The LIE of the EIA
I know it’s a legal
requirement, I know you have to be seen to be complying with the law or
ticking the box. But really let’s just be honest it doesn’t work. The reason it
doesn’t work is I think the actual point has been missed.
The point always was to allow the public their view on matters that are important, to issues that may affect their particular strand which has particular relevant needs. The problem is really the powers that be don’t want to listen they, just want to be left with the power to rule.
On my web presence today I have counted six different consultations and five questionnaires all related to matters that really concern me. Sorry but I don’t have time to spend time on filling in another survey or answering meaningless questions that nobody in power will actually take heed off. The questions which all ask in such a way that you are led to making a predetermined decision.
Even when you represent a group of people or join forces with other organisations to have your say, the fundamental rules of due regard that is required are ignored. So what is the point? Even if you’re successful in getting a judicial review through the courts, all that will happen is the courts will ask the powers to do it again. Even if due regard is given the authority can still choose to make the same decision.
This was never the intention of the legislation nor the reasons behind it. The intention of the public sector duty was always for those in power to think about what the effects of their decisions will have on people of particular characteristics before making decisions and to take steps to stop this from occurring. If the people in power have already decided because there political thought process doesn’t follow the principles of Equality whether it be physical or financial, no matter how much you ask them to think it won’t change their thought processes.
Again and again I am seeing a trend in EIA's one that does all the basics, including how it may affect people, but when it comes to mitigation the answer is where working on it, or it’s just a draft. This is an excuse. If you look carefully at case law the duty is a positive one which needs to be done before or at the time the process is put in to place.
Is there another way? Yes there is but again those in power aren’t willing to allow it happen. The only reason being that to allow it requires them to shift the power or control to the people. It's not a new buzzword it’s been around for some time, yet very little of it exists in central or local government.
The principles of co-production where rather than an authority or power coming up with solutions. The solutions are brought together by the people and the authority together. This not only brings new ideas and solutions to the table, but as it involves all people you are more likely to get it right. If it’s done properly you don’t even need to consult afterwards as it’s already done by the very fact that it is coproduction and you have taken people’s views on the way.
The point always was to allow the public their view on matters that are important, to issues that may affect their particular strand which has particular relevant needs. The problem is really the powers that be don’t want to listen they, just want to be left with the power to rule.
On my web presence today I have counted six different consultations and five questionnaires all related to matters that really concern me. Sorry but I don’t have time to spend time on filling in another survey or answering meaningless questions that nobody in power will actually take heed off. The questions which all ask in such a way that you are led to making a predetermined decision.
Even when you represent a group of people or join forces with other organisations to have your say, the fundamental rules of due regard that is required are ignored. So what is the point? Even if you’re successful in getting a judicial review through the courts, all that will happen is the courts will ask the powers to do it again. Even if due regard is given the authority can still choose to make the same decision.
This was never the intention of the legislation nor the reasons behind it. The intention of the public sector duty was always for those in power to think about what the effects of their decisions will have on people of particular characteristics before making decisions and to take steps to stop this from occurring. If the people in power have already decided because there political thought process doesn’t follow the principles of Equality whether it be physical or financial, no matter how much you ask them to think it won’t change their thought processes.
Again and again I am seeing a trend in EIA's one that does all the basics, including how it may affect people, but when it comes to mitigation the answer is where working on it, or it’s just a draft. This is an excuse. If you look carefully at case law the duty is a positive one which needs to be done before or at the time the process is put in to place.
Is there another way? Yes there is but again those in power aren’t willing to allow it happen. The only reason being that to allow it requires them to shift the power or control to the people. It's not a new buzzword it’s been around for some time, yet very little of it exists in central or local government.
The principles of co-production where rather than an authority or power coming up with solutions. The solutions are brought together by the people and the authority together. This not only brings new ideas and solutions to the table, but as it involves all people you are more likely to get it right. If it’s done properly you don’t even need to consult afterwards as it’s already done by the very fact that it is coproduction and you have taken people’s views on the way.
Or perhaps Equality doesn’t
matter, or Equality that is important anyway. Anyone remember sec 1 of the
Equality Act the one relating to socio economic factors? It was never brought
in to force. I wonder why?
Comments
Post a Comment