Against Poverty UK Trustees.
Vanessa Boon is a Senior Project Officer at The Equality Trust.
Dave Beck is a Lecturer in Social Policy at The University of Salford.
Read all the articles in the Academics Stand Against Poverty blog series here.
Bristol University Press/Policy Press newsletter subscribers receive a 25% discount – sign up here.
Follow Transforming Society so we can let you know when new articles publish.
The views and opinions expressed on this blog site are solely those of the original blog post authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the Policy Press and/or any/all contributors to this site.
Image credit: Erna Zogjani via Unsplash