0:00:14 > 0:00:20Thank you so much for being with us today and if everyone can take their
0:00:20 > 0:00:25seats. Sorry we are starting late. And can I say good morning to you
0:00:25 > 0:00:29and also anybody who is working on is back and watching online or the
0:00:29 > 0:00:34public gallery. This is the third and last all evidence session into
0:00:34 > 0:00:40our enquiry into the Government's raised its piracy audit which has
0:00:40 > 0:00:47provided evidence of disparity between differences in ethic groups
0:00:47 > 0:00:52in public and services. We have two witnesses today and after we have
0:00:52 > 0:00:55had this session will be hearing from David Lidington in the Cabinet
0:00:55 > 0:01:01Office. Our panel here today gives us more the opportunity to look at
0:01:01 > 0:01:06the office for National statistics and equality and human rights
0:01:06 > 0:01:12commission's work in this area and issues that should be addressed.
0:01:12 > 0:01:15Before I start, so could I ask you to say your name and the
0:01:15 > 0:01:28organisation you represent.I am Ian Bell at the National statistics
0:01:28 > 0:01:34office.Thank you all for being here today and we will start are
0:01:34 > 0:01:46questioning today.My question is to Melanie. The E HRC submission to our
0:01:46 > 0:01:53enquiry seems to think that the work your enquiry is doing is better at
0:01:53 > 0:01:56uncovering inequalities in the race disparity order. In your opinion, do
0:01:56 > 0:02:06you think the audit has been a waste of time?No, I don't. Certainly we
0:02:06 > 0:02:09do to our own work, we have a statutory duty to report to
0:02:09 > 0:02:12Parliament on progress towards equality and human rights in Britain
0:02:12 > 0:02:20and we do that through our fear of report. That's a very structured
0:02:20 > 0:02:23approach for which we use the measurement framework, which that at
0:02:23 > 0:02:28all areas of life and uses a variety of qualitative and quantitative data
0:02:28 > 0:02:36sources. The raised its piracy audit is a different exercise and I think
0:02:36 > 0:02:43it fulfils a different purpose. -- race disparity audit. It does things
0:02:43 > 0:02:49are approach isn't able to do, in terms of the amount of original
0:02:49 > 0:02:55analysis. But on the other hand, it has gaps where we actually do
0:02:55 > 0:03:00publish data. They fulfil a different purpose. I think it has
0:03:00 > 0:03:04also been extremely beneficial that the Government has shown such an
0:03:04 > 0:03:12interest in this issue and it certainly raised the profile of race
0:03:12 > 0:03:24disparity in society. So we welcome that.OK, but the EHRC did see the
0:03:24 > 0:03:28data lacks robustness, completeness and comparability. Is there
0:03:28 > 0:03:31something that can be remedied? Do you have some suggestions about
0:03:31 > 0:03:39making the audit and offensive?Yes, I think things can always be
0:03:39 > 0:03:43improved and that's probably equally true for our own work and we always
0:03:43 > 0:03:49look to improve. We talk to the race disparity unit on an ongoing basis
0:03:49 > 0:03:54about where we think additional data would be useful and I know that they
0:03:54 > 0:04:01are planning to add more data to the website. We will be helping to guide
0:04:01 > 0:04:09them in that. For example, on higher education, we think that there is
0:04:09 > 0:04:14more data that is available and could be used. The main issue for us
0:04:14 > 0:04:21is around setting the data in context. So we think it would make
0:04:21 > 0:04:25the data more useful if there was more contextual information which
0:04:25 > 0:04:33enables people to understand what it means and that it drew links between
0:04:33 > 0:04:36different data sets. For example, looking at the relationship between
0:04:36 > 0:04:42attainment in access to higher education and linking that to
0:04:42 > 0:04:48employment.But are the lessons that we should be learning from the
0:04:48 > 0:04:52altered in terms of how Government actually collects data and how we
0:04:52 > 0:05:02can make it more relevant, robust and useful?I think certainly and
0:05:02 > 0:05:08I'm sure ONS will have views on that as well. There are differences in
0:05:08 > 0:05:10the way organisations disaggregate ethnicity data which wakes it
0:05:10 > 0:05:15difficult to make comparisons, things are changing the way people
0:05:15 > 0:05:19do things over time, making it difficult to track progress. I think
0:05:19 > 0:05:23there are lessons to learn in terms of completeness and consistency
0:05:23 > 0:05:29about how we look at these issues. I'm just going to pressure a bit
0:05:29 > 0:05:34further on the usefulness of the data. You've expend about having
0:05:34 > 0:05:38contacts, which makes sense. There's any other way the data could have
0:05:38 > 0:05:45been presented which could have the data more useful to us?Well, the
0:05:45 > 0:05:51Government took a view that it was going to publish the raw data, in
0:05:51 > 0:05:56effect, without putting any kind of analysis or context around it and I
0:05:56 > 0:06:02can see that there are risks with doing that for Government because it
0:06:02 > 0:06:06may be seen at being political spin, the way that the information is
0:06:06 > 0:06:13presented if it isn't just resented in its raw form. But for people to
0:06:13 > 0:06:19use the data, they needed that analysis and context and therefore,
0:06:19 > 0:06:24we try to provide that with or report. Our reporters on a different
0:06:24 > 0:06:29basis but I think there is room for the Government to supplement what is
0:06:29 > 0:06:31the with a something that would make it easier for people to actually
0:06:31 > 0:06:41use.Ian, I don't know if you wanted to comment on this point.The point
0:06:41 > 0:06:48around the usefulness and comparability? The way the system
0:06:48 > 0:06:54hopefully works is that we publish in ONS what is called harmonisation
0:06:54 > 0:06:59guidance. Departments, whether the our collecting administrative data
0:06:59 > 0:07:03for how they run benefit systems or education systems and also the
0:07:03 > 0:07:08surveys the conduct, are then advised to harmonise against those
0:07:08 > 0:07:13classifications. What became apparent through the race disparity
0:07:13 > 0:07:17audit is something which I think was no one but shone a light in this
0:07:17 > 0:07:24area. It is that many organisations have yet to align the latest ONS
0:07:24 > 0:07:28classifications for the 2011 census and of course we are now coming up
0:07:28 > 0:07:35of the 2021 census. In part of the preparation for that, we are working
0:07:35 > 0:07:38through body ethnicity classification should look like. We
0:07:38 > 0:07:42know there's a real job to do to work with organisations across
0:07:42 > 0:07:46Government in order to get that consistency of approach right of the
0:07:46 > 0:07:49way across the data collectors and make sure that the harmonisation is
0:07:49 > 0:07:55there. Some NHS bodies are collecting 2001 definitions still, I
0:07:55 > 0:08:01know the Department for Education, my old apartment, was on a hybrid
0:08:01 > 0:08:05between 2001 and 2011. If we can get everyone up to the same level and
0:08:05 > 0:08:12work with them towards the 2021 census, it will undertake and take
0:08:12 > 0:08:17that increase incompatibility across-the-board. It is a task I
0:08:17 > 0:08:21have to take on as part of the next stage of the census development.
0:08:25 > 0:08:32Scanner has a supplementary, they worried about the robustness and
0:08:32 > 0:08:40consistency of the data. Whether particular areas where the
0:08:40 > 0:08:46organisation was concerned about that robustness of the data? That is
0:08:46 > 0:08:50worrying. I can understand completeness and comparability. But
0:08:50 > 0:08:55if you are saying some of the data wasn't robust, that would be useful
0:08:55 > 0:09:03to have a particular example.I think I will have to write to you
0:09:03 > 0:09:10about that.Will you put in something about how you would have
0:09:10 > 0:09:17done it differently? We are trying to get at if something like an audit
0:09:17 > 0:09:27like this is done, the robustness mixers question whether the
0:09:27 > 0:09:30integrity of the -- makes as question whether the integrity of
0:09:30 > 0:09:42the data is correct.We think it is really important there is a central
0:09:42 > 0:09:45point that guy is a strategic approach across Government to
0:09:45 > 0:09:58address the essays that occur across all areas of life and equality.
0:09:58 > 0:10:00Following the recent cabinet reshuffle, responsibility for the
0:10:00 > 0:10:07race disparity units now sits with the Cabinet office with its
0:10:07 > 0:10:11coordination role. Recently, it was a split responsibility. I think that
0:10:11 > 0:10:18is really welcome. I hope it is a strong push from the centre to take
0:10:18 > 0:10:22coordinated action across all these issues. In fact, we would like to
0:10:22 > 0:10:30see that happen all the quality protector characteristics which have
0:10:30 > 0:10:32different responsibilities across Government. And do not think it
0:10:32 > 0:10:37matters which department it sits in, it is that it sits in a place which
0:10:37 > 0:10:42has an overview and is able to influence action across Government.
0:10:42 > 0:10:47What do you think about the action that has been taken so far by the
0:10:47 > 0:10:51Government, devolving to the relevant departments?I think there
0:10:51 > 0:10:57is a kind of push and pull thing going on here. I think that is
0:10:57 > 0:11:02probably right. You need that kind of point of view to say, what are
0:11:02 > 0:11:11the priority issues we need to focus on getting traction on? And
0:11:11 > 0:11:15departments responsible for particular issues, the best place to
0:11:15 > 0:11:18come up with policy responses that we have not yet seen, really, what's
0:11:18 > 0:11:24those policy responses are going to be.What is the role of the
0:11:24 > 0:11:28Commission in all of this?I think the role of the Commission is to
0:11:28 > 0:11:34form our own views about what we think the priorities are based on
0:11:34 > 0:11:44our analysis and understanding of the data. And then to encourage and
0:11:44 > 0:11:46press Government to turn the information into reaction.Thank
0:11:46 > 0:11:57you.The UK has been collecting ethnicity data to identify
0:11:57 > 0:12:02inequalities for a good many years. While there have been some successes
0:12:02 > 0:12:11in reducing inequalities in a few areas, some issues remain stubbornly
0:12:11 > 0:12:22entrenched. Is it reasonable for us and the HRC to assume this will make
0:12:22 > 0:12:29a significant inroads in tackling the men -- more entrenched problems?
0:12:29 > 0:12:33To answer that you need to think about what conditions you actually
0:12:33 > 0:12:41need to make progress on an issue. I think that's transparency and
0:12:41 > 0:12:47leadership and commitment are part of that. They are kind of the
0:12:47 > 0:12:53beginning of that journey. What then needs to happen is for people to
0:12:53 > 0:12:59take ownership of the issues and actually act on them. I think
0:12:59 > 0:13:02obviously we have known about a lot of these issues for a very long
0:13:02 > 0:13:10time. They persist and progress has not been as rapid as we would have
0:13:10 > 0:13:16liked to see.Is this knowing it every two bit more is going to
0:13:16 > 0:13:22change anything?I think there is a risk. Action should be based on
0:13:22 > 0:13:28evidence. There is a risk the search for more and better evidence can
0:13:28 > 0:13:38delay action. I do not think, if we know that certain ethnic groups are
0:13:38 > 0:13:46underachieving at school, it is useful to know all the factors that
0:13:46 > 0:13:49contribute to that. It doesn't stop the actually trying to do something
0:13:49 > 0:13:54in the classroom. -- you trying to do something in the classroom.You
0:13:54 > 0:14:00said the HRC will form their own response to the audit. What form
0:14:00 > 0:14:07will that take when will we see it? Republished our road map to race
0:14:07 > 0:14:12equality very shortly after the audit was published. Which
0:14:12 > 0:14:16identified a number of areas we that urgent action was needed and we
0:14:16 > 0:14:21worked with some race equality organisations to produce that
0:14:21 > 0:14:25report.Is there anything else you are planning to do as a result of
0:14:25 > 0:14:30that?We are continuing to keep an eye on what is happening in touch
0:14:30 > 0:14:36with race disparity unit and we are continuing to ask them how the
0:14:36 > 0:14:46policy responses are progressing. Another thing we are doing at the
0:14:46 > 0:14:54moment is some research into the public sector the quality duty. --
0:14:54 > 0:15:02equality duty. That followed on from the earlier race equality duty. The
0:15:02 > 0:15:06policy idea behind it was it should harness the power of the public
0:15:06 > 0:15:14sector in addressing persistent equality issues. I think it is clear
0:15:14 > 0:15:19from the figures that hasn't been entirely successful. We are looking
0:15:19 > 0:15:25at how the duty has been working and considering whether we can make some
0:15:25 > 0:15:28recommendations about how it can be improved to make it be more
0:15:28 > 0:15:40effective.Did any of the data from the audit surprise you in terms of
0:15:40 > 0:15:45inequalities, or was it called grand you had expected and seen before? --
0:15:45 > 0:15:49and ground you had expected and seen before?I do not think there was
0:15:49 > 0:15:58anything that came as a massive surprise.-- old ground.Your new
0:15:58 > 0:16:11audit is going to be looking at the advantages and limitations of ONS
0:16:11 > 0:16:20data on... Is the fatal flaws?The work programme is broader than
0:16:20 > 0:16:23ethnicity. We are looking across the protector characteristics and the
0:16:23 > 0:16:30aim of the audit is to look at the data not just on ethnicity but
0:16:30 > 0:16:38across all the other characteristics, disability, gender
0:16:38 > 0:16:49identity, sexual orientation.The inequalities data audit that we
0:16:49 > 0:16:53studied with Government bodies that invited them to look through the
0:16:53 > 0:17:00baseline data we had available to us and add to it has now concluded. We
0:17:00 > 0:17:03had 46 responses, which I think we feel is particularly reassuring
0:17:03 > 0:17:07because it means for the majority of our Government stakeholders, we
0:17:07 > 0:17:12already had a side of the data they had. And it was being used either by
0:17:12 > 0:17:19us or through the race disparity audit. 46 had something additionally
0:17:19 > 0:17:25to offer to us. We will look through the quality and added value that
0:17:25 > 0:17:32that they take and give us.How satisfied are you that the data
0:17:32 > 0:17:41standards in the Government's audit are high enough?On race disparity?
0:17:41 > 0:17:46I think it is worth pointing out that much of the data in the audit
0:17:46 > 0:17:50is already published in individual departments and published often with
0:17:50 > 0:17:57the badges of national or official statistics designed to provide
0:17:57 > 0:18:02reassurance that these are done in line with the UK Statistics
0:18:02 > 0:18:08Authority code of practice and are of high quality. The audit has tied
0:18:08 > 0:18:11together, provided overview across the board. For many users interested
0:18:11 > 0:18:22at incoming -- coming at this from race disparity angles, it makes it
0:18:22 > 0:18:27more easily acceptable... We seconded out some staff to work in
0:18:27 > 0:18:33the audit and worked with them to make sure the quality and accuracy
0:18:33 > 0:18:40was there within the audit on that side.We have covered this briefly
0:18:40 > 0:18:44but can I just ask, based on what the audit revealed about how the
0:18:44 > 0:18:50public sector collects ethnicity data, could there be improvements to
0:18:50 > 0:18:55how the public sector collects that data?Yes, they're in and out of the
0:18:55 > 0:19:01-ish room for us to get more consistency -- undoubtably room for
0:19:01 > 0:19:06more consistency across the board. If it ain't the interpretation and
0:19:06 > 0:19:09allows it to be easier to follow through some of the disparities we
0:19:09 > 0:19:16have talked about already, if the education system is not on the same
0:19:16 > 0:19:22definition as the labour market data, it becomes harder for users to
0:19:22 > 0:19:25quickly come to conclusions.So the improvements you would recommend
0:19:25 > 0:19:32there are consistency, comparability and similar definitions?Alignment
0:19:32 > 0:19:39with the harmonised standards which the public, yes.Can I go back to
0:19:39 > 0:19:45the specifics of administrative data? Which we are not
0:19:45 > 0:19:49statisticians, that we understand there are real concerns about the
0:19:49 > 0:19:57way that data is gathered and then used, and that the limitations of
0:19:57 > 0:20:01that data have to be carefully considered. I am thinking
0:20:01 > 0:20:07particularly about Gypsy Roma Traveller communities who can deal
0:20:07 > 0:20:16-- Roman that's their position in the system is compounded. Would you
0:20:16 > 0:20:25agree?We have different sources, sensors, service, administrative
0:20:25 > 0:20:37data, all of which have different strengths and limitations. The issue
0:20:37 > 0:20:49you highlight, for each of these, it relies from census the surveys and
0:20:49 > 0:20:50administrative data, there are different reasons for interacting
0:20:50 > 0:20:59with that. Every ten years, the census, there must be trust in the
0:20:59 > 0:21:02system that the data is used in partially and independently and we
0:21:02 > 0:21:11would like to think we enable that. Surveys are usually run for
0:21:11 > 0:21:14households on a voluntary basis. For those communities there are two
0:21:14 > 0:21:18issues which we recap. One is how do we make sure that within it the
0:21:18 > 0:21:27survey House roads are even getting to the population. -- households.
0:21:27 > 0:21:30Second, there are issues around with a naturally respond to these data
0:21:30 > 0:21:43and that collection? And administrative data, when the Gypsy
0:21:43 > 0:21:47Traveller community, data will be collected as a by-product. It is
0:21:47 > 0:21:55recorded on what the person wants to express their identity as being and
0:21:55 > 0:22:00relies on the person saying they want their identity recorded in the
0:22:00 > 0:22:05assessment group. All rely on the trust around how data is collected
0:22:05 > 0:22:10and the bodies who are doing it. I think it is particularly for the
0:22:10 > 0:22:15group you highlight it, I think it would be difficult to conclude that
0:22:15 > 0:22:21anyone system is better than any other. I think each other strengths
0:22:21 > 0:22:24and limitations. In using the different types of sources of data,
0:22:24 > 0:22:29it is important we make it clear where the strengths and limitations
0:22:29 > 0:22:34are so people know and understand the issues which can be done. I do
0:22:34 > 0:22:38not think it is fair to say particularly that administrative
0:22:38 > 0:22:42data is particularly poor, but compared to others, yes.Given we
0:22:42 > 0:22:50are doing with groups were trust may not be strong, what are you doing to
0:22:50 > 0:22:58ensure that new methodologies are adopted to overcome that. Otherwise,
0:22:58 > 0:23:03we are living with a fatal flaw in the data?As I mentioned earlier, we
0:23:03 > 0:23:12are preparing for the 2021 census. One of the core aspects is community
0:23:12 > 0:23:16engagement we will be undertaking, we are already in large-scale
0:23:16 > 0:23:21stakeholder engagement on what are the needs for a user ethnicity data
0:23:21 > 0:23:27and what is the suitability for inclusion in the census. Our
0:23:27 > 0:23:34ambition in ONS, too often we have set up community engagement which
0:23:34 > 0:23:40sets up groups to have trust and fill it in for the census, but then
0:23:40 > 0:23:46the infrastructure tends to fade into the background after the census
0:23:46 > 0:23:53has happened. We need to design it so that we do not set up a community
0:23:53 > 0:23:54engagement programme for giving statistical information that
0:23:54 > 0:24:00disappears again on an ongoing basis. We need to build the trust,
0:24:00 > 0:24:03provide the information which allows accurate data to be done. We're
0:24:03 > 0:24:10building to that the moment and are determined to sustain.It feels you
0:24:10 > 0:24:17might have a census to me that he might have a mini- census. -- you
0:24:17 > 0:24:17might
0:24:22 > 0:24:26We have a programme of research at the moment called the administrative
0:24:26 > 0:24:32data census and that is looking at the information which is held across
0:24:32 > 0:24:39Government at the moment and, could we use that to provide updates on
0:24:39 > 0:24:44the population on an ongoing basis in between census years? Yes, your
0:24:44 > 0:24:52assertion is we could be looking at not many censuses in that sense but
0:24:52 > 0:24:58even many senses of the population using data which exists already.
0:24:58 > 0:25:02Just moving back to the race disparity audit, but it was
0:25:02 > 0:25:07important to know what datasets might be available. Much of the
0:25:07 > 0:25:10evidence we've received his calls for far more granularity in the data
0:25:10 > 0:25:17that is included in the audit. And the ability to control for variables
0:25:17 > 0:25:22so that it can be determined whether race in the factor in causing a
0:25:22 > 0:25:28particular disparity. Do you think the audit provides enough detail for
0:25:28 > 0:25:36this sort of robust analysis of the causes of disparities?The audit
0:25:36 > 0:25:41certainly, there are some examples within it where it gave more
0:25:41 > 0:25:44information than just the ethnicity breakdown. The one example which
0:25:44 > 0:25:49immediately springs to mind is the education where it also provided
0:25:49 > 0:25:53education on free school meals as an education of income levels to try
0:25:53 > 0:26:01and get into deprivation. I think where it summed it up was available
0:26:01 > 0:26:07provided the information, but fundamentally, I am turning to the
0:26:07 > 0:26:12work of Emma's team. The importance of the work is really the ability to
0:26:12 > 0:26:18look at all the characteristics and are not just race on this side. I
0:26:18 > 0:26:22think it's our view that we need to do a bigger job building on the work
0:26:22 > 0:26:29we've just added with the audit we mentioned earlier into much more of
0:26:29 > 0:26:36round all the inequalities.Just to emphasise that we see the race
0:26:36 > 0:26:41disparity audit as it currently stands as the beginning. It is
0:26:41 > 0:26:45providing common evidence base from which we can build a variety of
0:26:45 > 0:26:50different conversations. Whilst it doesn't necessarily all, is a
0:26:50 > 0:26:55surprise to some of us who are familiar with the contents, there
0:26:55 > 0:26:59are a number of third parties that want to have had access to the
0:26:59 > 0:27:07breadth of the content of the current audit. It begins the right
0:27:07 > 0:27:13sort of conversation and were ONS can add value is starting to
0:27:13 > 0:27:17introduce other variables, other factors and start to broaden out the
0:27:17 > 0:27:22intersection hours we were the data that is available to us.But our
0:27:22 > 0:27:27statistical professionals, are you not worried when, as we've had
0:27:27 > 0:27:31evidence given to us which shows how much this data could be
0:27:31 > 0:27:37misinterpreted? I'm sure not wilfully, but just by default. For
0:27:37 > 0:27:41instance, the audit shows that black women are almost twice as likely to
0:27:41 > 0:27:47have a common mental health problem as white women. But you could also
0:27:47 > 0:27:54be looking in that same dataset that information like housing tenure and
0:27:54 > 0:28:00other elements which could provide much more information than that
0:28:00 > 0:28:04simple fact around mental health to try and explain why that problem is
0:28:04 > 0:28:11happening. Clearly not necessarily driven, may not be driven by NHS
0:28:11 > 0:28:16issues or access to NHS issues, but maybe a disproportionate pub at
0:28:16 > 0:28:20ability that they are living in certain sort of housing or any other
0:28:20 > 0:28:27number of things. Yet that Laura low data isn't available.I think the
0:28:27 > 0:28:33audit was very clear, and the caveats were there quite clearly
0:28:33 > 0:28:39about how to use the data. But this is always going to be a tension
0:28:39 > 0:28:45within a statistical system, whereby if you wait for fully understanding
0:28:45 > 0:28:49and knowing all the causes of the system, then the data may not have
0:28:49 > 0:28:55seen the light of day for quite a long time. And actually, that then
0:28:55 > 0:28:59means that all the onus is on the people who have the data in order to
0:28:59 > 0:29:05fully analyse and do all the causalities. And actually, what the
0:29:05 > 0:29:09audit can usefully do is by putting the data together in one place and
0:29:09 > 0:29:14making it available, it can begin to get better question is asked to
0:29:14 > 0:29:18allow the evidence and analysis and further research to get into
0:29:18 > 0:29:25explaining the disparities. I view it as being a starting point for
0:29:25 > 0:29:29further research and analysis which enables us to achieve more by having
0:29:29 > 0:29:34out there and available to a wider group of researchers than if it was
0:29:34 > 0:29:37simply waited for until all of that analysis was completed by the data
0:29:37 > 0:29:44holders.You talk about this tension and I think you're absolutely right.
0:29:44 > 0:29:50There is a concern again, different amendment were coming from a
0:29:50 > 0:29:53different set of witnesses, that if you continue to segregate the data
0:29:53 > 0:29:58you could always show that there are other factors at work that could
0:29:58 > 0:30:04conceal with disparities. What I advise would you give to the
0:30:04 > 0:30:07departments who are currently analysing this data so that they get
0:30:07 > 0:30:17that tension right?The Government, the departments across Government,
0:30:17 > 0:30:20are part of the Government statistical service, and they are
0:30:20 > 0:30:25very used to this tension on a day-to-day basis and manage it for
0:30:25 > 0:30:29the datasets the release. They are constantly weighing it up, not just
0:30:29 > 0:30:33with the attention they have the but also the risk of disclosure as we
0:30:33 > 0:30:38get to smaller and smaller numbers as well. And so they will be
0:30:38 > 0:30:41factoring this in them. The best advice we would be giving us that we
0:30:41 > 0:30:48are here to help and advise in terms of we have a lot of experience and
0:30:48 > 0:30:51disclosure control as ONS and we are here to help and advice, but
0:30:51 > 0:30:56fundamentally it is about making sure that there is and Melanie put
0:30:56 > 0:31:03this very well, transparency is a necessary condition for open data in
0:31:03 > 0:31:06the transparency of the data alongside the all analysis and
0:31:06 > 0:31:09evidence they do have and the appropriate caveats in order to make
0:31:09 > 0:31:14sure that it is fully understood what you can't and can't conclude it
0:31:14 > 0:31:19is usually the best way to manage your way through that tension. But
0:31:19 > 0:31:23the transparency of the data is essential.That's really helpful,
0:31:23 > 0:31:28brilliant. Any other questions? Thank you so much for your time this
0:31:28 > 0:31:31morning, really helpful in the formulation of our report. Thank you
0:31:31 > 0:31:35for your time and I know it takes a lot of energy to come here and
0:31:35 > 0:31:39prepare for it so we are immensely grateful. We are now going to move
0:31:39 > 0:31:45on to our next session. So if I could ask eyewitnesses to leave and
0:31:45 > 0:31:50any members of the audience who wants to leave, please do. We are
0:31:50 > 0:31:57moving on to our next session and rigidly, seamlessly. If I could ask
0:31:57 > 0:32:01eyewitnesses to take their seats and also members of the audience who are
0:32:01 > 0:32:06joining us, I'd be grateful, and I'd like to welcome our minister, David
0:32:06 > 0:32:13Lidington, and also mark Bell, who is here from the Cabinet Office. And
0:32:13 > 0:32:18two people who have joined us in the audience as well. Minister, your
0:32:18 > 0:32:21predecessor was keen to engage with the committee about the next steps
0:32:21 > 0:32:25the Government should take now that the first stage of the race
0:32:25 > 0:32:28disparity audit has been complacent. We are grateful for that and we look
0:32:28 > 0:32:35forward to assessing the evidence we have heard and putting our
0:32:35 > 0:32:39conclusions and recommendations into the usual report. However, we do
0:32:39 > 0:32:45want to learn today more about the Government's on thinking, what
0:32:45 > 0:32:49you've learnt about the audit and what steps you plan to take to build
0:32:49 > 0:32:55on that and to respond importantly to its findings. I don't think I
0:32:55 > 0:32:59need to ask you to introduce yourselves, I think I've already
0:32:59 > 0:33:03done that, but I will move in rigidly on to our first set of
0:33:03 > 0:33:15questions, which are going to be asked by Jess.Your predecessor so
0:33:15 > 0:33:20describes it as explain or change. Does this mean that if the disparity
0:33:20 > 0:33:22can be explained that the Government doesn't think it needs to be
0:33:22 > 0:33:29changed?It depends what the explanation is. For example, one of
0:33:29 > 0:33:33the lines of constructive criticism that has been of some of the
0:33:33 > 0:33:38statistics that we have presented in the audit is that they've not been
0:33:38 > 0:33:46adjusted for age or for other characteristics, plus income level
0:33:46 > 0:33:54that might provide a better, more subtle explanation of the phenomenon
0:33:54 > 0:34:04that we are seeing. So I would say that the audit is unprecedented in
0:34:04 > 0:34:11just the sheer scope and scale of what is being presented and it is
0:34:11 > 0:34:20backed up by a determination from the Prime Minister personally Darren
0:34:20 > 0:34:24to address racial disparities. Obviously one looks at the evidence
0:34:24 > 0:34:28and, for example, at the evidence presented in the audit of
0:34:28 > 0:34:33educational attainment at school. Actually, you see different average
0:34:33 > 0:34:42levels of attainment by boys and girls within each ethnicity and you
0:34:42 > 0:34:45see some quite stark differences between the relative performance
0:34:45 > 0:34:50levels on an average of different ethnic minorities. So one needs to
0:34:50 > 0:34:56think, what is it that lies behind those inequalities? And then devise
0:34:56 > 0:35:01a policy response that addresses that.In that case, even if you
0:35:01 > 0:35:07could explain it, you would still stick to change it.The audit is the
0:35:07 > 0:35:12starting point. You then say, if there is this inequality in outcome,
0:35:12 > 0:35:19is there some reason for it? That may throw up a reason that goes
0:35:19 > 0:35:30beyond a simple, say people are judging those from one or another
0:35:30 > 0:35:33minority group and further, there may be other contributions, but then
0:35:33 > 0:35:38you want to ensure that there is genuine equality of opportunity in
0:35:38 > 0:35:41things like education and you want to ensure that all public services
0:35:41 > 0:35:48are operating anyway that is fair to all citizens of this country.It
0:35:48 > 0:35:52seems to me that you want to change it regardless, which is not a bad
0:35:52 > 0:36:00thing. It sounds like change or change.I think a challenge, I would
0:36:00 > 0:36:08say, is the keyword there.So, how is the Government going about
0:36:08 > 0:36:14explaining the disparities in the audit?We are now in the process of
0:36:14 > 0:36:24getting the Whitehall machinery into action about this. There have been a
0:36:24 > 0:36:28number of early priorities, one which, given my previous job, I knew
0:36:28 > 0:36:33something about, the Government's response to the report on the
0:36:33 > 0:36:36experience of black and ethnic minority people in the criminal
0:36:36 > 0:36:42justice system. When Justice Secretary, I announced the
0:36:42 > 0:36:46Government's response to that at the end of the last year, setting
0:36:46 > 0:36:49demanding targets for the prison service in terms of recruitment and
0:36:49 > 0:36:55development into leadership positions in the prison service. We
0:36:55 > 0:37:02are also...You're prioritising certain areas.Yes, and one of the
0:37:02 > 0:37:09things I intend to do, having inherited this position, is use the
0:37:09 > 0:37:15grip on racial disparity which is supported by the unit in the Cabinet
0:37:15 > 0:37:23Office that Marcus herds to ensure that each secretary of state, each
0:37:23 > 0:37:29department are addressing those things that fall within the areas of
0:37:29 > 0:37:36responsibility. They will need to be a system prioritisation here,
0:37:36 > 0:37:40otherwise we will find effort and resources spread too thinly to have
0:37:40 > 0:37:46a proper understanding.What if any deadline have each Government
0:37:46 > 0:37:53department been given for explaining the areas of disparity?We are not
0:37:53 > 0:37:59at that stage yet. What I want to do is make sure that when we are 12
0:37:59 > 0:38:02months on from the initial publication of the orders we are
0:38:02 > 0:38:07able to say that there has been some demonstrable progress made across
0:38:07 > 0:38:12Government. The earliest priorities have been the response to the
0:38:12 > 0:38:21criminal Justice report, some work that we are undertaking and
0:38:21 > 0:38:26employment where we are targeting efforts in about 20 areas of the
0:38:26 > 0:38:42country which have both a high rates of unemployment, high BAME
0:38:42 > 0:38:44unemployment and white citizens gap in unemployment and guess at what
0:38:44 > 0:38:49lies behind those differences in outcome and then we will be
0:38:49 > 0:38:56announcing fairly certain and externally led review of school
0:38:56 > 0:38:59exclusions. Because again, you look at the stats that are in the audit
0:38:59 > 0:39:07and you see that there are more black is being excluded from school
0:39:07 > 0:39:09both temporarily and then permanently and need to understand
0:39:09 > 0:39:13what it says that is driving that and what can be done about it.
0:39:18 > 0:39:21You have to have 30s because the Cabinet office is only as big as it
0:39:21 > 0:39:28is. -- priorities. It will be helpful to explain the findings of
0:39:28 > 0:39:34the audit...It will the
0:39:37 > 0:39:42it will be the Secretary of State, Cabinet officers, the Prime Minister
0:39:42 > 0:39:47has made it clear she regards it as a key aspect of the social policy
0:39:47 > 0:39:53programme. But it will have to be done within the Budget allocated.
0:39:53 > 0:40:04The Secretary of State makes its for spending...What will happen if
0:40:04 > 0:40:12nothing is done?There will be meetings of the ministerial group.
0:40:12 > 0:40:19The unit, markets may want to add to this, is talking to colleagues
0:40:19 > 0:40:25around Whitehall the whole time about what they are doing. One of
0:40:25 > 0:40:31the things I have since being appointed is where things now stand.
0:40:31 > 0:40:46I have asked. And making sure they have a follow-up...All the data on
0:40:46 > 0:40:53the website comes from departments, it is not our data they sensed a us.
0:40:53 > 0:41:00They have analysts more than capable of conducting a thorough regression
0:41:00 > 0:41:06analysis. They are doing that. They have been asked by us to do a
0:41:06 > 0:41:09regression analysis on all the measures on site and we are
0:41:09 > 0:41:16coordinating how they are doing that.Trying to explain, you have
0:41:16 > 0:41:24analysts in every department that is relevant. And so it is specifically
0:41:24 > 0:41:33on data analysis?That aspect is. We are actively involved it on the
0:41:33 > 0:41:42policy side.You will be seeking from fieldwork, talking to people?
0:41:42 > 0:41:49That is for departments to decide how they do that. We have asked them
0:41:49 > 0:41:56to do a proper regression analysis on data on the site.Before I bring
0:41:56 > 0:42:01in Eddie, can I ask for more detailed? From what has said,
0:42:01 > 0:42:04education and the criminal justice Section could be top priorities in
0:42:04 > 0:42:11what you are doing. They could be cleared data on racial disparities,
0:42:11 > 0:42:17exclusion particularly. The evidence we have been given would suggest
0:42:17 > 0:42:21that in other areas there will be co-dependencies which are driving
0:42:21 > 0:42:28disparity. We were given the example that black women are twice as likely
0:42:28 > 0:42:33to have mental health problems than white women. More likely to be
0:42:33 > 0:42:38living in social housing. It's maybe that housing tenure is the problem
0:42:38 > 0:42:44rather than race. How will you bring that thinking together because
0:42:44 > 0:42:48health and housing sit in different Government departments? And do you
0:42:48 > 0:42:55think there is room for a strategies year so that those who are
0:42:55 > 0:42:59interested -- strategy here so those interested will know what priorities
0:42:59 > 0:43:12you have decided our most important. We have heard from O N as and HRC
0:43:12 > 0:43:24that's transparency is essential for good strategy... The data and is
0:43:24 > 0:43:31that the data currently on the site is that there are 130-140 measures.
0:43:31 > 0:43:36We didn't have time to make linkages between the different data sets.
0:43:36 > 0:43:39That is something we could prioritise in the second phase. It
0:43:39 > 0:43:43would be interesting to know more about the connections between
0:43:43 > 0:43:48education, mental health, housing and employment data. We are
0:43:48 > 0:43:52discussing that other departments. On the policy side, as you say, some
0:43:52 > 0:43:57of the issues raised are classic crosscutting Government policies,
0:43:57 > 0:44:02whether there are serious dependencies. We will be discussing
0:44:02 > 0:44:12that between the connections between education and deployment.We have no
0:44:12 > 0:44:20plans at the moment to have a formal cross- Government strategy. But
0:44:20 > 0:44:27rather to expect departments to take account of the Prime Minister's
0:44:27 > 0:44:37priority here to work within their area of responsible to. Sometimes
0:44:37 > 0:44:43taking initiatives on the back of the audit. Sometimes using audit
0:44:43 > 0:44:45findings to influence the development of work they were doing
0:44:45 > 0:44:52anyway to provide for more effective policies. To take your mental health
0:44:52 > 0:44:55example, the Secretary of State for Health and social care is of course
0:44:55 > 0:44:58already preparing a mental health strategy that will be published
0:44:58 > 0:45:04later this year. He and his team will be looking to the results of
0:45:04 > 0:45:10the audit and building that in similarly, the Westway review was
0:45:10 > 0:45:16established towards the end of last year into detention under the Mental
0:45:16 > 0:45:22Health Act. It is a matter of record that black people in particular are
0:45:22 > 0:45:28more likely statistically to the subject to detention than white
0:45:28 > 0:45:35people under the Mental Health Act. He will no doubt want to take that
0:45:35 > 0:45:43into account in his work.You are making choices with the wages use
0:45:43 > 0:45:50scarce resources. How can this committee scrutinise your choices.
0:45:50 > 0:45:55-- with the way you use scarce resources.Ultimately, in policy
0:45:55 > 0:45:59terms, the choices are for secretaries of state. In their
0:45:59 > 0:46:11departments. What we seek to do through the ministerial group is to
0:46:11 > 0:46:21both remind... To remind the Secretary of State of state --
0:46:21 > 0:46:25secretaries of state that the Prime Minister attaches a high priority to
0:46:25 > 0:46:31this and they are continuing to work on this. Certainly, it would be
0:46:31 > 0:46:37helpful to the committee, we could look for ways to perhaps provide a
0:46:37 > 0:46:41report to the committee from time to time on progress so that the
0:46:41 > 0:46:46committee has a view of what is happening across Whitehall. I see no
0:46:46 > 0:46:52problem about that as a matter of principle. As I say, sometimes the
0:46:52 > 0:46:55work to address the disparities found in the audit will take place
0:46:55 > 0:47:01within the context of a broader policy works June that that
0:47:01 > 0:47:06particular Secretary of State is taking on.I am sure the committee
0:47:06 > 0:47:09would always relished any information the Government could
0:47:09 > 0:47:16furnish them with.I am surprised. You have had the data from the audit
0:47:16 > 0:47:21for a very long time. Most of the findings are not a secret. There is
0:47:21 > 0:47:24no doubt there is a link between people who do not receive a lot of
0:47:24 > 0:47:31money in terms of employment and the gap in pay for ethnic minority.
0:47:31 > 0:47:36There is no chance of home ownership for those who rent. It sounds
0:47:36 > 0:47:40piecemeal, the approach. Unless you have crosscutting Government
0:47:40 > 0:47:45strategy, you cannot solve this. I am sure you are aware of that. Is
0:47:45 > 0:47:49there no chance of having perhaps a minister for a race who can
0:47:49 > 0:47:54coordinate everything that is happening across departments? If it
0:47:54 > 0:47:59is really a priority for the Prime Minister and she is attaching
0:47:59 > 0:48:02welcome importance, it doesn't sound like you have an overall strategy.
0:48:02 > 0:48:06Correct me if I am wrong but it sounds like each department is doing
0:48:06 > 0:48:11its own thing and that won't solve the problem.It is important that
0:48:11 > 0:48:18each department feels like they have responsibility here. I can
0:48:18 > 0:48:23understand the argument. The risk with designating a minister for race
0:48:23 > 0:48:34equality, let's say, is that departments then say it is that
0:48:34 > 0:48:40minister's job rather than my job as a minister for schools, courts, the
0:48:40 > 0:48:47prison service. The police. To address these problems in my
0:48:47 > 0:48:49particular areas of responsibility and dealing with the public services
0:48:49 > 0:48:56for which in my ministerial capacity I am responsible. The fact that the
0:48:56 > 0:49:01unit is located in the Cabinet office gives us a locus and
0:49:01 > 0:49:06coordinating role to make sure departments are being kept up to the
0:49:06 > 0:49:14mark. I do not think that it would be right to portray the Government's
0:49:14 > 0:49:18response is in the recent sluggish. We are determined to make certain of
0:49:18 > 0:49:24the initiatives we take actually identifying and apply policy
0:49:24 > 0:49:29solutions that are going to work. Taking your point about employment
0:49:29 > 0:49:35and what we are doing their is to establish 20 pilot projects as I
0:49:35 > 0:49:41describe in areas of the country where we have a high BAME population
0:49:41 > 0:49:46and a large gap between ethnic minority and white employment rates.
0:49:46 > 0:49:52What we are doing is have Jobcentre plus working with employers, the
0:49:52 > 0:50:02voluntary sector, to understand and take action to remedy those gaps.
0:50:02 > 0:50:06Partly improving the training from the Jobcentre staff dealing with
0:50:06 > 0:50:11people from minority groups seeking work. It also means talking to local
0:50:11 > 0:50:21employers about things like perhaps having a normalised job applications
0:50:21 > 0:50:25addressing possible questions of unconscious bias. It also means
0:50:25 > 0:50:29talking to training providers locally and education providers
0:50:29 > 0:50:35because in some cases, I don't want to speculate, but it may be we find
0:50:35 > 0:50:44for some reason young people from particular groups are not getting
0:50:44 > 0:50:49access or gaining the qualifications for which employers in that area are
0:50:49 > 0:50:53looking. We need to get to grips with the reason at a concrete level
0:50:53 > 0:50:59and then put in place...I don't think any of this data comes as a
0:50:59 > 0:51:04surprise. It has been around for years, people from ethnic minority
0:51:04 > 0:51:07communities not getting the right kind of pay or jobs they want. To
0:51:07 > 0:51:13deny the links with housing I think is astonishing. To say that someone
0:51:13 > 0:51:16doesn't get paid enough money therefore they cannot get on the
0:51:16 > 0:51:21housing ladder, cannot rent, not to address the problems in the rental
0:51:21 > 0:51:26market, housing, I do not think you can do with these departments
0:51:26 > 0:51:32individually. You must realise there has to be a overall strategy. I do
0:51:32 > 0:51:37not think establishing a minister of race would be dodging
0:51:37 > 0:51:46responsibility, I think it would be establishing...I have not ever said
0:51:46 > 0:51:51that we will ignore the housing question, or ignore possible
0:51:51 > 0:51:59relationships there. I think that when it comes to employment, there
0:51:59 > 0:52:05have been some good signs of progress. We know one of the groups
0:52:05 > 0:52:10of people who are still least likely to be in work are women from
0:52:10 > 0:52:14Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities in this country. It is
0:52:14 > 0:52:18way below the national average for female employment. It is still in
0:52:18 > 0:52:24the last ten years we have seen a significant increase in the number
0:52:24 > 0:52:27of women from these communities getting into employment. There are
0:52:27 > 0:52:32success stories about the country we can learn from and build on as well.
0:52:32 > 0:52:37Are you satisfied with the level of increase in the number of ethnic
0:52:37 > 0:52:44minority women in 2018 that have got jobs?No. The fact it is way below
0:52:44 > 0:52:49average we cannot be satisfied.We will need to move on for time.
0:52:49 > 0:52:56Eddie?When disparities cannot be explained, what deadlines have been
0:52:56 > 0:53:03set for departments to come up with a plan?We are still at relatively
0:53:03 > 0:53:10early stages here, you will appreciate I have been in the post
0:53:10 > 0:53:16coming up to one month. In terms of the work already done at official
0:53:16 > 0:53:24level, I am not talking about sex deadlines...As you said earlier,
0:53:24 > 0:53:27the general aim is to be able to demonstrate very significant
0:53:27 > 0:53:35progress in tackling some of the key -- I am not talking about set
0:53:35 > 0:53:36deadlines.
0:53:42 > 0:53:45What streams have been started in response to the Government's
0:53:45 > 0:53:58findings?The Government response to the present enquiry was important.
0:53:58 > 0:54:02The exclusion response where we will have an external lead and a panel
0:54:02 > 0:54:07will be set up externally to have a member gratifies on that. Then we
0:54:07 > 0:54:12have a number of work streams that are going on within Government about
0:54:12 > 0:54:19this. I mentioned the work that was going on in terms of the review in
0:54:19 > 0:54:23mental health, but when we go back to education, the previous Secretary
0:54:23 > 0:54:29of State for Education last autumn, shortly before Christmas, launched a
0:54:29 > 0:54:37social mobility plan for the Department and findings of the audit
0:54:37 > 0:54:40are being built into the ongoing work of the department and social
0:54:40 > 0:54:48mobility. So that's how the address the broader issue of social
0:54:48 > 0:54:51mobility, they are taking account of the particular challenges thrown up
0:54:51 > 0:54:57by the racial disparity audit. Not to the exclusion of everyone else,
0:54:57 > 0:55:00because it is a real challenge in terms of kids from polar White
0:55:00 > 0:55:04families in terms of underperformance and schools as
0:55:04 > 0:55:14well.What criteria are you using to determine how you focus your
0:55:14 > 0:55:21efforts?We are looking at the findings of the audit. We are saying
0:55:21 > 0:55:25to departments, where there is an equality of outcome, the Prime
0:55:25 > 0:55:30Minister will set this challenge that you change or explain. We
0:55:30 > 0:55:38accept that sometimes there will be a crosscutting issue, other times it
0:55:38 > 0:55:45may be that you are having to address quite a deep-seated issues
0:55:45 > 0:55:51about a relationship between people in a particular community. The
0:55:51 > 0:55:58operation of a public service and the expectations that one has of the
0:55:58 > 0:56:02other, and then to come forward and come up with your solutions. But
0:56:02 > 0:56:09it's going to be work that is not going to be accomplished in six, not
0:56:09 > 0:56:14even 12 months. This is going to be a programme of work that will need
0:56:14 > 0:56:19to be followed through for a period of years and I think under more than
0:56:19 > 0:56:26one Parliament. If we are going to get genuine equality of opportunity
0:56:26 > 0:56:31that we want to see.But it feels that the problem could be so broad
0:56:31 > 0:56:36it very difficult to focus down on specific areas and prioritise.
0:56:36 > 0:56:44Secondly, to what Tulip said, this information has been around a long
0:56:44 > 0:56:49time. I appreciate your volley been in post for a month, but in terms of
0:56:49 > 0:56:54deadlines, to be able to sit here in 12 months and say, we know it is
0:56:54 > 0:57:02very broad, but what has actually changed?What I have said two
0:57:02 > 0:57:07officials is that I want us to be any position, I think there will be
0:57:07 > 0:57:12an expectation in parliament and were generally, 12 months on from
0:57:12 > 0:57:17publication of the audit in October this year to be able to say in
0:57:17 > 0:57:20public, this is the measurable progress that has been made. While I
0:57:20 > 0:57:32met some of the leading NGOs is in this field a couple of weeks ago,
0:57:32 > 0:57:44they felt that the timescale was a reasonable one.Organisations like
0:57:44 > 0:57:47have welcomed the order, but when I have been speaking to them, there
0:57:47 > 0:57:53are questions or what difference with this initiative may compare two
0:57:53 > 0:57:59different ones that have taken place in the blast, so do you have a plan
0:57:59 > 0:58:03for serious action in targeted areas? Do you have plans for
0:58:03 > 0:58:07measurable targets and are you going to focus on procurement about
0:58:07 > 0:58:17tackling racial disparities when it comes to employment?First of all on
0:58:17 > 0:58:21the organisations, I have found that when I have taught them they are
0:58:21 > 0:58:25very welcoming of this. What I have said to them in response to the
0:58:25 > 0:58:31challenge that they have understandably made is that this is
0:58:31 > 0:58:35the difference, that this is going to be a sustained period of work.
0:58:35 > 0:58:39It's not going to be something that we published in order to get a
0:58:39 > 0:58:47headline in October 2017 and are then going to forget about. That
0:58:47 > 0:58:52does mean we are not going to be looking for glib headlines and
0:58:52 > 0:58:59something we can claim as an instant result, it has to be steady work,
0:58:59 > 0:59:02target by target, priority by priority, to deliver the right
0:59:02 > 0:59:11outcomes over time. Certainly what they said to me is that it is the
0:59:11 > 0:59:16feeling of the people they represent is that it is a flash in the pan. --
0:59:16 > 0:59:26the fear of the people. We have to demonstrate sustained effort.
0:59:26 > 0:59:32Budgets? I said earlier that every Government department operates
0:59:32 > 0:59:37within the budget that they were allocated in the spending review.
0:59:37 > 0:59:42Clearly the work that apartments want to do in the next spending
0:59:42 > 0:59:46period is something that secretaries of state bid for in the normal way.
0:59:46 > 0:59:51There is a limited budget available in the Cabinet Office to try to
0:59:51 > 1:00:00support crosscutting work. But we look to departments because this is
1:00:00 > 1:00:06about achieving the Prime Minister's stated social policy objectives, to
1:00:06 > 1:00:14find within the existing resources, to deliver results.An additional
1:00:14 > 1:00:18point about scrutiny and follow-up. I think there is one important point
1:00:18 > 1:00:23about the product from the report being a living website. There is
1:00:23 > 1:00:27already some series on this, but as the data changes we will add it, so
1:00:27 > 1:00:31you will be able to see month by month, year by year, whether things
1:00:31 > 1:00:39are getting better or worse. I think that provides transparency but also
1:00:39 > 1:00:44some accountability and also pressure for change.It's not one
1:00:44 > 1:00:49set of stats and that's it.Month by month, once you want to implement
1:00:49 > 1:00:53the findings of the orders, how will you be measuring the success of the
1:00:53 > 1:00:58initiatives you are planning to implement?That's a slightly
1:00:58 > 1:01:02different issue. We will update data on the website for all of the
1:01:02 > 1:01:05measures as it changes and quite a lot has changed since launch in
1:01:05 > 1:01:12October, so there have already been a lot of updates. I think it is a
1:01:12 > 1:01:18separate question as and when Department said at the initiatives
1:01:18 > 1:01:23to tackle inequalities.The unifying the crosscutting strategy was help
1:01:23 > 1:01:26you to measure the success of the sale of more than having individual
1:01:26 > 1:01:33departments are their own thing? Actually, I think the gap between
1:01:33 > 1:01:40what Tulip is calling for, a cross Government discussed J and what I am
1:01:40 > 1:01:47describing, which is departments building this work into their
1:01:47 > 1:01:53mainstream business and building it in as part of the key priorities,
1:01:53 > 1:02:02with a coordinating mechanism of voters by Marcus's unit and by the
1:02:02 > 1:02:09interministerial group I chair, I think that gap is perhaps less than
1:02:09 > 1:02:18you fear.Have previous Government is not tried that one feels? -- and
1:02:18 > 1:02:26a failed.And don't want to pass judgment on previous governments. It
1:02:26 > 1:02:29is fair to say this is something successive governments have talked
1:02:29 > 1:02:35about and we still see some of these inequalities of outcome.Which means
1:02:35 > 1:02:39the previous Government strategies have not worked.I don't think there
1:02:39 > 1:02:42is a magic to putting the label of cross Government strategy on
1:02:42 > 1:02:47something. I have seen plenty of those, and go in my time in
1:02:47 > 1:02:54Parliament. What I believe can make the difference here is the personal
1:02:54 > 1:03:01commitment of the Prime Minister and I do think also the reaction of
1:03:01 > 1:03:05people in a lot of departments at operational levels, and this is the
1:03:05 > 1:03:09advice I get for the Cabinet Office team, has been very positive that
1:03:09 > 1:03:14this is something that key officials in Government positions really want
1:03:14 > 1:03:20to make a difference over.I seem to remember a previous prime ministers
1:03:20 > 1:03:26being committed to that exercise it, don't know where that one went! Is
1:03:26 > 1:03:35the reason the audit didn't refer to the public sector audit committee?
1:03:35 > 1:03:40Simply a slightly different thing. The publics sceptre equality duty
1:03:40 > 1:03:47requires public authorities to have due regard to eliminate unlawful
1:03:47 > 1:03:50discrimination, harassment, victimisation and other things that
1:03:50 > 1:03:55are outlawed by the act and to advance equality of opportunity and
1:03:55 > 1:04:04foster good relations. Those duties apply. What we are looking at here
1:04:04 > 1:04:10is we are focusing on the outcomes. What is the experience of people
1:04:10 > 1:04:15from BAME communities? How can we make sure that public services
1:04:15 > 1:04:20genuinely are providing equal treatment and equality of
1:04:20 > 1:04:27opportunity for them? Those services are already under public sector
1:04:27 > 1:04:35equality duty. In my experience, management and leaders in the public
1:04:35 > 1:04:39services are very well aware of their responsibilities in that
1:04:39 > 1:04:47regard. But what we are needing to do now is really probed why, despite
1:04:47 > 1:04:52the existence of that duty for some years now, there are still the
1:04:52 > 1:04:57disparities that were shown last October.Just before I bring Angela
1:04:57 > 1:05:02in, I want to pick up on one particular issue. You talk about
1:05:02 > 1:05:05departments building racial disparity in their work, which I
1:05:05 > 1:05:10think is welcome, when I think back to the ministerial working group on
1:05:10 > 1:05:16Gypsy Roma Travellers, a student under the coalition Government in
1:05:16 > 1:05:192012, its promise, and we've all this even looking at that piece of
1:05:19 > 1:05:24work, that issues to do with Gypsy Roma Travellers will be included in
1:05:24 > 1:05:28reviews and reports in the future from 2012 onwards and when the
1:05:28 > 1:05:34reports were actually published, and I'm thinking about things like hate
1:05:34 > 1:05:41crime review or exclusion review in 2014 or bullying guidance, these
1:05:41 > 1:05:47communities did not feature as had been promised. How can we make sure
1:05:47 > 1:05:51that the new reviews do exactly what you as the minister wants them to do
1:05:51 > 1:05:56and take the race disparity audit information into account and the
1:05:56 > 1:06:00work of the race disparity units? It seems like there has been good
1:06:00 > 1:06:05intentions in the past under a Conservative led Government but we
1:06:05 > 1:06:10want to make sure that this is going to be continued in the future in a
1:06:10 > 1:06:16way which can be monitored and can be held to account. It is partly
1:06:16 > 1:06:25held to account by the various statistical series. The website is a
1:06:25 > 1:06:28living source of information. Part way through the interministerial
1:06:28 > 1:06:36group where the relevant departments will be represented. What the
1:06:36 > 1:06:41trouble of stats showed was that Gypsy and Roma children come bottom
1:06:41 > 1:06:50of all the tables in terms of school attainment. We were quite closely
1:06:50 > 1:06:54with organisations representing the community on the orders and we are
1:06:54 > 1:06:58keen to include four days we could about Gypsy and Roma Traveller
1:06:58 > 1:07:06people. There are a couple of reasons that are worth spelling out.
1:07:06 > 1:07:13Some departments do not collect it, they do not ask, are you a Gypsy,
1:07:13 > 1:07:16Roma Traveller? Obviously we can only publish the data that
1:07:16 > 1:07:22apartments have. Even where it is collected, the numbers are small and
1:07:22 > 1:07:25the distribution is relatively even across the country, so if you get
1:07:25 > 1:07:29below a very general level of analysis, you are talking about very
1:07:29 > 1:07:33small numbers and there is little to say. That doesn't mean that there is
1:07:33 > 1:07:39nothing to be done going forward, but although we were quite keen to
1:07:39 > 1:07:42include what data we could, for those reasons there is not much on
1:07:42 > 1:07:47the site, with the exception of education, whether as a lot of
1:07:47 > 1:07:51detailed information about GRT children.How will you be
1:07:51 > 1:07:56supplementing the data in the race disparity audit to address GRT
1:07:56 > 1:08:02better in the future?We are talking to departments about what data they
1:08:02 > 1:08:07collect and about which categories the use with the view to try and get
1:08:07 > 1:08:13a bit more consistency in their approach. I think Gypsy Roma
1:08:13 > 1:08:17Traveller is one of the standard issue as there because one
1:08:17 > 1:08:21department has an awful lot of rather disquieting information about
1:08:21 > 1:08:24GRT children and how they are doing and others know relatively little.
1:08:29 > 1:08:36October was a start. We're listening, talking to departments
1:08:36 > 1:08:41and listening outside what is being said about the additional categories
1:08:41 > 1:08:47of information that they would like to see collected and published on
1:08:47 > 1:08:52the website. If the committee has suggestions for that, I am sure we
1:08:52 > 1:09:00would want to take those into account.Tony to the Government's
1:09:00 > 1:09:03engagements with civil society, how do you expect the role of Government
1:09:03 > 1:09:11to engage to ensure disparities revealed with the audit can be
1:09:11 > 1:09:20addressed?I made a point in the last couple of weeks of meeting a
1:09:20 > 1:09:28number of the leaders of some of the key organisations in this field.
1:09:28 > 1:09:42Official level, this is done very regularly. How often?We try to make
1:09:42 > 1:09:48a point of that in terms of how we do the work engaging with lots of
1:09:48 > 1:09:54voluntary organisations and members of the public.How do you expect to
1:09:54 > 1:10:03support civil society to deliver on these outcomes you are discussing?
1:10:03 > 1:10:15It is Government, summarily central Government, that is the priority. --
1:10:15 > 1:10:18summarily central Government. The purpose of the audit is to provide
1:10:18 > 1:10:26the statistical basis on which to shape policy for the delivery of
1:10:26 > 1:10:32public services. We are getting some local authorities, some NHS trusts
1:10:32 > 1:10:37who having seen the audit results are coming to us and saying, we
1:10:37 > 1:10:43would like to learn from this. What can we do? In our areas of
1:10:43 > 1:10:52responsibilities? Civil society IC as important partners, but the
1:10:52 > 1:11:00actual... It may well be as for example in the pilot projects
1:11:00 > 1:11:05unemployment that we conclude that working more effectively with civil
1:11:05 > 1:11:12society on the delivery of public services, for example on the
1:11:12 > 1:11:15mentoring of people, is the best way to address the disparities the audit
1:11:15 > 1:11:22has revealed.Coming back to your previous point about the role of the
1:11:22 > 1:11:26Cabinet office, you mentioned how you see the role of the Cabinet
1:11:26 > 1:11:30office as coordination and almost oversight. How will the Government
1:11:30 > 1:11:35departments be held to account for their response work on the audit.
1:11:35 > 1:11:41You will be responsible for assessing?It will be through the
1:11:41 > 1:11:46ministerial group. Which will be served by the racial disparity unit.
1:11:46 > 1:11:53The unit will report to ministers, to me, ultimately the power minister
1:11:53 > 1:12:01on the progress that has been made, or where we are finding problems.
1:12:01 > 1:12:06Moving on to the last couple of questions. What do you think the
1:12:06 > 1:12:09Cabinet office has learned about the quality of the data on ethnicity
1:12:09 > 1:12:18that is currently collected across the public sector? Are you really
1:12:18 > 1:12:26happy, or really unhappy, or somewhere in between?I will soon
1:12:26 > 1:12:31for expertise. -- turn for expertise. I am not a statistician.
1:12:31 > 1:12:37It has been very very. Different departments have obviously over the
1:12:37 > 1:12:43years collected sets of information that they judged was the most
1:12:43 > 1:12:50important for their departmental priorities. Sometimes that provides,
1:12:50 > 1:12:55as in the case of education attainment, some quite comprehensive
1:12:55 > 1:13:00statistics about outcomes for different ethnic groups. Other
1:13:00 > 1:13:04departments have not previously seen this as central to the role and have
1:13:04 > 1:13:12not collected these statistics or the statistics are not easily
1:13:12 > 1:13:21divisible so that you can come up with meaningful samples by age or
1:13:21 > 1:13:29other social characteristics.That is exactly right. If you look
1:13:29 > 1:13:35through the site, there is enormous variation in the quality and depth
1:13:35 > 1:13:40of ethnicity data held by Government departments. Particularly
1:13:40 > 1:13:49departments where there has been scrutiny pressure over the years,
1:13:49 > 1:13:53there can be more details, granular and useful data, and others have not
1:13:53 > 1:13:59had so much.Is there other data you have rejected and not put on the
1:13:59 > 1:14:08website because it would be misleading?We identified 340
1:14:08 > 1:14:13datasets and only published 20% of those so far. Potentially, more to
1:14:13 > 1:14:18come, but some we did not include for quality reasons. It doesn't
1:14:18 > 1:14:22necessarily mean it was bad data, though in some cases it was, it is
1:14:22 > 1:14:27more it did not satisfy the quality bar we wanted to apply to the
1:14:27 > 1:14:32numbers.When we were talking earlier this morning to the Office
1:14:32 > 1:14:40of National Statistics about data, consistency was something we raised.
1:14:40 > 1:14:45We are interested to know your plans to improve the consistency of data
1:14:45 > 1:14:48collected and also the ability that you will have two disaggregate that
1:14:48 > 1:14:58data. Can you explain?We are working with the Office of National
1:14:58 > 1:15:05Statistics, we have a great interest in ethnic classification
1:15:05 > 1:15:12consistency. We are looking through my working the statisticians across
1:15:12 > 1:15:15Government -- working with statisticians across Government. You
1:15:15 > 1:15:24cannot re-boot all departments. Slow, incremental work to get more
1:15:24 > 1:15:30consistency there is important. In terms of data quality, obviously
1:15:30 > 1:15:36this was a big cross-Government data project in the way it networked into
1:15:36 > 1:15:41analysts, departments, and had high quality conversations on how to
1:15:41 > 1:15:45improve the quality of the data where it is not where it should be.
1:15:45 > 1:15:54We try to apply the UK statistics Association code in terms of judging
1:15:54 > 1:16:02the quality of things we could publish on the website.You see
1:16:02 > 1:16:09consistency and disaggregation as a priority for the way this data set
1:16:09 > 1:16:16developed?I think so, yes. With disaggregation, getting more
1:16:16 > 1:16:21geographical disaggregation where we can lose important. The feedback we
1:16:21 > 1:16:26have had about this site is some of the more usable and interesting data
1:16:26 > 1:16:30is where outcomes for people of different ethnicities are compared
1:16:30 > 1:16:33in different geographical areas. That is something we are keen to do
1:16:33 > 1:16:40more on.My final point would be, we heard about the work OMS is doing
1:16:40 > 1:16:48around the senses. -- the census. And perhaps how that could be used
1:16:48 > 1:16:57more between multiple census. Is that something the Government will
1:16:57 > 1:17:07support?There is a clear structure with the census whereby ONS decides
1:17:07 > 1:17:11what questions are going to be asked. Obviously there are a number
1:17:11 > 1:17:25of demands for different categories to be specified in questions on the
1:17:25 > 1:17:31census. That will be for them to make a judgment in due course, the
1:17:31 > 1:17:35Office of National Statistics.Thank you for your time. I appreciate you
1:17:35 > 1:17:40taking the time out of your busy diaries to be with us and Dolby
1:17:40 > 1:17:46preparation that goes with that. The committee will now have a private
1:17:46 > 1:17:48session.