1. Judicial Diversity

2. Constitutional Reform Act 2005 Aimed at: increasing independence of judiciary increasing diversity of appointments Created Supreme Court independent of Parliament Allowed for Lord Chancellor in Commons Created independent JAC In 2005 there were: 3,800 FT and PT court judges 640 women (17%) 114 BAME (3%)

3. JAC statutory duties –To select candidates solely on merit –To select only people of good character –To have regard to the need to encourage diversity in the range of persons available for selection for appointment

4. Difficult birth – and sustained scrutiny 2007 Nooney Review - efficiency 2008 MoJ LEAN review - efficiency 2009 Neuberger Review - diversity 2010 End-to-End Review - organisation/management 2010/11 Public Bodies Bill: low point for JAC

5. Scrutiny continued… 2011/12 MoJ Review - appointments system as a whole, with focus on diversity 2011/12 HoL Constitution Committee Review - appointments system, including diversity New focus from then LC: -Cost -Speed -Diversity 2013 Crime and Courts Act – enhanced and extended role of JAC

6. Crime and Courts Act 2013 Equal merit provision Increased lay membership and diversity of selection panels for senior appointments Transferred chairmanship of panel to select LCJ and President UKSC to lay members of appointments bodies Transferred responsibility for selecting deputy High Court judges to JAC Statutory diversity duties for LCJ and LC

7. JAC Diversity Strategy Fair and non-discriminatory selection processes – now incorporating EMP Advertising and Outreach – further targeted through candidate attraction project Working with others to break down barriers – including via Diversity Forum WomenBAME Diverse staff: 58%19% Diverse selection panels: 64% 8% Diverse Commission: 53%13%

8. Selection process Candidates submit competency-based application form Short-listing by online test for larger exercises or paper sift for smaller/senior exercises Selection day: interview and combination of: - presentation on subject specified by JAC; - role play exercise (usually for entry level posts); - situational questioning; - competence-based questions around the qualities and abilities required for the office.

9. Performance of women candidates I Applications from – and recommendations of - women are higher under JAC Proportion of applications is significantly higher for 6/7 posts, and recommendations significantly higher for 3/7 posts Women making good progress at all levels of competition up to and including Court of Appeal: -41% (1,668) of recommended candidates -42% (1,173) of recommendations for legal roles -35% (530) of recommendations for courts

10. Performance of women candidates II In last District Judge and Circuit Judge exercises, 54% (29/54) and 48% (26/54) of successful candidates were women Women now make up 25% of courts judiciary – 830 of 3,282 judges – an increase of 8% (190) in nine years Women make up 45% of tribunals judiciary - 2,717 of 6,084 judges Progress at most senior levels still slow

11. Performance of BAME candidates I Applications from – and recommendations of - BAME candidates are higher under JAC Proportion of applications from BAME candidates is significantly higher for 6/7 posts BAME recommendations are significantly higher for one of the posts BAME candidates have generally been recommended in line with level in eligible pool: - 10% (398) of recommended candidates - 7% (194) of recommendations for legal roles - 7% (105) of recommendations for court roles

12. Performance of BAME candidates II 6% of courts judiciary have BAME backgrounds – 157 of 3,282 judges – double 2005 proportion 13% of tribunals judiciary are BAME – 740 of 6,054 judges Progress at senior levels still slow

13. Current and future challenges Diversity of candidate pool an ongoing challenge Need multiple routes in to the judiciary – and up Impact of O’Brien and Miller litigation – reduction in fee-paid vacancies Wider, ongoing financial constraints April 2014:Total Judiciary 9,366 Courts only 3,282 Women38% (3,587)25% (830) BAME10% (897)5.8% (157)