MPs issue critical report on Equality and Human Rights Commission

MPs expressed concern this week whether the Equality and Human Rights Commission was doing enough to devise and disseminate a culture of human rights in public authorities.

In a report the joint committee on human rights said the EHRC’s short human rights strategy, which was published in November 2009, showed that the commission was seeking to approach its responsibilities in a more systematic basis than before, but criticised the document as “too vague”.

The MPs recommended that the commission launch a more detailed version of the strategy later in 2010, after public consultation, “so that it is more focused and includes timescales, milestones and indicators of success”.

“We also recommend that the next human rights strategy should be more clearly related to the strategic objectives set out in the EHRC’s overall strategy,” the report added.

The MPs also said:

• The commission is not yet fulfilling its mandate set out in the Equality Act
• Merging the three equality bodies and developing a strong corporate board for the new body “…..was not done successfully, for which the chair (Trevor Phillips) must take responsibility"
• They were concerned about allegations made by a number of former commissioners over the way in which the body has been led by Phillips
• Phillips’ reappointment in 2009 should have been subject to open competition. “The Minister for Women and Equality’s decision to reappoint Mr Phillips without any parliamentary involvement could undermine the perceived independence of the commission and put its accreditation as a national human rights institution at risk”
• They were concerned that the EHRC continues to operate without a chief executive, describing this as “unacceptable, particularly as there would seem to be no prospect of an appointment being made until much later in 2010”, and
• The commission’s credibility across the political spectrum would be enhanced if it included at least one commissioner with links to the Conservative Party.

In its response the EHRC said it was “disappointing” that the committee had ignored evidence the commission had put before it in relation to its policy work, and claimed that “much of this report is largely historic”.

It added that the critical evidence from former commissioners is strongly contested by the remaining commissioners.

The commission said: “Although we have much to do on our human rights mandate, we already have a firm body of work which has delivered significant benefits to many. The committee acknowledges the importance of our landmark human rights inquiry, and accepts its findings.

“In addition, we have intervened in a series of legal cases that have won new rights for millions of the most vulnerable people in our society, including carers, people in care homes, people in custody and military personnel.”