SCOPE AND REMIT

This response has been completed on behalf of the Children's Law Centre and will focus specifically on the implementation of the statutory equality duty in the context of children and young people. These comments should however be read in the context of the other equality duties which will also apply to children and young people, e.g. children with a disability and children without, children of different religious beliefs, race, sexual orientation or young people with dependants and without.

GENERAL COMMENTS

In relation to both consultation and equality of opportunity in respect of children and young people we believe that this legislation offers many opportunities and challenges for better government. We believe that if properly implemented it will result in children's issues being much more visible in government and in the work of the Northern Ireland Court Service, which takes a lead role in the implementation of policy and legislation affecting children and young people.

We welcome the commitment to comprehensive consultation with all those affected by your policies on the first page of the draft scheme.

FUNCTIONS AND POLICIES

We welcome the detailed breakdown of the functions, powers and duties of the court service which is very helpful as is the detailed layout of the main policies currently in operation.

We note that you have excluded a review of all existing legal aid policies but have given a commitment to review the reform programme under new policies. We would ask you to consider carefully the issues in relation to children and young people in terms of access to legal aid, prioritisation and capping as part of the assessment and would refer you in this regard to the submission made by The Children's Law Centre to Public Benefit and the Public Purse highlighting some of the equality issues in this regard.

It will be necessary to carry out a detailed analysis of the way in which the legal aid system operates in the context of children and young people in terms of age, financial considerations, type of case which attracts funding and those which do not. We would refer you to page 42 of The Equality Commission's Guidance in this regard.

We recognise the commitment to ongoing consultation in relation to legal aid policy but would suggest that a proper analysis of the present situation should be made available as part of this consultation process. We also suggest that consultation in this regard need to be wider than the list attached at Appendix A and in fact needs to be with all those affected by your policies.

ORGANISATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS/ COMPLIANCE

The only minor matter we would raise in this regard is that it would be helpful if a key member of staff could be identified within the diversity unit (i.e. the name of the post) to which complaints should be sent.

 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

We note at section 3.3 the commitment to subjecting policies, which have a significant impact on equality of opportunity to full equality impact assessment.

In our view however this wording does not comply with the Guidance at Section 2 (page 43) which states that the public authority must use the information gathered to decide whether there is or is likely to be, a differential impact, whether direct or indirect upon the relevant group.  We recommend that this wording is used in order to comply with the Guidance and legislative requirements.

At paragraph 3.4 we believe the duty to consult to be with those affected by policies and not simply with the listed public authorities and Equality Commission.

CONSULTATION

In our view many of the policies of The Northern Ireland Court Service have a considerable impact on the interaction of children and young people with our court system. We have already mentioned legal aid policy but there are also issues in relation to the administration of the courts which are particularly relevant in this regard, particularly in light of the recent decision in the European case of T & V v UK which emphasised the importance of children's understanding and participation in court proceedings which affect them in order for proceedings involving children to be compatible with Article 6 ECHR. The whole operation of the court system is central to this debate which ranges from the layout of the courtroom, the treatment of vulnerable witnesses and children's evidence, the use of wigs and gowns, the waiting facilities provided for children and young people and the provision of information for children and young people in an accessible format.

We are aware that legislative and policy debate is ongoing with regard to many of these issues, but in the context of making the system better for children and young people there are a number of matters in relation to consultation which will need to be addressed.

There is no commitment in your scheme to the inclusion of children and young people themselves in your consultation processes. It is difficult to envisage a consultation exercise for example on the use of child witness supporters or the layout of a court from a child's perspective without asking children and young people themselves about their views. The duty to consult in relation to screening and impact assessments of policies is with those likely to be affected, not simply with the schedule A list.

We recommend that your definition of consultation is widened to make reference with consulting with those who are affected by your policies and that specific reference is made to consulting with children and young people

We welcome the recognition at paragraph 4.7 that consideration will be given as to how best to communicate information to children and young people and presume that this envisages a consultation process, which includes the taking of their views.

We would welcome the use of young people' summaries in this regard and the distribution of information about the court service and court procedures in language which is accessible to children and young people.

We note the reference to emergency policies and recommend that a provision be inserted to allow for these policies to be consulted upon and reviewed after implementation.

PUBLICATION OF IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

We object to the levying of a charge for material as this is not provided for in the Guidance and is not compatible with accessible information.

PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND SERVICES

We recommend that children and young people are identified as at risk in terms of access to information and are included as a fourth category on page 23.

We also recommend that the arrangements for providing information to children and young people are reviewed in accordance with Para 8.3.

CONCLUSION

We found the equality scheme produced by The Northern Ireland Court Service to be clearly set out and helpful in terms of the clear definition of functions and policies.

However we are not of the opinion that the consultation procedures as presently drafted meet with the requirements of the Equality Commission's guidelines .We trust that our comments in the context of children and young people can be incorporated into your scheme to ensure that the statutory duty is properly implemented and that children's rights are placed centrally to the decision making processes of The Northern Ireland Court Service.

We would be obliged to receive a copy of your final scheme when produced and thank you for affording us the opportunity to comment.

Paddy Kelly; Director, Children's Law Centre.