Publication - Consultation analysis

Miners' strike 1984/85 pardon consultation: analysis of responses

Published: 17 Aug 2021

Findings from the analysis of the responses received to the consultation, which ran from 12 March 2021 to 4 June 2021.

Miners' strike 1984/85 pardon consultation: analysis of responses
8. Partial Equality Impact Assessment (Q14)

8. Partial Equality Impact Assessment (Q14)

8.1 Question 14: If you have any comments on the partial EQIA, please tell us, using the box below.The consultation paper stressed the importance of ensuring that no negative impacts arose for individuals with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 as a result of the introduction of the proposed pardon. The consultation included a partial Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) which considered possible equality impacts and how these might be avoided. The final question in the consultation invited comments on the draft to inform development of a final version of the EQIA.

8.2 Nineteen (19) respondents (2 organisations and 17 individuals) provided comments at Question 14. Individual respondents often said they did not understand the question, or they made comments which were unrelated to the partial EQIA.

8.3 A small number of individuals highlighted the impact of the strike on miners and their wives and families. One individual simply said that ‘the EQIA covers all bases’.

8.4 The two organisational respondents responding to this question, commented as follows:

  • One organisation agreed with the conclusions in the partial EQIA that the proposed pardon is expected to advance equality of opportunity specifically on the grounds of age. This organisation also suggested that the policy to provide a pardon would contribute to the national outcome that 'we live in communities that are inclusive, empowered, resilient and safe and that we respect, protect and fulfil human rights and live free from discrimination’.
  • The second organisation stated:

    ‘The Miners’ Strike 1984/85 Pardon has serious Equality implications relating to age, disability and sex. These three protected characteristics should be taken into consideration throughout this process.’ (Organisational respondent – other)