Interviews with:

·  Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager; and

·  Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant

Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant introduced the Equalities Objectives report to the Committee. She explained that the Council’s duty under the new act was to set one or more equalities objectives.  Members were informed that the Council would be setting three objectives which as felt to be proportionate to the size of the authority.  They were required to be specific, measurable and achievable. 

The authority had to consider the data available to them on the ‘protected characteristics’ which were:

• Disability;
• Gender reassignment;
• Pregnancy;
• Race;
• Religion;
• Sex and Sexual orientation;
• Age; and
• Marriage.

Miss Negus explained that the data that had been available mainly related to age, gender, ethnicity and disabilities. As more data became available more objectives could be set, the Council would not have to wait a further four years to do this. One of the key recommendations of the report was that when the Council ran surveys more of the characteristics would be included in the questions.  There was also an intention to talk to stakeholders and improve data collection methods.

Members were concerned that there would be pressure on residents to reveal private information such and religion and sexual orientation.  Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, assured Members that  all equalities questions were optional.

The Committee were told that the three objectives to be set were:

• Improve the number of visitors to the museum aged 55+ by 5% over the next year. This target would then be expected to recur but this should be assessed after the first year.

The Committee were informed that this would fit into the Council’s priority of making Maidstone a decent place.  The museum was underused by the borough’s elderly residents and work would involve a cafe and events for older people.

• Increase the proportion of men registering for the Healthy Weight from 24% to 28% over the next year. Subject to review, targets would then be set for each of the next three years leading to a probable target of 40% by the end of the fourth year.

It was highlighted that this was dependent on the programme being granted PCT funding to continue. This target would fit with the Council’s priority outcome of ensuring that ‘residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced’. Members were informed that it was mainly women who were referred to the programme despite research showing that there were a higher proportion of overweight men in the borough than women. This target could also help to address the issue that men in deprived wards had a life expectancy of up to 5 years less than in other wards.

• Increase the proportion of people aged 18-24 who feel that the Council keeps people ‘well informed’ or ‘fairly well informed’ about services and benefits to 58% over four years.

Members were told that this objective was based on the results of the recent Resident’s Satisfaction Survey and the earlier Place Survey in 2008.

The Committee questioned who would take ownership of the objectives and targets.  They were informed that each objective would be assigned to a manager and actions included in service plans.  It was explained that there would be a number of different contributors but there would be overall ownership. The objective set around young people would be owned by the Head of Communications but there would be a number of different departments whose leaflets and communication methods would have to be considered in ensuring that this objective was met.

It was established that when the action plans were developed Managers would be questioning the cause of the inequality and why it existed before setting recommendations to achieve the outcome. Members were informed that the objectives would be monitored in the Council’s biannual survey.

Concern was raised over the objective set around the museum.  It was felt that there would be an impact on visitor numbers when the neighbouring Library relocated, reducing footfall to the area. The Museum had been extended but there had been staff cuts and income generation targets put in place because of a funding shortfall. Members were concerned that the various actions taken with the Museum, along with the equalities objective set, were not being addressed in a joined up manner.

Miss Kershaw explained that surveys would be used to measure the outcome of the objective which would reduce the burden to staff. 

Members questioned the way in which people were selected for the Healthy Weight programmes.  It was clarified that this was through self referral or by a GP referral and the criteria was a BMI of 28 or over.

A Member referred to 1.3.14 in the report and the comment made regarding the shortage of young people at Maidstone Borough Council.  It was felt that this could be seen as a positive outcome as happy staff remained in continuous employment which over time increased the age group.

In relation to staff numbers Members questioned the number of staff leavers since March 2011, when the last staff analysis was undertaken.  They were informed there had been 61 leavers.

It was recommended that:

a)  The report be noted by the Committee and recommendations set out in the report be taken forward with the Committee’s approval; and

b)  The Committee’s concerns regarding the capacity of the Museum in achieving the outcome of the equalities objective:  ‘Improve the number of visitors to the museum aged 55+ by 5% over the next year’ be taken into account by the Cabinet Member in his decision making.