1. Submitting evidence to the Women & Equalities Committee
Judith Boyce, Clerk

2. A quick canter through WEC and our work…
Role is to scrutinise the policy, administration and expenditure of the Government Equalities Office
Past inquiries:
Transgender equality
Gender pay gap
Employment opportunities for Muslims
Pregnancy and maternity discrimination
Equality analysis and Spending Review / Autumn Statement
Sustainable Development Goal 5 in the UK
Women in the House of Commons after 2020
High heels and workplace dress codes
Equalities legislation after the EU exit

3. A quick canter through WEC and our work…
Ongoing inquiries:
Themes: effectiveness of GEO / EHRC / Equality Act
Themes: representation, data collection
Disability and the built environment
Tackling inequalities faced by Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities
Fathers and the workplace
Older people and employment

4. How evidence* fits into inquiries
Scoping discussions
Terms of reference agreed and call for evidence published
Written evidence received
Written evidence feeds in to inquiry planning
Oral evidence sessions held (finishing with Ministers)
Outreach activities, visits, online engagement
Report prepared
Report agreed and published
Government response (two months)
Follow-up activities

5. Rules about written evidence
Guidance accessible from the submissions portal
One Word document with as little fancy formatting as possible
Be clear about who the submission is from, and in what capacity
No more than 3,000 words
Must be prepared for the Committee – we will not accept material already published or intended to be published elsewhere
Avoid comment on live legal proceedings
Committees take formal decisions to accept and publish evidence, which confers parliamentary privilege
Ask for permission to publish if you wish to do so before the Committee has published it
Confidential information? Get in touch

6. What are we looking for in written evidence?
Clear relationship to the terms of reference – though you don’t have to cover everything
Factual, expert information that the Committee can draw on for briefs and reports
Data, if you have it – if not your own, a reference is fine
Analysis of the issues and underlying factors
What you would like the Government to do, and why
Good practice can be interesting, but analysis is more useful – please don’t just tell us how great your service is!
Specialist input from your organisation’s unique perspective
You can endorse other submissions without repeating them
Draw on individual experiences if that’s what your strength is
Timely – the earlier it is, the more we can take it into account

7. Questions to ask yourself
What problems are we facing, and why?
What is the evidence for this being a problem?
Does current Government policy in this area work? If not, why not? Is it enough?
What would you change about current policy? What is the evidence that what you suggest would be better? (be creative: look forward and don’t default to funding as the solution)
Is the legislation in this area working effectively? How do you know? If not, why?
Do the GEO / EHRC have a role, and if so, are they performing it effectively?
Are there any useful points of comparison? (with other countries, with the devolved administrations, with policy relating to other protected characteristics)

8. Oral evidence
Choice of witnesses not always a result of “who gave the best written evidence”!
Time and space for oral evidence are limited, but all evidence is used if useful
Commitment to diversity on witness panels
Some of the terms of reference will become more or less prominent as an inquiry proceeds
Committee keen not to duplicate what we already know from written evidence – sometimes we’ll be seeking to fill gaps, or to highlight points of disagreement rather than consensus
We draw on the written evidence to test propositions, interrogate the data, and to inform questioning of the Ministers

9. Gaps in evidence
We can use different methods to get different evidence, especially personal experiences (visits, outreach, roundtables, web forums) – your help with these is also valuable
Need to bridge the gap between individual experiences and policy implications
We find it relatively easy to reach our ‘natural’ stakeholders, but more difficult to get evidence from outside the equalities world
Trying to be active in filling gaps in our written evidence by requesting submissions
How to uncover the bad practice (and the reasons for it) as well as celebrate the good practice?