Research Project: Systematic Racial Discrimination—A Comparative Assessment of the

First Triennial Review Titled ‘How Fair is Britain’ and Substantive

Equality in Western Australia

Prepared by: Bablu Chakma

Masters Student

Curtin University

Prepared for: Equal Opportunity Commission of WA

Substantive Equality Unit

Date of Submission: 7 February 2013

Bablu Chakma is an intern at the Equal Opportunity Commission (SEU) within

Equal Opportunity Commission, WA. His responsibility at SEU is to conduct a

comparative study of the First Triennial Review Titled ‘How Fair is Britain’ and

Substantive Equality in Western Australia. Besides, he is studying Master of

Human Rights at Curtin University.

He is keen on human rights and social justice, particularly on the rights of

Indigenous peoples and other minority groups in Bangladesh. He worked for

Kapaeeng Foundation, a human rights organization for the Indigenous

peoples in Bangladesh. He was also a part of central leadership of Chittagong

Hill Tracts Hill Students’ Council, the largest Indigenous student organization

working for the rights of the Indigenous peoples in Bangladesh. He attended

different workshops, seminars, and conferences relevant to his area of

interest.

Introduction The Equal Opportunity Commission administers the Policy Framework for

substantive equality which addresses systemic discrimination within the public

sector. It is designed to assist major public sector departments eliminate and

prevent systemic indirect forms of discrimination in their service delivery to

Aboriginal and minority ethnic groups. In doing so, Substantive Equality

promotes differentiated service delivery in order to achieve equal outcomes.

The Substantive Equality Unit (SEU) within the EOC is the first of its kind in

Australia.

This research paper was commissioned by the SEU within the Equal

Opportunity Commission of Western Australia. With a view to improve service

outcomes for Aboriginal peoples and minority ethnic groups, this paper

identifies the British Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)

monitoring indicators and compares it with the types of data necessary to

undertake similar monitoring for Substantive Equality in WA. This paper

attempts to identify whether equality data captured for Britain can be easily

readily identified and sourced by relevant government departments of WA.

However, due to some constraints, this paper has selected a sample sized

number of indicators in Britain to answer the research question.

Overall, this paper partially addresses the comparison between the monitoring

indicators in Britain and WA, and has not had the capacity to answer whether

the substantive equality data required in WA can easily be sourced from

participating government departments.

Scope, Methodology, and Limitation of the Study Scope Every three (3) years the EHRC is required to report to the UK Parliament on

progress related to human rights and equality. This paper relies heavily on

the first review undertaken by the EHRC and details the evidence from a

range of British sources including census data, surveys as well as research, in

order to identify and help answer the question ‘How Fair is Britain?’ The

British measures and the first review therefore presents an early opportunity

to examine how best Substantive Equality in WA (in particular its

measurement and monitoring) can adopt the kinds of indicators and evidence

in operation in the British. Britain and its monitoring of equality were selected

because Substantive Equality in WA closely follows the experience of Britain.

Britain imposes a total of forty (40) monitoring indicators across various

spheres of public life including services provided by the Government or its

agencies.

Methodology This paper adhered to the Substantive Equality Policy Framework and

examined whether WA equality measures could be identified so as to match

those in operation in Britain. Noting that this research is the first stage of an

anticipated broader study and is expected to evolve as more information is

known; the following research questions were therefore posed to help guide

the study:

1. Identify possible Australian equality indicators (including the sources)

to match Britain’s;

2. Compare how useful the indicators would be for the purpose of

Substantive Equality (including what is similar and different)

3. Describe the issues the research raises and suggest potential next

steps.

The primary source of information examined was the Equality and Human

Rights Commission (EHRC) Triennial Review 2010, ‘How Fair is Britain’.

Information for this study was obtained by accessing the website of the EHRC

where the review is published in full, according to equality criteria. The data

for the required substantive equality data in WA or Australia as a whole have

mostly been collected from different government and non-government

websites. The website of the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) have been

widely used in this regard. Notably, when going through this paper, it should

be kept in mind that the British indicators are based on whole country, even

though sometimes there are breakdowns when the data between states

contrast with each other. Similarly, even though this study set out to compare

equality data in Britain with WA, many of the data sources obtained could only

be found for Australia as a whole.

A desk top study of the information was therefore undertaken to find out which

of the forty (40) indicators in use across Britain were relevant to Substantive

Equality. Notably, of the forty (40) indicators, the following nine (9) indicators

were selected. The indicators are:

1. Life expectancy;

2. Equal treatment by the criminal justice system;

3. Crime against person;

4. Poor mental health;

5. Participation in higher education;

6. Pay gaps;

7. Housing and neighbourhood quality;

8. Access to care; and

9. Formal political participation.

Consultation with internal staff provided feedback as to the relevancy of the

indicators. However, this information was provided at the mid – point of the

study and would have benefited with a separate research question to discern

the relevancy of a sample set of indicators. The indicators have been chosen

both based on the importance and on a random basis. The indicators that are

chosen on the basis of importance are life expectancy, equal treatment by the

criminal justice system, participation in higher education, pay gap, and formal

political participation. Each of these indicators is important because they

range from the things that are necessary for survival to flourish in life. For

example, data regarding life expectancy demonstrates the existence of a

person whereas the higher education data reflects the flourish of life. Rest

four indicators have been selected randomly.

Limitations The study suffers from the limitation of having as low as nine (9) indicators,

out of forty indicators used across Britain. The main reason for choosing nine

(9) indicators is due to the limited time and availability of the author as well as

relevant staff of the EOC to work within the time allocated to this study. The

study occurred over seven weeks at just under one day per week. This paper,

therefore, determined select number of nine indicators with one indicator from

each of nine areas of capabilities and freedoms imposed which could be used

for the monitoring purposes of Substantive Equality. A further limitation is the

extent to which the nine (9) indicators can be sourced in WA from participating

Government departments. Rather in many cases it shows where the equality

data can be sourced nationally (for Australia as a whole). This is due to

management of data for the country as a whole which result in the

unavailability of state-specific data.

Findings and Analysis

The UK's first triennial review How Fair is Britain shows that the EHRC, Britain

uses its 40 monitoring indicators under the equality characteristics of age,

disability, gender, race and ethnicity, religion or belief, sexual orientation, and

transgender status.1 According to Britain, these indicators fall under nine

broad areas of capabilities and freedoms that are needed for the happiness

and productivity of the people. The nine broad areas are life, legal security,

health, education, employment, standard of living, care and support, and

power and voice.2

On the other hand, WA (and Australia as a whole) does not have any such

monitoring indicators and relies heavily on the indicators arising from census

data. Even though this paper was commissioned to locate all the monitoring

indicators used in Britain, due to the limitations mentioned in the last chapter,

this paper tries to have a close look at one indicator of nine aforesaid areas

used in Britain. After having a close look at each indicator used in Britain, this

section will attempt to locate those indicators in the relevant sources of

information in WA and Australia in order to make a comparison with the

former. The comparison between the monitoring indicators used in Britain and

                                                                                                               1 Equality and Human Rights Commission, How Fair is Britain (2010) 14 < http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/key-projects/how-fair-is-britain/>. 2 Ibid.

the data required for substantive equality in WA covered under this paper are

set out in the Table below:

Table: Summary of Comparison between Indicators

Area UK Indicators As They Apply I

Britain

Ethnicity Indicators Used in UK

Yes/No

Comparison Aus/WA for

e.g. Indicator Used

Aus/WA Source

Life

Expectan

cy

Age, sex, socio-

economic status,

and country of

birth.

Country

Of Birth.

Sex, age,

region, and

Aboriginality.

Department of

Health, WA;

Australian

Institute of

Health and

Welfare; and

ABS.

Equal

treatment

by

criminal

justice

system

Age, gender,

disability and

ethnicity.

Ethnicity. Gender and

age.

ABS and

Australian

Institute of

Criminology.

Crimes

against

person

Gender, age,

LLTI/disability,

ethnicity, sexual

orientation, and

socio-economic

status.

Ethnicity. Cultural and

linguistic

minorities,

Indigenous,

diverse

sexuality,

disability, age,

and region.

Women’s

Council for

Domestic and

Family

Violence

Services

(WA) and

Parliament of

Australia.

Poor

Mental

Socio-economic

group, ethnicity,

Ethnicity. Age, marital

status,

ABS/Australia

n Institute of

Health and religion. educational

qualification and

employment

status.

Health and

Welfare

(AIHW),

National

Survey of

Mental Health

and Wellbeing

(SMHWB).

Participat

ion in

Higher

Educatio

n

Gender, ethnicity,

disability, age,

sexual orientation,

and transgender.

Ethnicity. Gender,

Disability,

Nationality,

linguistic

minorities,

Indigenous

peoples,

gender, socio-

economic

groups, and

region.

Department of

Industry

Innovation,

Science,

Research and

Tertiary

Education

(DIISRTE).

Pay Gap Gender, age, and

sexual orientation.

No. Gender, age,

occupation/soci

oeconomic

status, and

industry.

Department of

Commerce,

WA and

Equal

Opportunity

for Women in

the

Workplace

Agency, ABS.

Housing

and

Housing

and

Neighbo

Gender, age,

disability and

Gender, age,

disability, and

ethnicity.

Ethnicity No equality data

for

neighbourhood

quality. But

housing in

Department of

Housing and

Works, WA;

Department of

Families,

urhood

Quality

general has

disability, age,

country of birth,

cultural and

linguistic

diversity,

household

composition,

socio-economic

status, and

dwelling type.

Housing,

Community

Services and

Indigenous

Affairs.

Access

to Care

Gender, age,

disability, and to a

limited extent by

ethnicity.

Ethnicity. Gender, age,

Aboriginal and

Torres Strait

Islanders,

Linguistic

minorities, and

country of birth.

Australian

Institute of

Health and

Welfare and

National

Seniors

Australia.

Formal

Political

Participat

ion

Gender, age,

socio-economic

status, and

ethnicity.

Ethnicity. gender, age,

and socio-

economic

status, fluency

in English, and

country of birth.

Parliament of

Australia,

Australian

Electoral

Commission,

and the

Western

Australian

Parliament.

Life Expectancy: Life expectancy is an important indicator used by the EHRC to monitor

equality in Britain. It is often used to indicate changes in the health status of a

community or to make comparisons between population groups. 3 Britain

                                                                                                               3 Ibid 73.

maintains the data at birth and at ages 20, 65 and 80.4 In addition, life

expectancy data is maintained for the people from different socio-economic

background which is classified according to different official position or skill of

the people.5 Also, the life expectancy data is maintained only for two sexes

i.e. men and women.6 However, the life expectancy data regarding other

people with disability, sexual orientation or transgender status are left out of

the purview of this indicator.7 Furthermore, the data regarding ethnic groups is

also not covered in Britain. Even though it tries to use country of birth as a

proxy of ethnicity, it suffers from serious limitation because only the country of

birth is used for keeping data.8 And other ethnic minorities and children born

in foreign countries are left behind. All these data are kept at the national and

state level, not broken down into city or other smaller section of the system in

Britain.9

In WA, however, the life expectancy data is maintained slightly different from

Britain. Whereas Britain keeps the life expectancy data at birth, at the age of

65, and 80, Australia keeps the data for life expectancy at birth, at the age of

15, and 65.10 Unlike Britain, Australian life expectancy data shows that the life

expectancy data is available at regional, city, and rural level as well.11 Despite

that, the life expectancy data between Britain and WA have some similar

features. Like Britain, the WA data also shows a comparison between the

average life expectancy of the two sexes—men and women. 12 The life

expectancy data regarding the people based on Aboriginal status also

                                                                                                               4 Ibid. 5 Ibid 76. 6 Ibid 74. 7 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 73. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Australian Institute of Human Rights, Australian Trends in Life Expectancy <http://www.aihw.gov.au/australian-trends-in-life-expectancy/>. 11 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Life Expectancy at Birth <http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/57E4ADF3F2034BCECA257943000CEE0B?opendocument>. 12 Department of Health WA, Population Health Indicators: Western Australia 2008 (2008), 5 <http://www.health.wa.gov.au/publications/documents/Population_health_indicators.pdf>.

appears to be available.13 Other than that, other ethnicity data in general

doesn’t seem to be available in WA or Australia at large. Furthermore, similar

to Britain, the data regarding religious minorities, people with disabilities, and

sexual orientation are either not maintained or publicly available in WA.

Whatever equality data can be sourced, can be sourced from the website of

relevant government departments—the Department of Health, Western

Australia. They provide the data based on the surveys and research

conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. And nationwide data,

including WA, can be sourced from the Australian Institute of Health and

Welfare.

Equal Treatment by Criminal Justice System: Britain examines three key measures under equal treatment by the Criminal

Justice System: the percentage stopped and searched (stop and search), the

percentage confident that the criminal justice system (CJS) meets the needs

of victims and of the accused (confidence in the CJS), and the percentage

satisfied with the handling of police complaints (handling of police

complaints).14 Under the measure stop and search, the data are broken down

only by ethnicity.15 Additionally, it uses British Crime Survey data carried out

as a part of the Equality Measurement Framework (EMF) which have been

disaggregated by age, gender, disability and ethnicity using small sample

sizes.16 They include evidence from a range of sources to illustrate the

experience of ethnic minorities including Gypsies and Travellers in relation to

stop and search.17 However, groups defined by socio-economic background,

religion or belief, sexual orientation and transgender status are not covered.18

Besides, the British Crime Survey measures public confidence in the CJS’s

ability to meet the needs of victims and defendants and the public perceptions

about the overall fairness of the CJS. These data have been disaggregated by

                                                                                                               13 Ibid. 14 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 126. 15 Ibid 127. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid 128.

age, gender, disability and ethnicity. 19 In this regard, supplementary

evidences from small-scale surveys are also being used to illustrate the

experience of women, people with learning disabilities and LGB and

transgender people.20 However, the groups defined by socio-economic status

and religion or belief are not covered in this indicator.21 Furthermore, since the

British Crime Survey data is not statistically significant, the Independent

Police Complaints Commission has carried out relevant which also have been

disaggregated by gender, age and ethnicity.22 However, the groups defined

by religion or belief, disability, socio-economic status, sexual orientation and

transgender status are not covered in this indicator.

On the contrary, Australia does not examine the equality of the services

provided under the criminal justice system using the measures different from

Britain. Such data can be found from a nationally conducted household survey

titled National Survey of Community Satisfaction with Police Services. Much

of the research examining public confidence in criminal justice proceeds by

asking respondents in general about their level of confidence in the criminal

justice system or how well they think the criminal justice system is doing.23

And such data are basically for the Australia as a whole; no separate data for

WA is maintained. It provides information on attitudes towards services

provided by the police, perceptions on fear of crime and problems in the

neighbourhood areas.24 It takes only gender and age into consideration as

equality data.25 Additionally, a survey report published by Australian Institute

of Criminology titled ‘What Australians think about crime and justice: results

from the 2007 Survey of Social Attitudes’ shows the confidence in criminal

justice system that comprise of the confidence in criminal courts and prisons

                                                                                                               19 Ibid. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. 23 Australian Bureau of Statistics, National Survey: Community Satisfaction with Police Services, Above n 11. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid.

along with police services.26 But this survey also lacks equality data other

than age and sex which is different from the equality data in Britain.27

Furthermore, the data regarding stop and search seems unavailable in WA.

The data available regarding the confidence in the criminal justice system can

be sourced from the websites of Australian Bureau of Statistics and Australian

Institute of Criminology.

Crimes against the person

Britain examines three key measures under crimes against the person: the

percentage of people reporting that they have been victims of violent crime,

the percentage of people reporting that they have been victims of sexual

assault, including attempts (focusing on rape), and the percentage of people

reporting that they have been victims of domestic violence and abuse or

partner abuse.28 Violent crime data collected through British Crime Survey

can be disaggregated by gender, age (16+), socio-economic factors and

limiting long-term illness (LLTI) or disability.29 Such disaggregation is possible

by ethnicity and by religion or belief – often only by pooling data as the

numbers are generally too small to yield statistically significant results.30 Data

from the British Crime Survey relating to this measure cannot be covered the

experiences of LGB, or transgender people. Additionally, the other source

Scottish Crime and Justice Survey can be disaggregated by gender, age

(16+), and socio-economic status.31 Under sexual violence, Britain focuses on

rape since that is the most persistent form of violence against women and

girls.32 There are two surveys conducted by British Crime Survey and Scottish

Crime and Justice Survey in this regard which provide a more accurate

reflection of the fact because these two surveys use self-completion modules.

                                                                                                               26 Lynne Roberts and David Indermaur, What Australians Think About Crime and Justice: Results from the 2007 Survey of Social Attitudes (2007) Australian Institute of Criminology <http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/4/8/A/%7b48A3B38B-376E-4A7A-A457-AA5CC37AE090%7drpp101.pdf>. 27 Ibid. 28 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 192. 29 Ibid 193. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid 194.

Both self-completion modules are administered only to those aged 16 to 59.33

This means that Britain miss out the information about elder and child abuse,

although they use supplementary sources of information where possible. The

British Crime Survey disaggregates by gender, and contains information

about the experiences of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) people even though

the number is low due to the non-disclosure of their identity.34 Finally, both of

these Survey self-completion modules ask about partner and family abuse

(including emotional, financial and sexual abuse, and the use of threats or

force as well).35 Besides, they draw on the face-to-face British Crime Survey

for information about domestic violence. 36 Such data have been

disaggregated by gender, age, socio-economic status, LLTI/disability,

ethnicity, sexual orientation, and socio-economic status.37 Along with the

surveys, they also consulted with various relevant literatures.38

Like Britain, WA keeps data on the crime reported to police on different sexual

assault and domestic violence. WA maintains a fairly broad range of equality

data that are covered under four broad categories-multicultural communities,

diverse sexuality, people with disabilities, and seniors and elder abuse.39 It

also maintains data about Indigenous communities and juvenile justice in

separate categories.40 However, unlike Britain, the data regarding rape and

domestic violence are not separately maintained in WA. Rather, the domestic

violence and sexual violence seem overlapping. Additionally, The Parliament

of Australia also maintains the equality data for the people across the country

from different groups who are under the threat of sexual violence or domestic

violence. The equality data in this regard comprises of different age groups,

Indigenous women, women living in rural and remote areas, women with

                                                                                                               33 Ibid. 34 Ibid. 35 Ibid 195. 36 Ibid. 37 Ibid. 38 Ibid. 39 Nicole Lagett, Violence Against Women in Western Australia (2007) Women’s Council for Domestic and Family Violence Services (WA), 5 <http://www.womenscouncil.com.au/uploads/6/1/1/9/6119703/____violence_against_women_in_western_australia_report.pdf>. 40 Ibid 10.

disability, and women from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.41

Even though Australia attempts to keep the disability data, the full extent of it

is not available.42 The data about the women from culturally and linguistically

diverse backgrounds cover the ethnicity in WA. The maintenance of some of

such data, however, different in WA (or Australia as a whole) is different from

those of Britain. For example, unlike Britain, the age is not confined into

particular age groups in WA. WA clearly mentions about the abuse of the

children at the domestic sphere. 43 The maintenance of data regarding

Indigenous men and women in WA or Australia as a whole is also different

from Britain. Furthermore, the data about women living in rural and remote

areas is also different from Britain since it doesn’t keep any such data. On the

other hand, whereas WA has some diversity data in with regards to sexual

assault and domestic violence, it appears that despite having a statistic for

different types of crime including violent crime, there is no equality data in this

regard.44 The crime statistics available for violent crime and other data can be

sourced from WA police department. The rape and domestic violence data for

WA in particular can be sourced from both the Parliament of WA and the

survey of Women’s Council for Domestic and Family Violence Services (WA).

Similar the data for the country as a whole can be sourced from the website of

the Parliament of Australia.

Poor Mental Health

Under poor mental health, Britain gives the percentage of people who attain a

score in psychological questionnaires that indicate possible mental health

conditions, such as depression or anxiety.45 The data about socio-economic

groups are used but they are not comparable since they vary in different parts

                                                                                                               41 Liesl Mitchell, Domestic Violence in Australia—An Overview of the Issues (22 November 2011) Parliament of Australia <http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/DVAustralia#_Toc309798373>. 42 Above n 39, 13. 43 Ibid 24. 44 Western Australia Police <http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeStatistcalNotes/tabid/1212/Default.aspx>. 45 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 270.

of the country.46 There is a lack of disaggregated data for disabled people

which implies a general association between poor mental health and disability

but no more detailed information of the particular impairments that may be

associated with poor mental health.47 Britain maintains data on ethnicity and

religion or belief in some parts of the country.48 There is limited evidence for

sexual orientation and transgender groups and therefore, they are reliant on

varied literature which limits the extent to which they can make any

generalizations to the wider population.49 However, there are issues with

under-reporting and diagnosis that apply across all groups, (particularly men

and people who have a different cultural background, or English is not first

language) which limit the reliability of the indicator.50

While developing a National Mental Health Strategy (NMHS), the finding of

lack of mental health data resulted in a national survey of mental health.51

Therefore, there is a nation-wide mental health data for Australia; there is no

separate study for WA per se. The Western Australian part of the survey was

conducted in 1997 to 1998.52 The equality data regarding mental health

basically covers about gender as well as different age groups—both children

and adults.53 Besides, the mental health survey in Australia maintains equality

data relating to gender, marital status, educational qualification, and

employment status.54 However, there is no equality data relating to religion,

sexual orientation, transgender, ethnicity etc. maintained in WA or Australia at

large. In fact, the focus of the survey was more on the type and severity of the

mental illness, rather than equality data. Another survey named National

Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing (SMHWB) conducted in 2007 only

covers only those disorders that can be identified using an interview-based

                                                                                                               46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid 271. 50 Ibid. 51 Australian Bureau of statistics, Mental Health and Wellbeing: Profile of Adults, Western Australia, 1997-98, Above n 11. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid.

household survey.55 Mental Health data can be sourced from the Australian

Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) which is actually dependent on ABS

survey data in this regard. Most of the data in this regard comes from the

2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing (SMHWB).

Participation in Higher Education

In Britain, the participation in higher education is measured by determining the

percentage of each group studying on a first degree course.56 The Higher

Education Statistics Agency’s collection of data about students in Higher

Education Institutes covers data supplied by higher education institutes.57 The

data collection procedure is uniform across all institutions, regardless of size,

nature and location; the range of data fields collected is administration-

dependent to a limited extent.58 The Higher Education Statistics Authority

does not collect data from Further Education Colleges.59 These data are

supplemented with data from other reports which are based mainly on

analysis of data relating to gender, ethnicity, disability and age. 60 The

disability categories indicate the type of disability that a student has on the

basis of their own self-assessment.61 Students are not obliged to report a

disability; therefore figures reported in analyses are derived from a subset

which may not be representative of the total student population.62 There are

no data by religion or belief, sexual orientation or transgender. As far as

possible, other literature has been drawn on for sexual orientation and

transgender, although due to small sample sizes, issues raised are indicative

only of possible issues facing these groups.63

The data collection process in Australia seems similar to that of Britain as

Department of Industry Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education

                                                                                                               55 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Mental Health (2009) Above n 11. 56 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 338. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. 61 Ibid. 62 Ibid. 63 Ibid.

(DIISRTE) also collects the higher education data from the higher educational

institutions. Even though the data in this regard is maintained nationally, the

WA data can be easily sourced. Like in other indicators, the data regarding

gender is maintained. But it includes the students of two sexes—male and

female.64 Britain keeps the data regarding the students from both overseas

and Australia.65 So it means that the data about the nationality is kept in

Australia. Separate data about students with non-English-speaking

background is maintained.66 This means that they keep data about linguistic

minorities. Other than that, Australia keeps data about the Aboriginal and

Torres Strait Islander peoples.67 The data about these three groups together

can be considered as ethnicity data. Higher education data regarding the

students from regional and remote areas, students with disabilities and

diverse socioeconomic status are also maintained.68 However, the data on

socioeconomic status, which is maintained under the category ‘low

socioeconomic status’ is a bit problematic. Because a clear distinction is not

made with other socio-economic statuses like ‘medium’ or ‘high’. But it

appears that the data regarding LGB and transsexual groups are not

available.

Pay Gaps In the data regarding the pay gaps, Britain looks at the median hourly pay of

employees (excluding unpaid overtime).69 The gender pay gap is usually

calculated from data published in the Annual Survey for Hours and Earnings

which is a survey of employers, rather than of individuals, and Britain claims

that as such is more likely to report actual earnings accurately.70 It is a

particularly rich source of data on earnings by occupation, industry and

region.71 This source can also be used to examine pay gaps by age.72 It

                                                                                                               64 Department of Industry, Innovation Science, Research and Tertiary Education <http://www.innovation.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx>. 65 Ibid. 66 Ibid. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid. 69 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 409. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid.

doesn’t contain any information on other equality characteristics. However,

Britain’s another source of data Labour Force Survey allows disaggregation

by most equality characteristics, apart from transgender.73 Sexual orientation

data are limited to those living in same-sex couples.74 In these data, single

lesbians and gay men cannot be identified.75 For these groups Britain draws

on general literature which indicates some possible issues they may face76.

Overall, the gender pay gap is substantial and the reasons for this have been

well researched. There is less evidence on pay gaps by ethnicity, disability,

religion or belief and sexual orientation.

Like Britain, Australia also collects its data on employee earnings from the

sample survey of the employers through a survey titled ‘The Survey of

Average Weekly Earnings’ (AWE). In the survey, the pay gap figure is based

on full time adult ordinary time earnings figures compiled by the ABS.77 Part

time and casual employees are not included, nor are overtime payments.78 It

appears that in the question of pay gap, Australia put emphasis on the

differences in the pay between the men and women since there are plenty of

surveys and researches on the pay gaps between two sex groups. The

Survey data shows that the biggest gender pay gap is in WA which is very

significant in comparison to the national statistics.79 Australia covers the pay

gap data for both public and private sector together where it also covers the

industry-wise, occupation, age data.80 But other data about ethnic groups,

sexual orientation, disability, religion etc. are not available. The data available

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             72 Ibid. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid. 75 Ibid. 76 Ibid. 77 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Information Paper: Release of Average Weekly Cash Earnings Series, May 2011, Above n 11. 78 Ibid. 79 Department of Commerce WA, Pay Equity and the Gender Pay Gap in Western Australia <http://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/LabourRelations/PDF/FlexibleWorkplaces/Pay_Equity_and_the_Gender_Pay_Gap_in_WA.pdf>. 80 Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency, Gender Pay Gap Statistics (May 2012) Workplace Gender Equality Agency <http://www.wgea.gov.au/Information_Centres/Resource_Centre/Statistics/Gender_Pay_Gap_Fact_Sheet_May_2012.pdf>.

for Australia as a whole in this regard can be sourced from website of Equal

Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency, ABS. In particular, the WA

pay gap data can be sourced from the website of the Department of

Commerce, WA.

Housing and Neighbourhood Quality

In Britain, there are several measures examined under Housing and

neighbourhood quality: overcrowded accommodation, substandard

accommodation and the numbers of households reporting problems with

pollution and crime.81 Under overcrowded accommodation, percentage living

in accommodation one or two bedrooms below the ‘bedroom standard’ level is

considered.82 And under substandard accommodation – percentage reporting

‘leaking roof, damp walls, floors or foundations, or rotten floorboards or

window frames (or ‘leaks, damp etc.’) is considered.83 In neighbourhood

quality, percentage reporting ‘pollution, grime, or other environmental

problems in the area caused by traffic or industry’ (‘pollution etc.’), and

percentage reporting ‘crime, violence or vandalism’ in the area (‘crime etc.’) is

considered. 84 For these measures, Britain uses the General Household

Survey at some parts of it which allows disaggregation of gender, age,

disability and ethnicity.85 But in other parts, it is slightly different where the

residents are asked to rate dwelling quality rather than to describe it, reducing

the possibility for direct comparisons to those for Britain as a whole.86 Data on

disability are limited.87 There are no data on transgender or sexual orientation

in terms of housing quality, but there is some limited alternative literature that

refers to related housing issues, such as homelessness.88 Overall, there is

very limited related literature for this measure for religion and belief; therefore

they are not covered.

                                                                                                               81 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 488. 82 Ibid. 83 Ibid. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid. 86 Ibid. 87 Ibid 489. 88 Ibid.

In WA, the neighbourhood quality data is not clear. A research report titled

‘More than a Roof and Four Walls’ shows that even though WA keeps the

data about the number of bedrooms in the accommodations—however, it

doesn’t keep the data about quality of the bedrooms in terms of ‘bedroom

standard’. 89 WA considers the residents in need of housing due to the

problems of quality, overcrowding and location (this includes many indigenous

households). 90 Even though it indicates that WA maintains data about

neighbourhood quality, there is no such indication of how they are measured.

In this line, it appears that WA maintains data about the neighbourhood

quality of Aboriginal people, as it mentions bout the lack of neighbourhood

quality facing by them in the State Housing Commission Annual Report.91

And other equality data seems unavailable about the neighbourhood quality.

But WA and Australia as a whole maintain equality data about access to

housing services in general. Such data are maintained for the people with

disability, age, country of birth, and cultural and linguistic diversity (along with

aboriginal and humanitarian migrants).92 Overall, it covers adequate ethnicity

data relevant for substantive equality. Moreover, other equality data

maintained in WA are household composition, socio-economic status, and

dwelling type. 93 Relevant data can be sourced from the website of the

Department of Housing and Works, WA. And overall Australian data, including

WA data can be sourced from the Department of Families, Housing,

Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.

                                                                                                               89 Social Housing Taskforce, More Than a Roof and Four Walls (30 June 2009) Department of Housing WA <http://www.dhw.wa.gov.au/HousingDocuments/social_housing_taskforce_report_final.pdf>. 90 Ibid 19. 91 State Housing Commission, State Housing Commission Annual Report 2005-06, Department of Housing and Works <http://www.dhw.wa.gov.au/HousingDocuments/SHC_Annual_Report_2005_06_FINAL.pdf>. 92 Social Housing Taskforce, Above n 89. 93 Ibid.

Access to Care

Under this indicator, Britain looks at the percentage of older people who do

not receive practical support that meets their needs 94 . The Equality

Measurement Framework includes a measure on the percentage of disabled

people (including older people) who do not receive practical support that

meets their needs.95 However, due to limitations in the data available, this

indicator only looks at the percentage of older people who do not receive

practical support that meets their needs.96 Only a survey conducted in a state

(England) provides some data for this measure for the 50-plus age group, in

England only, and can be disaggregated by gender, age and to a limited

extent by ethnicity.97 But it doesn’t provide data by socioeconomic group,

disability, religion or belief, sexual orientation or transgender. Evidence of

these groups has been sought from literature and small-scale surveys; results

are indicative only of possible issues facing these groups as sample sizes are

generally low.98 There is very limited related literature for this measure for

religion or belief; therefore, this group is not covered in this indicator.

Unlike Britain, Australia keeps the age data about all the Australians who are

aged 65 or more since as such are considered as the older people in

Australia. 99 Also, data about other mature age groups (50-64) are

maintained.100 Such age data are maintained along with the data about socio-

economic status. About gender data, Australia keeps data about two sexes—

men and women.101 But it appears that Australia doesn’t keep data about

other sexual diversity. Proper data about Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islanders and the people born in other countries is also maintained.102 And the

people who were born overseas are further differentiated based on their

                                                                                                               94 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 526. 95 Ibid 527. 96 Ibid. 97 Ibid. 98 Ibid. 99 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Older Australia at a Glance (November 2007) Department of Health and Ageing, 2 <http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=6442454209>. 100 Ibid. 101 Ibid 3. 102 Ibid 4.

background as English speaker or non-English-speaker. 103 These groups

cover the ethnicity data required for substantive equality data in WA. Even

though such data is basically maintained for Australia as a whole, the WA

data can be obtained from the geographic distribution of the older people.

Relevant data can be sourced from Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Another good source of data is a public policy discussion paper prepared by

National Seniors Australia titling ‘The Future of Aged Care in Australia’.104

Formal Political Participation Under formal political participation, Britain looks at two detailed measures –

the percentage voting in the UK general or national elections (electoral

turnout), and the equality characteristics of elected representatives to national

assemblies and Parliaments, and to local councils (political representation).105

The British Election Study provides coverage of voting across England,

Scotland and Wales. Conducted after every General Election, the British

Election Study survey looks at voting patterns for the UK.106 Its data can be

disaggregated by gender and age, but the ethnicity, religion or belief and

disability disaggregation is by broad categories only.107 There is very limited

related literature for this measure for groups defined by sexual orientation, or

according to socio-economic and transgender status. Therefore they are not

covered in this indicator.108 Britain draws on supplementary information to

describe barriers faced by disabled voters.109 On the other hand, political

participation draws on different government report and documents which

looks at the demographic breakdown of those who are elected to office, rather

than focusing on those who run for office.110 While information about the

gender, age, socio-economic status, ethnicity, and broad religious affiliation of

representatives is generally available for the UK, such information is not

                                                                                                               103 Ibid. 104 National Seniors Australia, The Future of Aged Care in Australia <http://www.nationalseniors.com.au/icms_docs/Future_of_Aged_Care_Report.pdf>. 105 Equality and Human Rights Commission, Above n 1, 578. 106 Ibid. 107 Ibid. 108 Ibid. 109 Ibid. 110 Ibid 579.

always available in some state level data.111 Other equality characteristics

such as disability, sexual orientation and transgender status are not always

recorded since elected representatives and candidates often do not wish.112

Like Britain, Australia also collects data about the voter turnout through

surveys. One such survey conducted by Australian Electoral Commission is

Informal Vote Survey House of Representatives 2001 Election. It shows the

percentage of voters registered to vote and the voter turnout (and informal

votes) in election.113 It is similar to Britain as it also keeps the data after the

election takes place. Since votes take place all over the country, data about

regional and rural data also maintained. 114 The survey also shows that

Australia keeps the data about the variations in the number of votes or

participation due lack of fluency in English and country of birth. In a different

document of Australian Electoral Commission shows that data about

Aboriginal people is also maintained. 115 These three groups together

represent ethnicity data required for substantive equality. Additionally, the

data about sex and age is also maintained by ABS.116 On the other hand,

similar to Britain, the Parliament of Australia maintains the data about the

elected members of the parliament. This includes data about gender, age,

and socio-economic status of the members of parliament.117 However other

equality characteristics such as ethnicity, religious characteristics, disability,

sexual orientation and transgender status are not available. So different data

can be sourced from the websites of Parliament of Australia, Australian

Electoral Commission, and the Western Australian Parliament.                                                                                                                111 Ibid. 112 Ibid. 113 Australian Electoral Commission, Informal Vote Survey House of Representatives 2001 Election (2003) 2 <http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Strategy_Research_Analysis/files/res_rep_01.pdf>. 114 Ibid 5. 115 Indigenous Electoral Participation Program, Final Evaluation Report Volume 1 (September 2012) Australian Electoral Commission <http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/files/iepp-volume-1.pdf>. 116 Australian Bureau of Statistics, Measures of Australia Progress, 2004 Above n 11. 117 Paul Nelson, Population Change in Electoral Divisions, 2008 to 2009 (19 August 2011) Parliament of Australia <http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/PopulationChange2008-09>.

Conclusion: With a view to improve the take up of substantive equality this paper looked at

the monitoring indicators used by the EHRC in its fist triennial review ‘How

Fair is Britain’ and attempted to compare the required data for the public

sector in WA. This paper sourced nine indicators used in the EHRC’s review

with the types of data required for substantive equality in WA and it also tried

to find the possible sources of information in this regard.

By using the website of EHRC and different government and non-government

organisations’ websites within Australia, an analyses of a sample of the

monitoring indicators used in Britain was the first assignment. Secondly, it

compared the required equality data in WA or Australia as a whole with those

of Britain. Finally, it tried to locate the sources of those equality data in

different government departments and other organisations’ websites. As

mentioned within the ‘limitations’ section of this paper not all of the relevant

and important issues were addressed and as a result it is recommended that

further research is undertaken to fully respond to the research questions (as

set out in the under – insert section of where this is]. In order to achieve its

objective, the following suggested steps are made for any future research:

• The scope of the research should be broadened. All the forty indicators

should be covered in order to provide a full and thorough examination

of the issues as the set number of 9 indicators covered in this study

was just a representation and provided a snapshot of the range of

equality areas.

• An attempt to source only WA data, rather than a mixed set of data of

WA and Australia as a whole should be undertaken. Without having

WA-specific data, a proper comparison between Britain and WA is not

possible.

• Provide definitions of the relevant indicators in use in Britain. For

example, because substantive equality concerns itself with the needs

and interrelated barriers confronting Aboriginal peoples and minority

ethnic groups, the definitions (of both Britain and Australia) would

provide further insight and remove any confusion with regard to its

meanings.

• Sufficient amount of time should be given to complete the research.

Since finding proper data and analysing and comparing them requires

a significant amount of time, adequate time should be given while

doing a further broader research.

• The researcher should be clear about is asked and all relevant facts

and matters relating to the research before actually starting the

research. Regular contact with the responsible SEU staff(s) may help

in this regard.

If these recommendations can be implemented properly, presumably, the

quality of further research will be better. This eventually will help SEU in

ensuring substantive equality in government services for the Indigenous

peoples and ethnic minorities.

References: Australian Bureau of Statistics, Life Expectancy at Birth

<http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/57E4ADF3F2034BCEC

A257943000CEE0B?opendocument>.

Australian Electoral Commission, Informal Vote Survey House of

Representatives 2001 Election (2003) 2

<http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/Strategy_Research_Analysi

s/files/res_rep_01.pdf>.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Older Australia at a Glance

(November 2007) Department of Health and Ageing, 2

<http://www.aihw.gov.au/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=6442454209>.

Australian Institute of Human Rights, Australian Trends in Life Expectancy

<http://www.aihw.gov.au/australian-trends-in-life-expectancy/>.

Department of Commerce WA, Pay Equity and the Gender Pay Gap in

Western Australia

<http://www.commerce.wa.gov.au/LabourRelations/PDF/FlexibleWorkplaces/

Pay_Equity_and_the_Gender_Pay_Gap_in_WA.pdf>.

Department of Health WA, Population Health Indicators: Western Australia

2008 (2008), 5

<http://www.health.wa.gov.au/publications/documents/Population_health_indi

cators.pdf>.

Department of Industry, Innovation Science, Research and Tertiary Education

<http://www.innovation.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx>.

Equality and Human Rights Commission, How Fair is Britain, (2010), 14 <

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/key-projects/how-fair-is-britain/>.

Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency, Gender Pay Gap

Statistics (May 2012) Workplace Gender Equality Agency

<http://www.wgea.gov.au/Information_Centres/Resource_Centre/Statistics/Ge

nder_Pay_Gap_Fact_Sheet_May_2012.pdf>.

Indigenous Electoral Participation Program, Final Evaluation Report Volume 1

(September 2012) Australian Electoral Commission

<http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/files/iepp-volume-1.pdf>.

Liesl Mitchell, Domestic Violence in Australia—An Overview of the Issues (22

November 2011) Parliament of Australia

<http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parlia

mentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/DVAustralia#_Toc309798373>.

Lynne Roberts and David Indermaur, What Australians Think About Crime

and Justice: Results from the 2007 Survey of Social Attitudes (2007)

Australian Institute of Criminology

<http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/4/8/A/%7b48A3B38B-376E-4A7A-A457-

AA5CC37AE090%7drpp101.pdf>.

National Seniors Australia, The Future of Aged Care in Australia

<http://www.nationalseniors.com.au/icms_docs/Future_of_Aged_Care_Report

.pdf>.

Nicole Lagett, Violence Against Women in Western Australia (2007) Women’s

Council for Domestic and Family Violence Services (WA), 5

<http://www.womenscouncil.com.au/uploads/6/1/1/9/6119703/____violence_a

gainst_women_in_western_australia_report.pdf>.

Paul Nelson, Population Change in Electoral Divisions, 2008 to 2009 (19

August 2011) Parliament of Australia

<http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parlia

mentary_Library/pubs/BN/2011-2012/PopulationChange2008-09>.

Social Housing Taskforce, More Than a Roof and Four Walls (30 June 2009)

Department of Housing WA

<http://www.dhw.wa.gov.au/HousingDocuments/social_housing_taskforce_re

port_final.pdf>.

State Housing Commission, State Housing Commission Annual Report 2005-

06, Department of Housing and Works

<http://www.dhw.wa.gov.au/HousingDocuments/SHC_Annual_Report_2005_

06_FINAL.pdf>.

Western Australia Police

<http://www.police.wa.gov.au/ABOUTUS/Statistics/CrimeStatistcalNotes/tabid

/1212/Default.aspx>.