1.2.2 – Established political parties
1.1.4 – Rights in context
Last week Kemi Badenoch announced she wished to abolish the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), which she said had led to some groups in society being ‘preferred over others. The announcement came in the wake of the protests over the murder of Henry Nowak, where police were accused of treating allegations of racism more seriously than Nowak’s protests that he had been stabbed.
PSED is a legal duty within the Equality Act 2010, a significant piece of rights legislation passed by Labour shortly before the General Election that year. It came into force in England, Scotland and Wales in April 2011 and requires public bodies to consider equality when making decisions. Public bodies must have “due regard” to three aims: eliminating discrimination, advancing equality of opportunity, and fostering good relations between different groups. It applies to bodies such as schools, hospitals, councils, police forces and government departments. Whilst the Equality Act applies across all of society, PSED only applied to public bodies.
In practice, this means public authorities should think about how policies affect people with protected characteristics, such as race, sex, disability, age, religion, sexual orientation, pregnancy and maternity, and gender reassignment. For example, a school changing its uniform policy, a council closing a service, or a hospital reorganising appointments should consider whether the decision disadvantages particular groups. It therefore requires public bodies to take proactive steps to avoid possible discrimination, rather than relying on the Equality Act to address discrimination reactively.
PSED is therefore mainly about the decision-making process for public bodies. It does not usually force a public body to reach a particular outcome. Instead, it requires them to show that equality was properly considered. In practice, this can involve equality impact assessments, consultation, data-gathering, publishing equality information, or setting equality objectives.
The Conservatives, under Kemi Badenoch, are proposing to scrap the PSED. Badenoch argues that the duty has encouraged “identity politics”, bureaucracy and fear of legal challenge, and that public services should return to “common sense” and equal treatment under the law. Reports say the Conservative proposal would repeal the PSED while keeping the wider Equality Act protections in place.
This announcement by the Conservatives could be seen as an attempt by the party to carve out a position distinct from both Labour and Reform UK. Whilst Labour wish to keep the Equality Act and PSED in place, Reform UK’s position is more radical. Reform figures have said they would repeal the Equality Act 2010 itself, with Suella Braverman saying Reform would scrap the Act on ‘day one’ and criticising the idea of protected characteristics.
This announcement could be used to demonstrate that the Conservatives have moved further into populist territory. Earlier Conservative governments largely accepted the Equality Act settlement, even if they criticised aspects of bureaucracy. Indeed, the Equality Act (and PSED) came into force under the Coalition government in 2011 and was not repealed during the party’s 14 years in government. Badenoch’s position suggests a shift from liberal-conservative rights protection towards a more combative argument about identity, meritocracy, social cohesion and state overreach.
More broadly, the debate serves as an important reminder that rights in the UK are politically vulnerable. Unlike in countries with entrenched constitutional rights – such as the United States with its Bill of Rights – Parliament can amend or repeal equality protections by ordinary legislation. The courts can enforce duties while they exist, but they cannot stop Parliament removing them. This means equality rights in the UK depend not only on legal principle, but also on political consensus – and that consensus now looks much less secure.