1. How Fair is Britain? 2010 The EHRC first Triennial Review Equality indicators in practice

2. The Equality Act (2006) gave the EHRC a statutory duty to: 1. Identify outcomes and indicators that measure society’s progress towards our mandates 2. Monitor progress towards each identified outcome by reference to relevant indicators, producing regular reports. (Section 12 of the Equality Act, 2006). How Fair is Britain? is the first of a 3-year cycle of reports of this progress.

3. The Equality Measurement Framework

4. Part I – A new landscape Part II – Critical issues facing Britain today 1) Life2) Legal security 3)Physical security4) Health 5)Care and support6) Education 7)Employment8) Standard of living 9)Power and voice Part III – Findings and challenges Structure of the Report

5. IndicatorsSome key findings (6) Life: Life expectancy; Mortal illness; Suicide; Accidental death; Homicide; Deaths in institutions Women on average live for 4 years longer than men Men and women in the highest socio-economic group can expect to live 7 years longer than those in lower socio- economic groups Infants under the age of 1 are more likely to be a victim of homicide than any other age group. Three times as many men as women commit suicide. Suicide rates amongst men in Scotland are higher than England (7) Legal security: Equal treatment by the criminal justice system; Offences reported and brought to justice; Prison numbers and conditions Black an Asian people are disproportionately affected by stop-and-search. Young people with disabilities are less likely to feel fairly treated by the criminal justice system Ethnic minorities are overly-represented in the custodial system. Muslim people make up 12% of the prison population

6. IndicatorsSome key findings (8) Physical security: Crimes against the person; Targeted violence; Fear of crime 1 in 4 women have experienced domestic abuse. Three quarters of domestic violence offences are repeat offences Over a quarter of all rapes were committed against children under 16 (9) Health: ‘Poor’ health and limiting long-term illness or disability; Poor mental health; Living a healthy lifestyle; Dignity and respect in health treatment Gypsy and Traveller people report having the worst health outcomes A quarter of Pakistani and Bangladeshi people report having a LLTI or disability. Bangladeshi men are twice as likely to have mental health issues than White men. Evidence suggests the mental health issues are a serious concern for the both LGB and Transgender populations

7. IndicatorsSome key findings (10) Education: Level of development at age 5; Permanent exclusion from school; Educational attainment at age 16; Participation in higher education; Adult skills and qualifications; Adult learning; Use of the internet Girls routinely outperform boys throughout the educatory process Gypsy and Traveller students perform worst Disabled children also perform worse than non-disabled children, and are much more likely to be excluded from school. Black and Gypsy and Traveller children are also more likely to be excluded than average Bullying affects many children. LGB and Transgender, and disabled are most likely to report being bullied. Victims of bullying do 15% worse at GCSE than average Black students are less than two-thirds as likely to get a good degree as White students 33% of working age Muslim women have no qualifications, and only 9% have a degree Being Black and male has potentially greater impact on levels of numeracy than being learning disabled

8. IndicatorsSome key findings (11) Employment: Employment; Pay gaps; Occupational segregation; Illness and injury at work; Discrimination in employment People with disabilities experience an 11% pay gap 45% of disabled people in their early 20s are NEET (not in education, employment, or training) 1 in 4 Bangladeshi and Pakistani women are employed Only 47% of Muslim men, and 24% of Muslim women are employed. 42% of young Muslim people are NEET Women occupy 77% of administration/secretarial roles, and 83% of personal service roles. Only 6% of engineers and 14% of architects are women. Women occupy 1 in 3 managerial jobs in Britain (12) Standard of Living: Wealth; Low pay and low income; Housing and neighbourhood quality; Financial exclusion Wealth of the top 10% of households is almost a hundred times greater than the bottom 10% (£853,000 to £8,800) 1 in 5 people live in households below the 60% of median income level. This level is 1 in 4 for households with a disabled person, and 1 in 3 for Bangladeshi-headed households Nearly three-quarters of Bangladeshi and half of Black African children grow up in poverty

9. IndicatorsSome key findings (13) Care and support: Access to care; Access to childcare; Unpaid care responsibilities Lone parents, non-working parents, parents with disabled children, and lower income parents use less childcare, and it is less likely to be formal childcare 1 in 4 women and 1 in 5 men in their 50s are carers. By the time they are 59, women have a 50% chance of providing care 175,000 people under the age of 18 have care responsibilities. 273,000 of people aged 16-74 provide unpaid care despite being sick or disabled themselves. (14) Power and voice: Formal political participation; Perceptions of influence; Political activity; Taking part in decision- making and campaigning organisations A minority of people under the age of 25 now vote in general and devolved elections The number of MPs over 50 has increased since 1997. Religious and ethnic minorities are still underrepresented in Parliament. Less than 25% of MPs are women LGB people are more likely to be involved in informal civic or political actions than average

10. Fair Treatment at Work : our employment indicators Employment rate NEET rate Pay gap Occupational segregation Illness/injury at work Perceptions of discrimination And Low pay

11. Intersection: multiple disadvantage Employed full time: Ethnicity and Gender –13% Pakistani women –40% White British Women Religion and Gender –46% Black Caribbean Women –14% Muslim women –60% Christian women and women with no religion

13. Limitations Age as a characteristic Inconsistent across indicators Sample sizes Socio-economic/ethnicity/religion characteristics