Assessment of impacts
In accordance with the EQIA process, having gathered information on the draft Policy and those that are likely to be affected by it, the Council must then assess whether there is likely to be a differential impact on groups within one or more of the Section 75 categories should the Policy be adopted, before determining the extent of that differential impact and whether it is likely to be adverse.
On this occasion, Irish speakers and members of Irish groups and communities are likely to advance an argument that the Policy should be regarded first and foremost as a positive action measure, while downplaying any potential adverse impact on those who have a different perception. The EQIA will endeavour to take account of these competing perspectives.
Previous consultations around language issues in the city have consistently provoked considerable interest - along with a binary division of opinion between those for and those against. At the very least, the EQIA will afford a contemporary opportunity to gauge opinion, and to help the Council reach an informed decision with regard to the promotion of good relations and/or equality of opportunity at this particular moment in time and mindful of ever-changing political circumstances regionally and locally.
It is important to reiterate that the Policy must be seen in context and as such represents no more than the natural outworking of the Council’s own Language Strategy, which has already been subject to close and regular scrutiny over many years.
The Policy also sits very comfortably alongside local, national and international minority language obligations, charters and guidance, with all the actions attached to the Policy being endorsed within these various documents. Indeed, it could be argued that the Council should already have moved further and faster in order to meet these national and international standards.
These are positive impacts of the Policy that will be embraced by one section of the community. However, in light of earlier rounds of consultation, the potential to raise concerns with regard to the promotion of a good and harmonious environment across the city cannot be ignored.
While many who speak Irish are of the view that its use is non-contentious and apolitical, there are those, predominantly from Protestant, Unionist and Loyalist communities, who would argue that the Irish language has been overtly politicised within the confines and context of Northern Ireland.
Hence, the Policy may have the potential to adversely impact people with regard to their religious belief, political opinion and/or race/ethnic origin (i.e. national identity) but the precise extent of this impact is yet to be determined. In this way, the EQIA process, and in particular the current public consultation and stakeholder engagement, can help consider further the tangible and contemporary impacts of the Policy in terms of: (i) encouraging or discouraging engagement with the Council and its various facilities and services; (ii) the promotion of a good and harmonious environment across the city; and (iii) the promotion of equality of opportunity and good relations among Council employees, residents and visitors of the city.
Equality of opportunity
The EQIA process is intended to anticipate barriers to participation or failings in service provision (i.e. the promotion of equality of opportunity), and to assist public authorities in mitigating these adverse impacts as well as complying with the law.[1] One of the key indicators of adverse impact, as identified by the Equality Commission, can be lower participation rates or uptake by one or more group.
The proposals contained within the draft Policy may give rise to a potential adverse impact for users and potential users of Council facilities and services, and in particular those from a Protestant, Unionist, or Loyalist background.
In theory at least, it could be argued that there may be the potential for outworkings of the Policy, including bilingual signage, to introduce a ‘chill factor’ for those from particular communities which may in turn discourage access to, or use of, Council facilities and services. However, to date there is no hard evidence to substantiate this assertion, but this possibility should not be ignored in any future monitoring arrangements, and the consultation process will explore this possibility further.
Good relations
The 1998 Act requires the Council to have a scheme which states the Council’s arrangements for assessing its compliance with the good relations duty under Section 75 (2). It also requires the Council to consult on matters to which the good relations duty is likely to be relevant (including details of the persons to be consulted).
The Council’s Equality Scheme commits the Council to following the guidance of the Equality Commission. This recommends the use of EQIAs to assess the impact of a proposed policy upon both limbs of Section 75. It recognises the interdependence between the two statutory duties, while acknowledging the primacy afforded to the first statutory duty (due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity) over the second (regard to the desirability of promoting good relations).
Over the last decade, there has been a longstanding debate with regard to the status of good relations within Section 75. Originally set out in 2013 by the Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ), in brief this perspective maintains that good relations’ considerations rest uneasily within Section 75 and should not inform deliberations or decisions attaching to an EQIA. Instead it is argued that the focus of an EQIA should fall exclusively on the first Section 75 duty (the promotion of equality of opportunity). Furthermore, where there are positive impacts on one community then these should be afforded due consideration along with any adverse impacts attaching to a proposal or policy.
The Council acknowledges the primacy afforded to the equality of opportunity duty in Section 75 (1) and that there is no statutory obligation to carry out an EQIA in relation to Section 75 (2). However, where a policy or proposal has the potential to harm good relations then this potential adverse impact cannot be disregarded, in particular as there is a likelihood that the promotion of equality of opportunity may also be affected directly or indirectly, for example where members of one community are then less likely to use a facility or service, or where community relations deteriorate to a point where the use and/or availability of facilities or services is affected.
The evidence that is available to date, and including the previous rounds of public consultation, does indicate that the Policy may have the potential to have a perceived adverse impact on good relations on grounds of religious belief, political opinion, and also perhaps race/ethnic origin (i.e. national identity), with residents, visitors and employees from a Protestant, Unionist or Loyalist community background more likely to perceive the possibility of an adverse impact.
Previous consultations on related matters, and including street signs and leisure centre signage, has suggested that there may be the potential for those who do not support the use of languages other than English to see the promotion of Irish as potentially challenging to their sense of identity.
With this in mind, there are already safeguards in place within the Policy to ensure that its implementation is scheduled so as to be fair, reasonable and proportionate within the present-day context of local circumstances. The phased approach to implementation, taking into account the demography of the City, should allow for a period of adjustment for communities that may be more resistant to change, and along with other measures contained within the Policy, these will now be subject to a period of consultation.
Conclusions
The draft EQIA on this Policy is now being made available for public consultation as Step 5 in the EQIA process.
The historical evidence that is available to date, and prior to this current period of consultation, suggests that elements of the draft Policy may be perceived to have the potential for an adverse impact but the extent of that impact is yet to be fully determined, and the consultation phase of the EQIA should be informative in this regard.
