City of York Council and Centre for Applied Human Rights
Human Rights and Equality Assessment Tool (HREA)
An Equality Assessment Tool is an evidence-based approach designed to help organisations ensure that any Policy, Criterion or Practice (PCP), is fair and does not create barriers or disadvantage any protected groups from participation. This covers both strategic and operational activities.
City of York Council (CYC) combines this approach with York’s commitment as a Human Rights City to produce a Human Rights and Equality Assessment tool (HREA).
This document enables CYC to evidence its legal duty to give ‘due regard’ to those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act and consider Human Rights at the same time.
Whether a HREA is needed or not will depend on the likely impact that a PCP may have and relevance of the activity to Equality and Human Rights.
The HREA should be started when the need for a new PCP is first identified, or when an existing one is reviewed. It is essential to continue to update the HREA during the life of the PCP, as and when new information is learned. It is not complete until the PCP is complete.
Non-discrimination is a minimum standard. The development of the HREA should prompt critical discussion and highlight disproportionate impacts.
Balancing residents’ rights and CYC duties can be very complex and sometimes there will be no ‘win-win’, so compromises or mitigations may need to be identified to ensure the best outcomes.
Finally, the value in a HREA is in both the short and long term, by investing in this process CYC will create robust, meaningful, and empowering policies that are more likely to stand the test of time.
|
Directorate |
City Development |
|||
|
Service Area |
Transport and Highways - Transport Policy & Sustainable Travel |
|||
|
Name of proposal |
Rougier Route |
|||
|
Lead Officer |
Tom Horner |
|||
|
Date Assessment Started |
19/11/2025 |
|||
|
Date Assessment Completed |
Ongoing |
|||
|
Names of those who contributed to the assessment |
||||
|
Name |
Job Title |
Organisation |
Area of Expertise |
|
|
Tom Horner |
Head of Transport Policy & Travel Behaviour |
CYC |
Sustainable Travel |
|
|
Ian Boddice |
Senior Project Manager |
CYC |
Major Projects Delivery |
|
|
Lara Thornton |
Communications Manager |
CYC |
Communications & Engagement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1 |
What is the purpose of the proposal |
|
Please explain your proposal in plain English avoiding acronyms and jargon. Consider using Age 9 English. |
|
|
The main purpose of the proposal seeks to shorten bus journey times into and through York City Centre and to make those journeys more reliable. This is important to ensure as many people as possible use the bus, which then improves the environment and frees up space on the roads for the people who really need to use them. Several ideas and options have been looked at. The proposal is a trial of a bus lane and two bus gates (parts of road that only buses and other selected vehicles can use) for 18 months. The bus lanes and bus gates will be located on George Hudson Street (southbound) and Lower Micklegate (both ways). In addition to the bus gates, three further camera enforced locations are proposed at Victoria Bar, on Fetter Lane and on Tanner Row (between Rougier Street and North Street) to protect residential areas from cut through traffic. The proposal has been modified following public consultation to allow buses, emergency services, Blue Badge holders and Hackney Carriages through the bus lane and bus gates. Local residents, business owners and local permit holders only would be allowed through the camera enforced locations at Victoria Bar, Fetter Lane and the section of Tanner Row between Rougier Street and North Street. The report requests funding approval, delegates responsibility to the Director of City Development to implement the project and to amend the conditions of the Experimental Traffic Order and updates the Council’s Parking and Moving Traffic Offences Enforcement Policy.
|
|
1.2 |
Are there any external considerations? |
|
Legislation / government directive / codes of practice etc. |
|
|
The Council is under a duty contained in section 16 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 to manage its road network with a view to securing the expeditious movement of traffic on that network, so far as may be reasonably practicable while having regard to their other obligations, policies and objectives. This is called the network management duty and includes any actions the Council may take in performing that duty which contribute for securing the more efficient use of their road network or for the avoidance, elimination or reduction of road congestion (or other disruption to the movement of traffic) on their road network. It may involve the exercise of any power to regulate or coordinate the uses made of any road (or part of a road) in its road network.
In exercising functions under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, the Council must consider the criteria within Section 122 of that Act 1984 and, in particular, the duty to make decisions in accordance with s.122 so far as practicable having regard to the matters in s.122(2) to “secure the expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians ) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway. The matters set out in s.122(2) are:
a) the desirability of securing and maintaining reasonable access to premises; b) the effect on the amenities of any locality affected and the importance of regulating and restricting the use of roads by heavy commercial vehicles, so as to preserve or improve the amenities of the areas through which the roads run; b) the strategy prepared under section 80 of the Environment Act 1995 (national air quality strategy); c) the importance of facilitating the passage of public service vehicles and of securing the safety and convenience of persons using or desiring to use such vehicles; and d) any other matters appearing to the local authority to be relevant.
The proposed
bus priority is an integral part of City of York Council’s
Bus Service Improvement Plan and the City of York Local Transport
Plan. Bus Operators Traffic Commissioners Code of Conduct - “The Traffic Commissioner’s "window of tolerance" for local bus services in England and Wales requires 95% of services to operate within a specific timeframe: no more than 1 minute early and 5 minutes late.”
|
|
1.3 |
Who are the stakeholders and what are their interests? |
|
Consider both internal and external stakeholders. |
|
|
Blue badge holders – interested in accessing the City Centre and areas where Blue Badge holders can park. Disabled people who use the corridor – interested in changes to road layouts, cycling facilities and wider improvements. Local residents – interested in the potential impacts of cut through traffic in their local area and how they will undertake their journeys if there are changes to the operation of the road network and any local improvements to be made. Wider York residents – interested in changes to routes they can travel on Taxi companies and Hackney Carriage licence holders – interested in how the routes available to them to use may change and potential impacts on their customers. Taxi users – interested in how their journeys may change. Businesses with a frontage onto the bus lane/bus gated area – interested in their servicing arrangements and any changes to accessing their business and potential impacts on their customers. Businesses in the wider area - interested in any changes to accessing their business and potential impacts on their customers. Bus Users – interested in changes that will benefit/change their journeys. Bus operators – interesting in changes to the road network and potential journey time and reliability improvements.
Major engagement has taken place on the proposal from initial stakeholder conversations to understand the priorities of key groups, to speaking in person with members of public through two rounds of consultation. The consultation report annexed to the report considered consultation responses in detail.
|
|
1.4 |
What results / outcomes do we want to achieve and for whom? |
|
Explain what outcomes you want to achieve for stakeholders, staff and the wider community. Demonstrate how the proposal links to the Council Plan (2023- 2027) and other corporate strategies and plans. Highlight how the proposal meets the objectives of Equalities, Affordability, Climate and Health. |
|
|
The proposal aims to increase the number and proportion of bus users in city to help free up road space for those who really need to use it. Shorter bus journey times and better reliability of bus service are important factors in people’s choice of whether to take the bus or travel by other means. Bus operators currently have to ‘pad out’ with extra time to make sure they are compliant with the requirements of the Traffic Commissioner. Reducing through traffic on one of York’s busiest bus corridors should enable buses to have a consistent, quicker journey, therefore increasing passengers.
The project directly contributes to three priorities in the Council Plan. These are;
1. Health & Wellbeing. The project could have significant road safety benefits along the corridor as well as enabling more active travel and improving air quality.
2. Sustainability. Reducing bus journey times on the Rougier Street – Micklegate – Tower Street corridor will make bus travel more attractive, enabling a shift away from car use, which will in turn reduce congestion in the city. Mode shift towards public transport also strongly contributes towards reducing carbon emissions from transport and helps the Council meet its net zero target.
3. Economic. A safer environment for pedestrians, wheelchair users, wheelers and cyclists will help to connect the eastern and western sides of the river, linking the footstreets to Bishophill and increasing footfall on Micklegate and Tower Street. A more reliable bus service will attract more people to travel by bus to the city centre, alleviating congestion.
|
|
3.1 |
What sources of data, evidence and consultation feedback have you used to help understand the impact of the proposal on equality rights and human rights? |
|
|
Please consider a range of sources, including consultation exercises, surveys, feedback from staff, stakeholders, participants, research reports, the views of equality groups, as well your own experience of working in this area etc. |
||
|
Source of data / supporting evidence |
Reason for using this source |
|
|
|
Stakeholder engagement in advance of public consultation, including York Access Forum |
To understand the initial views of key people and groups across the city to inform the proposal presented in the public consultation |
|
|
Stakeholder engagement during public consultation, including York Access Forum |
To understand the views of key people and groups across the city with regard to the detail of the proposal and any issues with its implementation |
|
|
Public consultation responses (in person and online) |
To understand views on the project from a wide range of people across the city |
|
|
Dedicated session with young SEND students |
To understand the impacts of delayed bus journeys on young people in the city |
|
|
Further conversations with the Bishophill community |
To identify any access barriers or further issues with the project following refinement of the proposals after the initial public consultation |
|
|
Our Big Transport Conversation data and information |
To provide data on the strategic approach that respondents felt the Council should be taking – improving buses across the city emerged as a key priority. |
|
|
The case for faster buses, Confederation of Passenger Transport, 2026. |
Research report provides data on the impact of speeding up bus journeys. |
|
|
Why are we waiting? Disabled people’s experiences of travelling by bus. Bus users UK, 2024. |
Research report identifying challenges associated with bus travel, includes themes around the impact of bus unreliability |
|
|
Traffic Survey Data |
To understand current traffic flows |
|
|
Satellite Navigation Journey Time data |
To understand current journey times |
|
|
Traffic modelling outputs |
To estimate the impact of traffic flows and journey times as a result of the proposal |
|
|
Photographic survey and bus journey video analysis |
Determine extent of issues with congestion affecting the route |
|
3.1 |
Equality-related obligations derive from the Equality Act of 2010 and the Human Rights Act of 1998. |
|
Once you have engaged with stakeholders you will need to identify how this proposal impacts on their human rights and equalities. Although table one looks complex, its purpose is to facilitate an initial screening of equalities and human rights impacts of your proposal. Many human rights and equalities will not be affected by the decision you are seeking Executive or Council approval for and so can be left blank. The aim here is to identify pressure points regarding human rights and equalities that require attention. Please see the Appendix for details of the protected characteristics and human rights to consider The rights listed below in the first column are the relevant ones from the Human Rights Act, and the York Human Rights City Network Indicator Report (non-discrimination, education, health and social care, housing, a decent standard of living). The human rights in the Indicator Report were selected by residents of York as their priority rights. In the first row the protected characteristics under the Equality Act are listed, to which ‘Everyone’ has been added to capture impacts that affect everyone without distinction. |
EqualitiesHuman Rights |
Everyone |
Age including financial, digital exclusion impacts |
Disability Including financial, digital exclusion impacts |
Gender |
Gender reassign-ment Including Trans, Non-binary, Intersex |
Marriage and civil partnership |
Pregnancy and maternity |
Race |
Religion and belief |
Sexual orientation |
Carers inc financial, digital exclusion impacts |
Low-income groups inc financial, digital exclusion impacts |
Veteran, armed forces community |
Those with experience of Care |
|
Right to life* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Prohibition of torture* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Prohibition of slavery and forced labour* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to liberty, movement and security (including freedom of movement)*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to a fair trial* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
No punishment without law* |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to private and family life*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Freedom of thought, conscience, and belief*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Freedom of expression*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Freedom of assembly*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to marry*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to property*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to education*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to free elections*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
|
Right to housing*** |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
Here you will need to record the details on all the impacts identified for both Human Rights and those with Protected Characteristics.
Where you have identified an impact on a protected characteristic/human right in the table above, please indicate whether this is positive or negative and give a description of this impact. If you run out of rows, please add as necessary.
Rights clashes and restrictions
Where rights clash or are being restricted, you will need to explain how the decision has been taken, that the limitation on human rights is provided by law, for a legitimate purpose (justified), and proportionate (the minimum necessary restriction on rights).
Use the following guidance to inform your responses:
First, think about what equalities or rights might be engaged by the proposal, and describe the likely impact of the proposal, and provide an evaluation.
Use the following questions to inform your responses if human rights or equalities are limited or qualified in any way:
· Why are a person’s rights being restricted?
· What is the problem being addressed by the restriction on someone’s rights?
· Will the restriction lead to a reduction in the problem?
· Does that restriction involve a blanket policy, or does it allow for different cases to be treated differently?
· Does a less restrictive alternative exist?
· Has sufficient regard been paid to the rights and interests of those affected?
· Do safeguards exist against error or abuse?
|
Protected Characteristics or Human Rights |
Key findings / impacts |
Positive (+) Negative (-) (Neutral (0) |
High (H) Medium (M) Low (L) |
|
Age
|
The 2024 National Travel survey identifies that young people, particularly those between 17 and 20 make the most bus journeys. Young people should therefore benefit most from reduced bus journey times and better reliability. |
+ |
M |
|
Disability
|
The original proposal did not include access through the bus gate for Blue Badge holders – we heard through the consultation that this was an important priority for disabled people and have amended the project to include Blue Badge holder access through the main bus gates. This will provide easier access to York City Centre for Blue Badge holders than non Blue Badge holders.
We also heard from disabled residents in the Bishophill area about the importance of access into their home streets and have modified the initial proposal to enable easier access in Bishophill and between Micklegate and the Bishophill area for residents and their carers.
Additional segregated cycling infrastructure on Micklegate and Toft Green/Tanner Row will provide dedicated infrastructure for disabled cyclists. Longer term, the one-way loop around Toft Green and Micklegate could enable widened pavements.
Hackney carriages are proposed to be allowed through the bus gates and along the bus lane – this should be advantageous for disabled people who do not own their own vehicle and cannot use the bus. For those who use private hire taxis, some selected journeys may increase in journey time and price. The project team will work with Private Hire taxi firms throughout the trial to evaluate and understand this impact.
|
+ |
M |
|
Gender reassignment |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Marriage and Civil Partnership |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Pregnancy and Maternity |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Race
|
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Religion and Belief |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Sex
|
The 2024 National Travel Survey identifies that women are more likely to use the bus than men – improving the reliability of buses and reducing their journey times will provide significant benefit to bus users in future. |
+ |
M |
|
Sexual Orientation |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Other social – economic groups |
|||
|
Carer
|
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Care Leavers
|
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Low income groups |
Department for Transport Annual Bus Statistics show that people in the lowest income quintile make roughly 2.5 times more local bus trips per year (around 67 trips) than those in the highest income quintile (around 25 trips). Low income groups should therefore benefit from improve bus reliability and shorter journey times. |
+ |
M |
|
Veterans and armed Forces |
No findings |
0 |
|
|
Other
|
No other findings |
0 |
|
|
Human Rights (list any rights impacted) |
|||
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 |
What are the main gaps in information and understanding of the impact of your proposal? |
||
|
When conducting your screening, you may have discovered gaps in data or knowledge that make it difficult to assess whether your proposal had a positive or negative impact on human rights/equalities. Please indicate actions you will take to resolve this gap. As your proposal progresses you may be able to resolve this knowledge gap –please indicate when it was resolved. |
|||
|
|
Gaps in data or knowledge |
Action to deal with this |
Date resolved |
|
|
Impacts on SEND students |
Conversations with Education Access team – these conversations identified a need to engage with parents of SEND students to support them with Blue Badge applications for their regular private hire taxi. |
|
|
|
Exact impact on journey times of affected adjacent routes |
Monitor vehicle journey time changes using the Council’s access to TomTom data and regularly review with a view to making changes to the project if required. |
|
|
|
Exact bus journey time reliability improvements are unknown |
Monitor bus reliability throughout the trial. |
|
|
|
Whether any unforeseen specific access issues may occur
|
Monitor communications channels, provide a dedicated email and option to phone the project team should any local residents or businesses experience any access issues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.1 |
What has been done to optimise opportunities to advance equality / human rights or foster good relations? |
|
Blue badge holders have been allowed access to the proposed bus lane and bus gates on George Hudson Street and Micklegate for the trial period. Extensive consultation has been undertaken and identified that providing access through the bus gates for Blue Badge holders was a priority for York Access Forum and York Disability Rights Forum.
The project team will work with the Equalities Officer, York Access Forum and other relevant groups to design the Blue Badge registration process to support the project. This process will be transferable to other projects that the Council is currently working on, such as school streets. It is fully understood that Blue Badge holders will, in many cases, need to register more than one vehicle and that requirement will form part of the process design work.
A warning letter will be issued within the first six months – this warning letter can build in text to inform Blue Badge holders from further afield how to register. The project team is also aware that there could be visitors to the area who have a Blue Badge and may not be aware of the registration process and consequently may accidentally travel through the bus gates or along the bus lane several times in one visit to York. This situation will be considered as part of the process design.
Detailed engagement with SEND students has enable further wider conversations to be undertaken around transport priorities which can help to inform future strategy and policy work.
Hackney Carriages have been recommended to be allowed access through the bus gates and along the bus lane to provide a public transport option for people who cannot use the bus and who need to use accessible vehicles.
This HERA will continue to develop and be updated with more information if the project is approved and as the detailed processes develop through the design process.
|
|
6.1 |
Having considered the potential or actual impacts you should be in a position to make an informed judgement on what should be done. In all cases, document your reasoning that justifies your decision. |
|
|
Important: If there are any adverse impacts you cannot mitigate, please provide a compelling reason in the justification column. There are four main options you can take: |
||
|
No major change to the proposal |
The HREAT demonstrates the proposal is robust. There is no potential for unlawful discrimination or adverse impact and you have taken all opportunities to advance equality / human rights and foster good relations, subject to continuing monitor and review. |
|
|
Adjust the proposal |
The HREAT identifies potential problems or missed opportunities. This involves taking steps to remove any barriers, to better advance quality or to foster good relations. |
|
|
Continue with the proposal (despite the potential for adverse impact) |
You should clearly set out the justifications for doing this and how you believe the decision is compatible with our obligations |
|
|
Stop and remove the proposal |
If there are adverse effects that are not justified and cannot be mitigated, you should consider stopping the proposal altogether. If a proposal leads to unlawful discrimination it should be removed or changed. |
|
|
|
Option Selected |
Conclusion / justifications |
|
Adjust the proposal |
The proposal has been adjusted following the public consultation to introduce additional local resident access routes and blue badge holder access through the main bus gates and bus lane on George Hudson Street and Micklegate. |
|
7.1 |
What action, by whom, will be undertaken as a result of the impact assessment. |
|||
|
List below the actions or mitigations that have been identified and who will be responsible to carrying them out. Add as many lines as you need. |
||||
|
Impact / Issue |
Actions to be taken |
Person Responsible |
Timescale |
|
|
Journey times |
Monitoring during trial period |
Project Manager |
18 months |
|
|
Bus journey reliability |
Monitoring during trial period |
Project Manager |
18 months |
|
|
Allow blue badge holders through the bus gates/into the bus lane |
Create registration process for blue badge holders
|
Project Manager |
January 2026 |
|
|
Communicate the changes effectively and simply
|
Create and deliver the communications and engagement plan |
Transport Communications Manager |
July 2026 – May 2027. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1 |
How will the impact of your proposal be monitored and improved upon going forward? |
|
Consider how will you identify the impact of activities on protected characteristics, other marginalised groups and human rights going forward? How will any learning and enhancements be capitalised on and embedded? |
|
|
The proposal will be subject to extensive monitoring throughout the 18 month trial period ahead of a decision on whether to the make the project permanent. Monitoring will include;
· Real time bus journey times · Bus reliability information · Wider vehicle journey times · Views of users of the corridor · Further engagement with users of the corridor and key stakeholders (including York Access Forum) and taking into account any feedback received. · Air quality · Road traffic casualties |
Appendix A
Under the public sector duties introduced by the Equality Act 2010 public bodies must have due regard for the need to:
· Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the act, such as the failure to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people
· Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not
· Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not
These duties relate to the nine protected characteristic groups defined by the Equality Act 2010 (outlined in the table below).
The Council recognises that a person’s socio-economic background and whether they live in a rural or urban location can be important factors in determining fair access to services, employment and treatment. When carrying out analysis, you must also consider socio-economic issues and rural / urban location issues. In addition to the nine protected characteristic the HREAT includes the following equality groups:
· Carers
· Low income groups
· Veterans, armed forces community
· Experience of care/Other (other groups that are impacted)
- First, human rights apply to everyone and not just groups with protected characteristics.
- Second, they allow for the balancing of rights, priorities, and risks. Many rights are not absolute and can be limited or qualified in particular circumstances.
The following guidance identifies which rights are most likely to be engaged by proposals in certain policy areas. This doesn’t mean that you should not consider whether other rights might be engaged.
Absolute rights: Cannot be breached in any circumstances e.g. right to life and to protection from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
Limited rights: can only be restricted in specific situations e.g. a person can be deprived of their liberty if they are convicted of an offence and imprisoned.
Qualified rights: human rights can be restricted if it is in the interests of the wider community or to protect other people’s rights e.g. freedom of movement and assembly were restricted during the Covid-19 pandemic in the interests of public health.
As limited and qualified rights are not absolute, they sometimes have to be balanced in decision making. In Table 1, absolute rights are indicated with an *; limited rights with a **; and qualified rights with a ***.
Right |
Description |
Focus Area |
Right to life |
Nobody, including the Government, can take someone’s life away. Public authorities must take appropriate measures to safeguard life including by protecting people whose life might be in danger. Public authorities should also consider the right to life when making decisions that might endanger or affect life expectancy. When public officials may be involved in an instance when someone died, public authorities must investigate. |
· Benefits and money · Births, deaths and marriages · Children and families · Environment and animals · Health and social care · Housing · Planning and building · Waste and recycling |
Right to liberty and security |
It focuses on protecting individuals’ freedom from unreasonable detention, as opposed to protecting personal safety. However, there is case law from other jurisdictions where this right also covers personal safety in conditions other than detention. |
· Right to liberty and security |
Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment |
Torture consists in causing very serious and cruel physical or mental pain or suffering. Inhuman treatment or punishment is treatment which causes intense physical or mental suffering. Degrading treatment means treatment that is extremely humiliating and undignified. Inhuman or degrading treatment could include: serious physical assault; very severe detention conditions or restraints; serious physical or psychological abuse in a health or care setting. |
· Children and families · Health and social care |
Right to marry and start a family |
Right of men and women of marriageable age to marry and to start a family. |
· Births, deaths and marriages |
Prohibition of slavery and forced labour |
Slavery is when someone owns someone else like a piece of property. Servitude is when someone provides services to a person for no reward and is unable to stop due to coercion. Forced or compulsory labour is when someone is forced to do work to which they have not agreed to, under the threat of punishment. |
· Children and families · Jobs, training and volunteering · People and communities |
Right to a fair trial |
This right is triggered when someone is charged with a criminal offence and have to go to court, or a public authority is making a decision that has an impact on someone’s civil rights or obligations. |
· Environment and animals · Health and social care · People and communities · Streets, roads and pavements |
No punishment without law |
No one can be charged with a criminal offence for an action that was not a crime when it was committed. Public authorities must explain clearly what counts as a criminal offence so that people know when they are breaking the law. |
· Environment and animals · People and communities · Streets, roads and pavements |
Right to property |
No public authority, without very good reason can take away one’s property, which may include things like land, houses, objects, shares, licences, leases, patents, money, pensions and certain types of welfare benefits. This right applies to companies as well as individuals. |
· Benefits and money · Business · Council tax · Environment and animals · Housing · Planning and building · Travel and transport · Streets, roads & pavements · Waste and recycling |
Right to private and family life, home and correspondence |
This includes one’s right to determine their sexual orientation, lifestyle, and the way one looks and dresses. It also includes the right to control who sees and touches one’s body. It further covers one’s right to develop their personal identity and to forge friendships and other relationships, the right to participate in essential economic, social, cultural and leisure activities. In some circumstances, public authorities may need to facilitate the enjoyment of one’s right to a private life, including their ability to participate in society. It also means that personal information about anyone (including official records, photographs, letters, diaries and medical records) should be kept securely and not shared without their permission, except in certain circumstances. |
· Benefits and money · Births, deaths and marriages · Children and families · Health and social care · Jobs, training and volunteering · Parking and permits · Planning and building · Schools and education · Sports and leisure |
Right to free elections |
Public authorities must support the right to free expression by holding free elections at reasonable intervals. These elections must enable anyone to vote in secret. |
· Births, deaths and marriages · People and communities |
Freedom of thought, conscience and belief |
This may include the right to change religion or beliefs, the right to put one’s thoughts and beliefs into action, for example by exercising the right to wear religious clothing, the right to talk about one’s own beliefs or take part in religious worship. Public authorities cannot stop anyone from practising their religion, without very good reason. This right protects a wide range of non-religious beliefs including atheism, agnosticism, veganism and pacifism. This includes the right to express views aloud (for example through public protest and demonstrations) or through published articles, books or leaflets, television or radio broadcasting, works of art, the internet and social media. It further protects the right to receive information from other people by, for example, being part of an audience or reading a magazine. |
· Business · Schools and education |
Freedom of expression |
This includes the right to express views aloud (for example through public protest and demonstrations) or through published articles, books or leaflets, television or radio broadcasting, works of art, the internet and social media. It further protects the right to receive information from other people by, for example, being part of an audience or reading a magazine. |
· Business · Environment and animals · People and communities · Schools and education · Sports and leisure |
Freedom of assembly and association |
This encompasses the right to form and be part of a trade union, a political party or any another association or voluntary group. Nobody has the right to force anyone to join a protest, trade union, political party or another association. |
· Environment and animals · Jobs, training and volunteering · People and communities · Travel and transport · Streets, roads and pavements |
Right to education |
This right protects one’s right to an effective education within the UK's existing educational institutions. It relates to primary, secondary, and higher education. Parents have a right to ensure that their religious and philosophical beliefs are respected during their children’s education. |
· Children and families · Environment and animals · Jobs, training and volunteering · People and communities · Schools and education · Sports and leisure |
Right to housing |
Adequate housing must provide more than four walls and a roof. For housing to be adequate, it must, at a minimum, meet the following criteria: Security of tenure, that is legal protection against forced evictions, harassment and other threats; availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure; affordability, which means that housing is not adequate if its cost threatens or compromises the occupants’ enjoyment of other human rights; Habitability, which relates to physical safety or adequate space, as well as protection against the cold, damp, heat, rain, wind, other threats to health and structural hazards; accessibility, in that it must accommodate the specific needs of disadvantaged and marginalised groups; location, which means that it must not be cut off from employment opportunities, health-care services, schools, childcare centres and other social facilities, or it must not be located in polluted or dangerous areas; cultural adequacy, which means that it must respect and take into account the expression of cultural identity. |
· Benefits and money · Housing · People and communities · Planning and building · Waste and recycling |