Blick_UK Politics (9780198825555)_CH10

10 IDENTITY, EQUALITY, AND POWER A contemporary democracy allows for us to be both equal and different. The UK is a diverse society and people differ from one another in many ways: according to gender, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious faith or lack of belief, age, presence or absence of a disability, and many other aspects. You can probably think of a few of these characteristics that you would use to define your identity, or that of your friends and family. These identities have been recognized as an important concern within UK politics, alongside more traditional socio-economic ways of classifying people. Laws and policies have been created to try to ensure that people do not suffer adverse consequences because of who they are, and that they are all equal members of society. These measures are not necessarily entirely effective, however, and continue to be subject to considerable scrutiny. In mid-2020, the subject of racial inequality came to the political forefront. As part of an international movement, anti-racism protests took place across the UK, inspired by the Black Lives Matter campaign originating in the United States, and in particular its response to the killing of George Floyd, an African American, while being arrested in Minneapolis in May 2020. A white police officer, subsequently convicted for murder and manslaughter, had knelt on Floyd’s neck for a prolonged period. Public debate in the UK at this time came to focus on issues such as police discrimination against people from Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups, and the UK’s imperial heritage (see Chapter 13). The UK is a very diverse country, but inequality and a lack of inclusion are serious problems. There is, for instance, diversity in the distribution of material wealth and opportunity between people and territories within the UK; their spread is not even. The ability and willingness of people to participate in political processes varies significantly in accordance with personal characteristics. Consequently, some groups are less likely to impact upon decision-taking processes. Arguably, therefore, the inclusiveness of the political system is compromised. This chapter explores the connections between the individuals and groups that make up UK society and politics. It discusses the profile of the population, and the measures in place to promote equality and prevent discrimination on the basis of characteristics and identity. The chapter considers the different ways—beyond party politics—in which people and groups can seek to promote particular causes and goals; and their views of such processes. It suggests a number of theoretical perspectives: the need to consider equality from the point of view of its effective enforcement; the existence of socio-economic inequalities and their implications; different interpretations of political representation from the point of view of identity; and the concept of power in a social context. The chapter presents a series of practical examples illustrating its themes: measures in place to ensure that some groups do not achieve inappropriate forms of influence; the degree of diversity among those who hold public office; the campaign for new legislation to prohibit the practice of upskirting ; and the position of trans people in UK society and law. We debate whether political equality is a reality in the UK and discuss Brexit, identity, equality, and power, as well as the broader implications of the subjects of this chapter for the UK political system.

© Oxford University Press

222 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

Learning Aims After reading this chapter, you will be able to: ❚ Remember the range of different characteristics that can define identity within UK society. ❚ Understand the different forms of discrimination that people can face. ❚ Apply a variety of theoretical perspectives involving identity, equality, and power in UK society, including around enforcement of socio-economic equality, and representation. ❚ Analyse the rules and mechanisms that exist to promote equality and prohibit discrimination in the UK. ❚ Evaluate how effective different people and groups are at exercising power. ❚ Create an argument about the nature of political equality in the UK.

10.1 What is it? 10.1.1 Identity and equality

Identity and equality, therefore, have important connota- tions for UK politics. While there are efforts from within the system to respond to issues they raise, they are not always successful. Some groups may be numerically underrepre- sented in positions of public authority; and policy might not effectively provide for their interests. The complexity of social identity and efforts to achieve equality can encourage the use of different ways of viewing politics. For instance, a feminist approach to UK politics can perceive a system in which male-centred, pa- triarchal values retain a predominant role (John, 2018b: 7). Critical race theory—which originated in the US but is applied by some theorists to the UK—rests on the tenet that white supremacy is ingrained within a society char- acterized by institutional discrimination against people from other racial groups (Warmington, 2012: 9–11). Queer theory entails the analysis of political power structures from the perspective of sexual identity, and the marginali- zation or exclusion of certain groups within society (Sulli- van, 2003). All of these outlooks suggest that identity is a fundamental lens through which many groups of people in the UK see politics.

Identity is about the things that make you who you are. In a democracy, people are supposed to be equal. These two concepts and the connections between them are central to politics (Bernstein, 2005). Your identity might affect how you vote or lead you to take part in a political campaign as a way of giving expression to your sex, your ethnicity, or your sexual orientation. Other people may behave towards you in certain ways because of the characteristics making up your identity (or characteristics they perceive you to have). Your university or workplace might provide you with support be- cause of a physical or mental disability. Or—less favourably— an employer might discriminate against you, perhaps declin- ing to offer you a job for which you have applied, for the same reason (even though they probably would not admit to this reason, and such discrimination is likely to be illegal). The political system to some extent reflects the exist- ence of identity; parties might seek to appeal to voters within identity groups (such as women, or people from par- ticular ethnic or religious groups). They might also adopt policies they think will appeal to people who possess those characteristics, or give attention to the profile of their own candidates and how far that profile reflects different groups within society. Public authorities also have a role in dealing with issues relating to identity on behalf of individuals and society as a whole. They might, for instance, promote equality and set out to prevent discrimination through legislative measures and policy programmes. In doing so they seek to reconcile an im- portant tension within a democracy. On the one hand, people are in theory equal and enjoy the same rights within a socie- ty that seeks to bind them together (see Chapter 5). Yet, on the other hand, they have many divergent characteristics for which they might desire recognition or which they might seek to express, and which may in turn lead to their being denied the security and opportunity to which they are entitled.

A longstanding means of classifying members of society has been class. This concept can be difficult to define. It might be related to someone’s family background and per- haps the area they come from; even the accent in which they speak. Some of these factors can have significant consequences for a person’s future life chances. A fre- quently employed way of defining social class —or social grade , the term usually strictly employed in this instance— is through classifying the particular type of occupation they, or the main income earner in their household, perform (or whether they work at all). As discussed in Chapter 7, social class or grade is becoming less relevant as a means of determining the likelihood of people voting for a particular party in an election. But while class is seemingly less im- portant to party-political orientation than it once was, it still © Oxfor University Press

10.2 How it works 223

has important implications, including for the way in which people perceive politics, and their assessment of the value of taking part.

The social nature of politics has implications for pow- er relationships. While anyone can try to exercise power, perhaps working in combination with others, some people and groups are better placed to organize and to achieve the results they seek. The amount of power they possess can have some connection to their personal characteris- tics or their socio-economic status. A group that is more numerous or more likely to vote, for example, might find that governments are more likely to pay attention to its interests. As a consequence, that group can find itself in a more privileged position in society than others. For in- stance, a particular ethnic group—in the UK, the White cat- egory—might be numerically dominant and find itself in an overall position of advantage relative to some other ethnic groups. It is not just about numbers. Some smaller groups may achieve influence out of proportion to their size be- cause they are in an advantageous position of some kind (see Chapter 3 on lobbying ). Social characteristics, there- fore, have implications for politics, and politics in turn has implications for the nature of society. We discuss power and identity further in section 10.3 later in this chapter.

10.1.2 Identity and power There are also important connections between identity and power. As discussed in the introduction to this chapter, politics involves the public interaction between different individuals and groups. When they engage with each oth- er, these people and organizations often seek to achieve particular outcomes. We can define power as a group or an individual’s ability, when dealing with others, to get what they want (Beetham, 1991; see Chapter 1). Politics takes place within society and we cannot sep- arate it wholly from society. Political processes therefore reflect in some respects the features of that society. For instance, as discussed above, political parties seek to secure electoral support from particular social groups through their policies and political messaging.

10.2 How it works 10.2.1 The profile of the UK population

Welsh in Wales) was the main language (see Chapter 12). But 7.7 per cent said they had another main language, shown in Figure 10.2, with Polish the most widely spoken of the ‘Other’ main languages, at about 1 per cent or 546,000 speakers.

There are many ways of defining the characteristics of the population of the UK. The diversity of the UK, in terms of the varied characteristics of the population, is partly a con- sequence of patterns of inward migration over a number of decades, including from the former British Empire (see Chapter 13) and the European Union. Arrivals in substantial numbers from the West Indies, India, and Pakistan during the 1950s and 1960s led to a significantly changed profile for the UK population (Mortimore and Blick, 2018: 478). Ethnicity Figures 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3 help to paint a picture of the UK’s profile according to the most recent census (taken in 2011). Figure 10.1 gives a clear view of the ethnic makeup of the England and Wales: people of white ethnicity remain by far the largest group, with Asian, black, mixed, or multiple and other ethnicities making up 14 per cent of the population. Language English is by far the most widely spoken main language for the UK as a whole; the census found that for 92.3 per cent of respondents in England and Wales, English (or English and

Mixed or Multiple Ethnicity

2% Other 1%

Black 3%

Asian 8% © Oxford University Pr ss

White 86%

White Asian Black Mixed or Multiple Ethnicity

Other

FIGURE 10.1  Ethnicity in England andWales at the 2011 census Source: Office for National Statistics, 2018

224 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

Top 10 Main 'Other' Languages in England and Wales, 2011

Arabic French All Other Chinese (1) Portuguese Spanish

Polish Panjabi Urdu Bengali (with Sylheti and Chatgaya) Gujurati

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 Number of speakers as main language, thousands

FIGURE 10.2  Top 10 main ‘other’ languages in England andWales, 2011 Source: Office for National Statistics, 2013 Note: ‘All Other Chinese’ is an aggregate of Chinese languages and excludes those that wrote in Mandarin Chinese and Cantonese Chinese.

Diversity is not consistent across the UK; the types of diversity we have discussed so far—ethnicity, language, religion—tend to be concentrated more heavily in some parts of the country than others. London, for instance, is characterized by exceptional levels of these types of diver- sity (Office for National Statistics, 2013). Disability There are a range of other characteristics defining iden- tity that contribute to the diversity of the UK population. In 2011, just under 18 per cent of people in England and Wales described themselves as having a disability of some kind. (The Equality Act 2010 defines a disability as a ‘physical or mental impairment’ that ‘has a substantial and long-term adverse effect’ on a person’s ‘ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’.) This characteristic is another example of one which is distributed unevenly across the UK, as can be seen in Figure 10.4: a greater proportion of people living in Wales reported having a disability than in England. Gender, sexuality, and age The 2011 census also estimated that, in the UK as a whole, there was a total of 32.2 million women, and slightly few- er men, 31 million (for a discussion of trans identity, see In Practice 10.1) (Office for National Statistics, 2012a).

Sikh 1%

Jewish 1%

Hindu 3%

Buddhist 0%

Muslim 5%

Other (as classified by Census) 0%

No Answer 7%

Christian 59% © Oxford University Press

No Religion 25%

FIGURE 10.3  Religion in England andWales, 2011 Source: Office for National Statistics, 2012b

Religion With respect to religion, Figure 10.3 shows that a major- ity (59.3 per cent) of respondents in England and Wales said they were Christians—Christianity is the most widely followed religion—but the rest of the population were of another religion or none.

10.2 How it works 225

80 90 100

20 30 40 50 60 70 Per cent

No Disability

0 10

Disability

England

Wales

FIGURE 10.4  Disabilities in England andWales, 2011 Source: Office for National Statistics, 2015

In terms of sexual orientation, in 2015, 1.7 per cent of people living in the UK reported themselves as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (Office for National Statistics, 2016). Age, too, is a form of identity and one that changes over time, for everyone. As of 2011, 18 per cent of the population were aged 0–14 years; 66 per cent were 15–64; and 16 per cent were aged 65 and above. Social grade Figure 10.5 and Table 10.1 explore the makeup of the UK according to social grade, a system used by opinion re- search professionals, which classifies people according to the chief income earner in their household. From the graphs and data above, we see that the UK has a diverse profile, with characteristics differing according to migration patterns and other factors. But why is diversity and identity relevant to politics? We will see in the next sections that the presence or possession of certain characteristics can lead to discrimination and affect political power, and that political action and legislation is needed to promote equality. 10.2.2 Promoting equality Some groups in society are subject to discrimination or experience disadvantages related to their characteristics. This point was highlighted during the 2020 coronavirus emergency when there was clear evidence that groups such as black people, women, and people with a disabil- ity, already likely to be in a less privileged position than others, suffered disproportionately, either from the dis- ease itself, its impact, or measures taken in response to it.

A 4%

E 10%

B 23%

D 15%

C2 20%

C1 28%

FIGURE 10.5  Social grade distribution in the UK, 2016 Source: National Readership Survey, 2016

© Oxford University Press

Mechanisms exist intended to protect them and to pro- mote social equality, including legal measures. The legal framework in this area has developed over a long period of time (see How did we get here? 10.1). This protracted period of development demonstrates that such measures can take time to come into being, often involving long-term political campaigning by those in favour of change. It also shows that legislating for equality is an ongoing process, and pressure is always likely to develop for more change (see In Practice 10.1 and 10.2). The central equality law in the UK today, encompassing all the areas covered in How did we get here? 10.1, is the Equality Act 2010 (see Chapter 5). It consolidated existing legislation in this area and added new protections. The Act introduced ‘protected characteristics’, of age, disabil- ity, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation, prohib-

226 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

TABLE 10.1  Definitions of UK social grades

Social grade Types of work A

Higher managerial, administrative and professional Intermediate managerial, administrative and professional

B

C1

Supervisory, clerical and junior managerial, administrative and professional

C2

Skilled manual workers

D

Semi-skilled and unskilled manual workers

E

State pensioners, casual and lowest-grade workers, unemployed with state benefits only

Source: National Readership Survey, 2016

How did we get here? 10.1  Table 10.2 helps you to understand how the legal framework around diversity, identity, and equality has developed over time, by showcasing some of the key legislation in this area.

TABLE 10.2   Legislating for equality: a selective list Sex equality Year Legislation Outcome 1918 Representation of the People Act 1918

Provided the vote to women aged 30 and over who also met a property requirement. First permitted women to be members of the House of Commons. Ended bars on entering universities and careers, or the performing of public functions, on the basis of sex or of being married. Lowered the minimum voting age for women to 21, putting women and men on the same basis for the first time.

1918 Parliament (Qualification of Women) Act 1918 1919 Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919

1928 Representation of the People Act 1928

1970 Equal Pay Act 1970 Sought to end discrimination between men and women in payment for employment. 1975 Employment Protection Act 1975 Introduced statutory maternity leave, and protection against being dismissed for being pregnant. 1975 Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Banned discrimination on the basis of sex in providing services and goods, and in education and employment. The Act also created the Equal Opportunities Commission. 2002 Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002 Altered the law to enable political parties to continue to use women-only shortlists in their selection of candidates for election. © Oxford University Press

Race equality Year Legislation

Outcome

1965 Race Relations Act 1965

Established the Race Relations Board, able to inquire into complaints about alleged illegal discrimination. Banned discriminating on the basis of race in education and providing goods and services, in employment and in education. It made incitement to racial hatred illegal, and created the Commission for Racial Equality, taking the place of the two previously existing bodies: the Community Relations Commission and the Race Relations Board.

1976 Race Relations Act 1976

10.2 How it works 227

Disabled rights Year Legislation

Outcome

1970 Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970

Created the scheme of special parking rules for the disabled.

1995 Disability Discrimination Act 1995 Made it illegal to discriminate against disabled people and introduced requirements to provide for disabled access. LGBT Year Legislation Outcome 1967 Sexual Offences Act 1967

Decriminalized sex in private between men aged 21 and over, applied in England and Wales, with similar changes taking place later in Scotland (1980) and Northern Ireland (1982). The controversial Section 28 in this legislation forbade schools from presenting ‘homosexuality … as a pretended family relationship’. It also prohibited the ‘promotion of homosexuality’ by councils. Following a long campaign, the repeal of the Act occurred in 2003. Lowered the age of consent for men having sex with men to 18—still two years higher than for different-sex partners.

1988 Local Government Act 1988

1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 1999 Sex Discrimination (Gender

Protected trans women and men from employment discrimination.

Reassignment) Regulations 1999

Did you find any of the timescales here surprising? Why do you think there has been more legislation in some areas than others? © Oxford University Press 2000 Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 Lowered the age of consent for men having sex with men to 16, the same as for different-sex partners. 2002 Adoption and Children Act 2002 Made it possible for same-sex couples (and unmarried different-sex couples) to adopt children. 2004 Civil Partnership Act 2004 Made it possible for same-sex couples to enter arrangements similar to marriage. 2004 Gender Recognition Act 2004 Provided for trans women and men to obtain official recognition for their gender, including a replacement birth certificate. 2013 Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 Provided for couples of the same sex in England and Wales to marry. A change to the same effect was passed in Scotland in 2014, and in Northern Ireland in 2020. Sources: Kelly, 2019; Mortimore and Blick, 2018

iting discrimination from taking place on a basis of these characteristics. The Act also created a requirement for public authorities, when planning policy, to ‘have due re- gard’ to the ‘desirability of’ carrying out their functions ‘in a way that is designed to reduce the inequalities of out- come which result from socio-economic disadvantage’. However, this last stipulation was never brought into force because the Labour government that introduced the 2010 Act lost power that year. The Conservative- Liberal Democrat coalition government that succeed- ed the Labour government in 2010 chose not to imple- ment this particular provision. This part of the Act not

being brought into force is significant, because it means that socio-economic equality is not afforded the same de- gree of legal recognition as other forms of equality (see section 10.3.2 in this chapter for further discussion on this). The Equality Act 2010 does not apply in Northern Ireland, which has its own regime for the promotion of equality, including various legislative measures and the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, established un- der the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (see Chapter 12). Alongside the legal framework, bodies exist to ensure that it is put into practice. In Wales, Scotland, and England the Equality and Human Rights Commission holds a key

228 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

enforcement role (operating alongside a Human Rights Commission in Scotland). This Commission first came into being under the Equality Act 2006, combining three pre- viously separate commissions—the Disability Rights Com- mission, the Equal Opportunities Commission, and the Commission for Racial Equality—into a single unified entity. The power that the single Commission uses most exten- sively is to assist individuals in bringing cases against dis- crimination, or to bring cases of this type itself. It can also investigate possible violations of the Equality Act 2010 and take enforcement measures where it finds that a breach has occurred. Failure to comply can potentially lead to le- gal action and in some cases the imposition of an unlimited fine. With the agreement of the government, the Commis- sion can also issue codes of practice, for instance to em- ployers on equal pay. It carries out research, disseminates information, and makes policy recommendations (House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee, 2019: 10). Within the UK government, the Government Equalities Of- fice is responsible for the advancement of equality general- ly, including work opportunities and participation in political and public roles (rather than the enforcement role undertak- en by the Equality and Human Rights Commission). It has a focus on promoting the Equality Act 2010; same-sex civil partnership and marriage; LGBT matters; and international commitments pertaining to equality. Ministerial responsibili- ty for the Government Equalities Office is held by a Cabinet member alongside their full departmental portfolio. At the time of writing Elizabeth Truss, Secretary of State for Inter- national Trade, was also Minister for Women and Equalities. Beyond legal frameworks to protect identity and prevent overt discrimination, identity has an impact on how people participate in politics, as we will discuss next. 10.2.3 Organizing to influence Observers of politics in the UK (and elsewhere in the world) have recently devoted much attention to the idea of ‘ iden- tity politics ’. There is not a precisely agreed definition of this term (Bernstein, 2005: 47–48) but it broadly applies to the idea of people participating in politics on the basis of their characteristics such as religious faith, ethnicity, or gender. In doing so they may seek to further the cause of the particular group they identify with, and resist discrimi- nation against it. This approach is slightly different from the promotion of equality through legal frameworks and public bodies which we have discussed above. Observers who are favourable towards the idea of iden- tity politics see it as a means by which people can, on the basis of their personal characteristics, become more wide- ly engaged and recognize the legitimacy of others (Lichter- man, 1999: 101). Other analysts, however, in particular those

grounded in Marxist theory, are sceptical about identity politics, holding that the best means of advancing social justice is through addressing issues of economic inequality related to the capitalist system and the class structures that are intrinsic to it (Bernstein, 2005: 49). If people, particularly those in minority groups, pursue goals through the political process—either in pursuit of ‘identity politics’ or on a more socio-economic basis—how possible is it for them to go about doing so? Can they re- alistically expect change? There are a variety of means by which members of different social groups can seek, individ- ually or collectively, to achieve influence within society. They might, for instance, vote in an election or join a party that they perceive as representing their interests (see Chapters 6 and 7). As well as engaging in voting, people seeking to promote the interests of particular groups might form or join pressure groups , which campaign for specific causes (see Chapter 7). They might take part in protests. In some cases, efforts to promote the rights of a particular group can enlist wider support. During 2020, for instance, the Black Lives Matter movement attracted participants of varied ethnicity. When we consider the scope for members of particular social groups to exercise power, it is important to assess their attitudes towards the political process and their involvement with it. The annual Hansard Society ‘Audit of Political Engage- ment’ opinion poll provides insight in this area. The 2019 au- dit (Hansard Society, 2019: 16–28) found that some of the UK’s population are highly sceptical of the political system: 63 per cent of people believed that the UK ‘system of gov- ernment is rigged to advantage of the rich and powerful’ and 41 per cent disagreed or disagreed strongly with the propo- sition ‘that political involvement can change the way the UK is run’. When asked in the audit how much influence they felt they had over the making of decisions, 47 per cent replied that they believed they did not have any at UK level; and 42 per cent felt they had none at local level. Questioned about the kinds of political participation they had entered into over the past twelve months, 53 per cent replied none at all. However, under these headline figures, there were some important social differentials in terms of belief in or scepticism about the political system and political involve- ment. Figure 10.6 shows divergence in whether people think political involvement is an effective activity across sex, age, social grade, and ethnicity. These data show that—for example—more men feel that political involvement is effective than women, and more people in the BME category (Black and Minority Ethnic) the survey used were optimistic about the prospects for this ac- tivity to make a difference than those in the white category. The relative optimism of some of these groups, howev- er, did not necessarily translate into active participation, as demonstrated by Figure 10.7. A comparison of Figure 10.6 and Figure 10.7 shows that the young and members of the least privileged social grades might be relatively positive

© Oxford University Press

10.2 How it works 229

36

35

34

33

30

30

27

29

18– 24 25– 34 35– 44 45– 54 55– 64 65+

Male

Female

38

40

35

29

31

21

AB

C1

C2

DE

White

BME

FIGURE 10.6  Percentage of the population who feel getting involved in politics is effective, according to sex, age, social grade, and ethnicity Source: Hansard Society, 2019: 32 © Oxford University Press

about the idea of participation in politics as making in dif- ference, but they were the least likely to actually take part. Similarly, while BME people were more optimistic than white people about the value of involvement in politics, those in the BME group were less likely to vote. Female and male respondents were roughly similar on this count: 60 per cent and 62 per cent respectively (Hansard Society, 2019: 31). Difference in likelihood to vote can itself affect politics; it may be that groups that are more likely to vote gain more at- tention from politicians seeking their support, and that in turn those groups receive preferential treatment. We have seen that there is a general tendency that, the older a person is, the greater their reported chances of voting. This phenome- non could help explain a pattern that some observers have claimed exists for inequity between age groups in aspects

of public policy, with more policies seeming to favour old- er voters. A House of Lords Committee investigating this subject found that young people did not enjoy the same opportunities for improving living standards that members of previous generations had during their lives. It called for better monitoring of this problem by policy makers, and that greater fairness between age groups should influence their decision-making (House of Lords Select Committee on Intergenerational Fairness and Provision, 2019). The impact of identity politics on the UK comes from the country’s diverse profile, as we have seen. The lack of equality on the basis of different characteristics has led to the intro- duction of extensive bodies of legislation. Identity also affects political participation, as we have considered here. Next, we discuss some theoretical themes raised by identity in the UK.

230 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

71

70

70

62

60

55

47

45

18 – 24 25 – 34 35 – 44 45 – 54 55 – 64

65+

Male

Female

75

63

61

59

48

48

FIGURE 10.7  Percentage of the population who are absolutely certain (score 10) to vote, according to sex, age, social grade, and ethnicity Source: Hansard Society, 2019: 31 BME © Oxford University Press AB C1 C2 DE White

10.3 In theory 10.3.1 Enforcing equality

Two examples of discrimination on the basis of charac- teristics are antisemitism and Islamophobia —prejudice against, respectively, Jewish and Muslim people. Though these are blanket terms, their expression can take many forms, such as stereotyping and caricature of people with- in these categories. Antisemitism can include Holocaust denial —that is, the questioning of the historical fact of the extermination of Jews pursued by the Nazi regime, in particular from 1941 to 1945. It can also involve abuse and sometimes violent

Discrimination and harassment As we have already discussed, our society is diverse, and not always equal. Many groups in society suffer discrimina- tion based on their characteristics, including on the basis of religion, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, and absence or presence of a disability. Here we discuss the theory of enforcing equality, and how effective this is.

10.3 In theory 231

attacks. Recent controversy has surrounded cases of anti- semitismwithin the Labour Party and whether the leadership of the Labour Party handled the issue appropriately, and if it had appropriate mechanisms for doing so (Goddard, 2018). Aswell as sufferingprejudice anddiscrimination as agroup, Muslims also suffer from economic and social disadvantage. The UK Muslim population is concentrated to a significant ex- tent in geographical areas that suffer from deprivation; is far more likely than the average to live in poor households; and has relatively low levels of full-time employment. Islamopho- bia has a racial dimension to it; and victims of Islamophobia might include people who are not Muslims, but assumed to be by those targeting them (Priddy and Torrance, 2019). The persistence of these kinds of discrimination, as well as others, suggests an important perspective we must take into account when analysing identity and equality in the UK. A law stating that certain rights exist, or that certain forms of behaviour are illegal, is not in itself sufficient for the effective promotion of equality. If it seems as though vi- olating such standards will not lead to negative outcomes for those carrying them out, then they are likely to contin- ue, if one takes the view that deterrents are the appro- priate means of preventing discrimination. Furthermore, if victims of improper behaviour do not feel that they will be supported in taking action to protect their rights, then they may be reluctant to do so. Meaningful equality requires proper enforcement. Without it, actual or potential victims are denied a secure place within society. Doubts exist about how effective enforcement of equality is in the UK. Furthermore, even if public authorities are taking effective steps to protect and promote rights, it is not always entirely within their direct power to guarantee success. These doubts were formalized when in 2019, the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee identified

what it perceived as serious weaknesses in the upholding of equality in the UK. It criticized the existing system for re- lying on individuals, who had been discriminated against, taking action on their own account. This tendency was problematic because it might have been hard for them to know what their rights were or understand the complexities of the law. They might not receive sufficient support from other sources, the financial costs could be too high, and they might come under inappropriate pressure from those they were taking legal action against. The Committee rec- ognized that the Equality and Human Rights Commission had suffered from reductions in its financial support. But it held that it should still be able to take a more proactive ap- proach to the protection of equality and that it could use its existing powers more effectively than it was. It could—by us- ing these powers—bring about a cultural change, leading to a wide variety of organizations recognizing that they were obliged to promote equality and oppose discrimination. The Committee also saw a role for the government in prioritizing equality as a more mainstream part of its work; and for other public sector entities such as regulators. In the absence of such a shift, there would continue to be a lack of effective protection against the unfair treatment of a range of groups including the disabled, older people, and travellers (House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee, 2019). The international #MeToo movement against sexual assault and harassment also shone a spotlight on the en- forcement of equality. The movement encouraged much scrutiny of standards in the UK, thereby revealing consid- erable problems in areas such as workplace conduct. The House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee in- vestigated this subject in 2018 (House of Commons Wom- en and Equalities Committee, 2018). Excerpts from the Committee report are produced in Closer Look 10.1.

Closer look 10.1 House of CommonsWomen and Equalities Committee, 2018, excerpts from ‘Sexual Harassment in theWorkplace’ © Oxford University Pr ss

Notes that sexual harassment, impacting upon both women and men, but a significantly higher proportion of women, is a longstanding issue that the #MeToo campaign served to highlight. Notes that the existence of legal prohibitions and responsibilities to act are not sufficient in themselves.

Sexual harassment in the workplace is widespread and commonplace. It is shameful that unwanted sexual behaviours such as sexual comments, touching, groping and assault are seen as an everyday occurrence and part of the culture in workplaces. A BBC survey in November 2017 found that 40 per cent of women and 18 per cent of men had experienced un- wanted sexual behaviour in the workplace. These behaviours are unlaw- ful, but the Government, regulators and employers have failed to tackle them, despite their responsibilities to do so under UK and international law. As a result these legal protections are often not available to workers in practice. The #MeToo movement has put sexual harassment in the spotlight, but it is not a new phenomenon. Employers and regulators have ignored their responsibilities for too long.

232 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

Calls for greater political priority to be attached to tackling sexual harassment, to ensure actors beyond government, including regulators and business, take action.

It is time for the Government to put sexual harassment at the top of the agenda. Currently, there is little incentive for employers and regulators to take robust action to tackle and prevent unwanted sexual behaviours in the workplace. In contrast, there is considerable focus on protecting people’s personal data and preventingmoney laundering, with stringent requirements on employers and businesses to meet their responsibili- ties in these areas. They should now put the same emphasis on tackling sexual harassment.

vated hate crimes occurring around the time of the EU ref- erendum of mid-2016 and the terrorist attacks of mid-2017 (Allen and Zayed, 2019a). Hate crime undermines a key principle of democracy: that everyone should have equal standing and securi- ty within society. It also has direct consequences for the political processes that are part of the democratic system. Women running for office at local government level are more likely to fear abuse, violence, or harassment than men in the same position (Committee on Standards in Pub- lic Life, 2017: 61). Referring to this tendency, a report by the Committee on Standards in Public Life, an official body reporting to the Prime Minister, noted that forms of speech that did not amount to hate crime could nonetheless also have an intimidatory effect, for instance by stressing the personal characteristics of people when depicting them in a negative light (Committee on Standards in Public Life, 2017: 73). This might discourage some groups in society from running for office and therefore continue to propa- gate inequalities in the system. Alongside being potential victims of hate crime, some ethnic minority groups are also more likely than the norm to be the subject of measures designed to prevent, detect, and punish crime. Disparities exist with respect to ethnic- ity in the operation of the Criminal Justice System (CJS), though it is not possible to establish with certainty how far they arise from discriminatory practices. An official review of data for 2018 finds: In general, minority ethnic groups appear to be over- represented at many stages throughout the CJS compared with the White ethnic group. The greatest disparity appears at the point of stop and search, arrests, custodial sentencing and prison population. Among mi- nority ethnic groups, Black individuals were often the most over-represented. (Ministry of Justice, 2019b: 2) Evidence appeared of disproportionate use of law en- forcement powers against BAME people during the coro- navirus emergency. For instance, analysis carried out by Liberty Investigates, a research project connected to the Liberty civil liberties pressure group, showed that BAME people were 54 per cent more likely to be issued

A 2019 report by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) , taking a lead from issues raised by #MeToo, identified se- rious problems for LGBT employees. A TUC survey found that almost 70 per cent of LGBT people had experienced sexual harassment of some kind in the workplace, but that most of them did not want to report it (Trades Union Con- gress, 2019: 11). Results of a large-scale government survey of the life experiences of LGBT people appeared in 2019. These re- sults revealed that, although there were general positive responses about the rights provided to LGBT people in the UK, a number of problems existed. Findings included that 40 per cent or more of respondents had been subject to unwanted behaviour because of their LGBT status. Two per cent had undergone treatments presented as ‘cures’ for their sexual orientation. Nearly a quarter had used men- tal health services in the past year. Overall, LGBT people had a lower level of satisfaction with their lives than the average in the UK (6.5 out of 10 as compared with 7.7 out of 10) (Government Equalities Office, 2019). Hate crime Another area in which a variety of supposedly protected groups remain vulnerable is that of hate crime . Hate crime is any criminal act targeted at people because—in the view of the victim or anyone else—of their individual char- acteristics. These characteristics can include: disability ; gender; age; being transgender (see In Practice 10.1); sexu- al orientation; ethnicity or race; and belief or religion. It may involve public order offences such as threats and harass- ment; violence; stalking; or criminal damage. Precise data and trends are difficult to establish, but the most common motive for hate crime is race. Out of all the different ethnic- ities, it is Asian people, or those with an Asian background, who are subject to the largest proportion of hate crimes. Another common motive is religion, and hate crime, such as abuse or violence, is an aspect of both antisemitism and Islamophobia, as discussed above. There is evidence that hate crime tends to increase following some political events and following incidents such as terrorist attacks; data show sudden surges in racially and religiously moti-

© Oxford University Press

10.3 In theory 233

with a fine in the UK coronavirus lockdown period from 27 March to 11 May 2020 (Gidda, 2020). Both stop and search disparities and these data around fines for breaking lock- down rules contributed to the anger expressed in the UK Black Lives Matter protests in June 2020. Disparities continue to exist, and there is a long way to go before enforcement of legal frameworks fully eliminates these tendencies, but there has been progress towards

identifying the key issues and possible ways forward to prevent discrimination on the basis of personal charac- teristics. In Practice 10.1 shows some of the challenges in- volved in protecting the rights of a particular group, trans people. It is a significant subject of study because it is in an area where there have been recent efforts to define, es- tablish, and legislate for rights, and where they are a matter of ongoing controversy.

Political debate about provision for rights and non-dis- crimination in the UK is expanding to take in varied con- ceptions of gender, and in particular the idea of people being trans. But what does trans mean, and what are the legal and political implications of this characteristic? Sex is assigned to people when they are born, based on their anatomy, hormones, and chromosomes. For the majority of people, they are assigned either ‘male’ or ‘female’ (but intersex people are those for whom sexual characteristics may not fit into these categories). Though gender has been defined in many ways, it is usually agreed to be a more socially based charac- teristic, including aspects of identity, presentation, and expression. For a cisgender person, their gender match- es the sex they were assigned. A transgender person is someone whose gender attachment diverges from this assignment. Someone who identifies as female but who was assigned male at birth can be labelled a ‘trans woman’; and someone who was assigned fe- male at birth but identifies in gender as male can be labelled a ‘trans man’. It is possible for trans identity to be ‘non-gendered’—that is, neither male nor female. It can also take a ‘non-binary’ form, fitting on a spectrum somewhere between male and female, either at a fixed point, or perhaps shifting. Being trans may or may not involve obtaining medical intervention intended to affirm gender identity in phys- ical characteristics and presentation (House of Com- mons Women and Equalities Committee, 2016: 5–6). In 2018, the UK government reported that trans people ac- counted for between approximately 0.35 per cent and 1 per cent of the UK population—producing a rough fig- ure of between 200,000 and 500,000 people in total. It emphasized that arriving at a precise total was a difficult task (Minister for Women and Equalities, 2018: 83). In practice 10.1 Trans rights and UK politics

In recent years, trans issues have gained in political prominence, with campaigners for trans rights opposing transphobia—a term meaning prejudice against trans people. There is clear evidence of trans people under- going discrimination and of their life chances suffering in different ways. For instance, in 2018, the Stonewall campaign group published a report based on opinion research evidence. To give some examples, around 40 per cent of trans people and 30 per cent of non-binary people had in the previous year suffered some kind of incident or hate crime related to their identity. A quarter of trans people had been homeless; and 36 per cent attending higher education institutions had, in the previ- ous 12 months, suffered unpleasant treatment from staff. Where healthcare was concerned, 41 per cent said that staff had not showed understanding for them; and 62 per cent reported that it had taken too long for them to receive treatment (Bachmann and Gooch, 2018: 6). Concerns also involved the legal status of trans peo- ple. An important stage in provision for trans rights came with the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (see How did we get here? 10.1). Under this Act people aged eighteen and over can apply to the Gender Recognition Panel for a Gender Recognition Certificate, under which their gen- der can be recognized for most purposes; and they can obtain a replacement birth certificate that refers to their recognized gender, rather than the sex they were as- signed at birth. Between the passing of the Act in 2004 and 2018, nearly 5,000 people had received certifi- cates, 73 per cent of whom were receiving legal recog- nition as women, having been assigned as males at birth (Minister for Women and Equalities, 2018: 76). As noted above, in ‘promoting equality’, the Equality Act 2010 creates a series of categories, including gen- der reassignment, protecting those who fit within them

© Oxford University Press

234 Chapter 10  Identity, equality, and power

from discrimination on a basis of their characteristics. Under the 2010 Act it is illegal to discriminate against a person on the grounds that (section 7): ‘the person is proposing to undergo, is undergoing or has under- gone a process (or part of a process) for the purpose of reassigning the person’s sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex’. There are exceptions to this rule. For instance, it is possible to prevent trans people from taking part in some sports on grounds of safety or fair competition. It is also permissible in some circum- stances to provide services for a single sex that are not available to trans people. On this basis, refuge facilities for women who are victims of domestic violence may in some circumstances exclude trans women (Minister for Women and Equalities, 2018: 76; 43–44). A number of subjects of controversy have arisen in the area of the legal framework providing for the rights of trans people. There are objections to the £140 fee charged as part of the process that the 2004 Act cre- ates for applying for recognition; and to the stipulation that, as part of their application, a person must have al- ready spent two years living in the gender identity with which they associate. Perhaps the most firmly voiced criticism is that the process provided for under the 2004 Act requires that the person seeking recognition pro- duce a personal psychiatric report diagnosing ‘gender dysphoria’, a diagnosis that describes the distress that a person may feel as a consequence of being a trans person. Arguments advanced by those who oppose this stipulation include that it is problematic because it means that someone must show distress if they are to receive legal recognition. Campaigners for trans rights have also objected to the need for trans people who are married to obtain the agreement of their spouse for 10.3.2 Socio-economic inequality The targeting of people for their personal characteristics amounts to direct discrimination. Another form of discrim- ination is indirect. You might, because of circumstances beyond your control, find yourself in a less advantageous position and with fewer life chances than others. An indica- tor of equality or otherwise in this regard is distribution of resources. One way of measuring this is in terms of dispos- able income—that is, income available for spending after the deduction of direct taxes. In 2017–18, 20 per cent of households with the largest disposable incomes account- ed for 42 per cent of all disposable household income in the UK. The bottom 20 per cent took just 7 per cent. This degree of inequality has remained broadly the same since

them to secure recognition; and have suggested that the minimum age for recognition should be lowered from eighteen, perhaps to sixteen. Campaigners hold that, while the 2004 Act was ground-breaking at the time it was introduced, it now needs updating to bring it into line with good practice elsewhere. Some have argued that, rather than needing to meet various bureaucratic requirements, trans people should be able to declare themselves (House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee, 2016: 11–19). This latter recommendation has been a particular source of controversy. Sceptics have argued that such a system would be vulnerable to abuse, for instance by people seeking access to women-only spaces for improper purposes. Others argue for sex-based defini- tions of gender, focusing on physical sexual characteris- tics, and holding that trans men (for example) cannot be men. There is not only disagreement about the substan- tive issue. An argument has developed about whether or not concerns raised about self-identification amount to transphobia; and whether the behaviour of trans rights campaigners has had the effect of inappropriately stifling discussion. One aspect of this dispute has been conflict between trans rights activists and some feminist groups (Fairbairn, 2020: 22–26), although many femi- nists and feminist organizations support trans rights. In mid-2020, a leaked government letter prompted pro- tests from trans rights campaigners. They feared it sug- gested that the government did not intend to remove bureaucratic barriers to recognition, and that they might introduce new restrictions on trans people securing ac- cess to single-sex spaces. the 1990s, following a widening of the gap in the 1980s. The UK has greater inequality than most EU member states, but less than that of the US (McGuinness and Harari, 2019: 3). This unevenness has a territorial dimension to it, with London in a particular position of advantage relative to other parts of the UK (though there is also inequality within London itself) (UK2070, 2020: 6). Whether or not you regard inequality of this kind as a problem in itself, and whether you support taking steps to correct it, is partly a matter of political disposition. For instance, a more interventionist or socialist perspective, often associated with the political left , might suggest that income should be more evenly distributed. From this view- point, society has a responsibility to ensure material eq- uity, and to do otherwise is to deny groups of people full How well protected are trans rights in the UK?

© Oxford University Press