Delivering rights for Gypsy/Travellers in Scotland: ethnicity defined in law
Submitting Institution
University of StrathclydeUnit of Assessment
Social Work and Social PolicySummary Impact Type
SocietalResearch Subject Area(s)
Studies In Human Society: Sociology
Law and Legal Studies: Law
Summary of the impact
Being recognised in law as an `ethnic minority' has far-reaching
consequences, including the right of access to welfare and protection from
race discrimination. As part of an industrial tribunal case in September
2008, research conducted at Strathclyde was used as expert testimony that
resulted in giving Gypsy/Travellers in Scotland such legal status. This
judgment has meant that the entire population of this group now has access
to protection under Race Relations legislation. As a result, the case has
been cited to support other cases that challenge decisions which affect
the everyday lives of Gypsy/Travellers. The research and case has also
directly shaped public policy by the Scottish Government in relation to
human rights, and in subsequent policy on equality, accommodation and
employment. At the local level for individual Gypsy/Travellers, the ruling
has implications for their access to services, with health care and social
work organisations now explicitly including guidance on support for this
ethnic group.
Underpinning research
Context: Dr Colin Clark is an expert in ethnic minorities and
identity, and has worked with and researched Romani and Gypsy/Traveller
across Europe for the past 20 years. He has been an expert witness in
several legal cases in 2000 and 2004. Clark's acknowledged expertise in
relation to these groups meant that he was called as a leading
international expert in an industrial tribunal case in Scotland in 2008
which centred on the legal and cultural definition of Gypsy/Travellers as
an ethnic group.
Key findings: The meaning and use of ethnicity has been described
as one of the most pressing issues to occupy the social sciences in
contemporary times [1]. Across Europe the relationship between the
identity and status of Romani and Gypsy/Traveller communities and
ethnicity has been contested in government policy, legal systems and
within the communities themselves. Research conducted at Strathclyde has
made a distinctive contribution to this debate through its exploration of
the social-legal identities of Romani, Gypsy/Traveller and other minority
group within Europe [1, 2, 3], the UK [4] and Scotland specifically [5].
Clark's research has highlighted the challenges faced by Gypsy/Travellers
to gain legal ethnic identity across different cultural and political
contexts, and the consequences for them in terms of access to social and
welfare services, and in securing accommodation and employment. It also
interrogated the dangers and risks arising from `matter of fact'
assumptions within academic and public discourse that Gypsy/Travellers
were an ethnic minority group under existing Race Relations legislation.
Drawing upon European experiences, Clark's research [5] found that the
`legal' identity of Gypsy/Traveller communities was actually
unsubstantiated in law. Although the Scottish Parliament had stated in
2001 that Scottish Gypsy/Travellers were 'to be regarded' as an ethnic
group in Scotland by public/state bodies this remained untested. Clark's
research concluded that whilst Scottish Gypsy/Travellers are undoubtedly
as much an 'ethnic group' as any other currently protected by the Race
Relations Act 1976 (as amended 2000) - now replaced by the Equalities Act
2010 - Scottish Gypsy/Travellers generally lacked the substantive
protection of the Act in the Scottish context. It further found that only
when a test case comes before the Scottish courts and completes its
journey through the legal system, would Gypsy/Travellers be assured of
their rights and protection from discrimination. Although this group's
ethnic identity had been defined in Europe [1] and in the UK [4] they
continued to face social exclusion and thus needed to resort to legal
status to challenge decisions and actions which affected their lives [2,
3].
In Scotland, although there was a widely accepted view that they were an
ethnic group, the research concluded that in the absence of a legal basis
this could be challenged under the law, and without this being tested
Gypsy/Travellers remained open to potential discrimination and exclusion.
Key researchers: Dr Colin Clark, Lecturer in the School of Social
Work and Social Policy University of Strathclyde from January 2005 to August
2013 led on all research referred to in this case study.
References to the research
[1] Clark, C. and Titterton, M. (2000) `Working with socially excluded
Romani communities in central and eastern Europe: lessons from Bulgaria',
Social Work in Europe, 7 (3): 38-45. ISSN: 13531670.
[2] Clark, C. (2003) 'Ethnicity, the law and Gypsy-Travellers in
Scotland: which way now?' in Salo, S. and Pronai, C. (eds.) Ethnic
Identities in Dynamic Perspective. Budapest: Gondalot/Minority
Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, pp.
211-218. ISBN: 9639500992
[3] Clark, C. and Cemlyn, S. (2005) `The social exclusion of Gypsy and
Traveller children' in G. Preston (ed.) At Greatest Risk: the children
most likely to be poor, London: CPAG. pp.150-165. ISBN: 1901698785.
[4] Clark, C. and Greenfields, M. (2006) Here to Stay: the Gypsies
and Travellers of Britain Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire
Press (382 pages). ISBN: 1902806336.
Notes on quality: The research was published across peer-reviewed
journals [1, 4] and in refereed international books [2, 3 and 5]. Each is
widely cited as evidence of social exclusion of this community [1 - 3].
Reference 5 was included in RAE2008 and is a benchmark output for identity
research on Gypsy/Travellers [5].
Details of the impact
Process from research to impact:
The Scottish Executive's Race Equality Scheme (RES) 2005 `Working Together
for Race Equality' commented that, at that time, not all Gypsy/Traveller
communities were recognised for the purposes of the race relations
legislation but acknowledged the need for protection from discrimination
and abuse. Plans for services for the traveller community in Scotland
prior to 2008 were dealt with under the Equal Opportunities agenda.
In September 2008, an industrial tribunal case was brought in Aberdeen by
Mr Ken MacLennan claiming that his employers at the Gipsy Traveller
Education and Information Project (GTEIP) had dismissed him for "taking a
stance on behalf of gipsy travellers". Dr Clark was called as an expert
witness on behalf of the plaintiff, appearing before Judge Nicol Hosie and
others to argue the case for Scottish Gypsy/Travellers having legal
protection under the terms of the Race Relations Act of 1976 (as amended
2000).
Over a two day period (8th- 9th September), Clark
presented as evidence his research findings from the 2006 study [5] and he
was questioned by both the plaintiff's and defendant's legal teams as well
as the Judge himself. At the heart of this case was a question over the
legal ethnicity and standing of Scottish Gypsy/Travellers in regard to
Race Relations legislation. Using his prior research, Clark indicated that
in the absence of a `protected' socio-legal status of Scottish
Gypsy/Traveller ethnicity, this group would, if they were to experience
social and cultural stigmatisation and discrimination, struggle to have
the same legal redress that other ethnic minority groups had in Scotland.
This hearing thus became the pivotal `test case' that Clark (2006) had
argued was required to provide legal clarification [5].
The judgement was in favour of the plaintiff, Mr MacLennan, with Judge
Hosie concluding: "Having satisfied ourselves, therefore, that the two
main characteristics set out by Lord Fraser in Mandla were satisfied and
that the other non-essential characteristics were satisfied in varying
degrees, we arrived at the view that Scottish Gypsy-Travellers have
"ethnic origins", with reference in particular, to Section 3(1) of the
1976 Act and that they therefore enjoy the protection of the Act" (page
15, point 49). Judge Hosie referred to Dr Clark's evidence
throughout his judgement and determined him to be an "impressive and
persuasive witness" (page 6, point 14).
The unanimous judgment of the Tribunal is summed up in the conclusion on
page 15 of the written judgment (dated 21 October, 2008). This judgment is
all the more remarkable as the Judge admits a previous mistake he had made
at an earlier industrial tribunal hearing in March 2008 which was
conducted without consulting the available evidence base or asking for
expert witness testimony: "I think it is worthy of comment that,
having now approached the issue in this manner, I was convinced that I
had fallen into error by conducting the previous hearing in the way I
did and not hearing evidence. I am satisfied that my decision to review
that judgment, at my own instance, and to hear evidence, was the correct
one."
Types of Impactm
1. Changes in public policy and law
Following entry of the judgment into the Registry on 21 October 2008, the
test case had immediate and far-reaching impacts for all 20,000 to 22,000
Gypsy/Travellers in Scotland - in terms of their legal protection, support
of future legal challenges, influence on public policy and in the
approaches taken by service providers to Gypsy/Travellers (Sources 1 and
2). Further, as legal precedence, the judgment has in subsequent cases
been used to support Gypsy/Travellers in challenging decisions which
affect their everyday lives and their identity. The research in Clark
(2006) [5] continues to be used by Scottish Gypsy/Traveller individuals
and families to challenge discrimination in courts of laws.
The judgment officially granted legal protection as an ethnic minority
group to rights enshrined with all Race Relations legislation (now
superseded by the Equality Act 2010). Amnesty Scotland in their report `On
the Margins - Local authority service provision for Scottish Gypsy
Travellers' April 2012, has noted that this has provided security of
protection for the entire Gypsy/Travellers community and impacted on their
confidence and ability to engage with local authorities and other
communities (Source 2).
The Equal Opportunities Committee, Scottish Parliament 1st
Report March 2013 (Source 5) acknowledges "A recent Tribunal judgement (Mr
K MacLennan v Gypsy Traveller Education and Information Project 2009) held
that Gypsy Travellers are a distinct ethnic group and therefore covered by
the Race Relations Act 1976."
2. Improved social welfare and inclusion
The outcome of the judgement has impact on enhancement to policy and
practice, improved social welfare, inclusion and access to justice for all
Gypsy/Travellers in Scotland. The implications in relation to human rights
were acknowledged immediately by the Scottish Government in their `Race
Equality Statement' published in December 2009, and in statements on their
website including:
"Although it is not in our power to make change in relation to the legal
recognition of Scottish Gypsies/Travellers as an ethnic group since
legislation around equal opportunities is reserved, the Scottish
Government continues to recognise Gypsies/Travellers as an ethnic group in
its work and encourages others to do likewise. The Scottish Government
acknowledges that Gypsy/Traveller communities have specific requirements
and require the same level of protection from discrimination and abuse in
common with all of Scotland's minority ethnic communities. A recent
judgement in relation to an employment tribunal (K. MacLennan Vs. Gypsy
Traveller Education and Information Project) has set a precedent in this
regard, it concluded that "Scottish Gypsy/Travellers" is a group which can
be defined by reference to it ethnic origins and therefore can be afforded
the protection offered by section 2(1)(d) of the Race Relations Act 1976."
(Source 3)
The Statement goes on to propose the provision of resources for
education, transit sites and community development, with an unspecified
number of transit sites in place by March 2011. It notes that these were
priorities in the 2005 Equal Opportunity Committee Interim Report and from
the Gypsy/Travellers Steering Group (from 2005-06).
BEMIS, the Black and Ethnic Minority Infrastructure in Scotland working
group, is a network of ethnic minority organisations convened to address
the gap that exists in support for the ethnic minority voluntary sector in
Scotland. The BEMIS report `Gypsy Travellers in Contemporary Scotland',
2011, (Source 1) cites Clark's research to support many of the points made
in the report, including the argument that the Scottish Travellers are a
distinct indigenous group.
From Chapter 2 p.17 of this report - `Clark (2006) argues that at various
stages in Scottish history, dispossessed labourers and other marginalised
people may have complemented the original Scottish nomadic. Hence, he
argues that it is true that Scottish Gypsy/Travellers are quite distinct
from recent Roma arrivals in Scotland, via government asylum dispersal
schemes for example, because they are an indigenous nomadic group' (Source
1).
It continues to shape policy through debate in the Scottish Parliament,
being part of the evidence drawn upon by the Equal Opportunities Committee
of the Scottish Parliament in their 2013 hearings addressing where
Gypsy/Travellers live (Source 5), and in the case made by the Equality and
Human Rights Commission (Source 4) where a new tick box stating
"Gypsy/traveller" has been incorporated into the census which will assist
in monitoring accommodation needs for the Gypsy/Traveller community
(Sources 5 and 6) and in relation to employment law (Source 7).
The ruling has had implications for service provision for all
Gypsy/Travellers. Across service providers and local authorities, the
outcomes of the legal case have been reflected in the guidance issued in
relation to social inclusion and discrimination across professions
including nursing and health care (Source 8) and social work (Source 9).
Sources to corroborate the impact
1. BEMIS (2011) Gypsy Travellers in contemporary Scotland
http://bemis.org.uk/docs/gypsy_travellers_in_contemporary_scotland.pdf
p 20 -21
2. Document - Amnesty Scotland (2012) On the margins, Local Authority
service provision for Scottish Gypsy Travellers (endnote 4, p16).
3. Scottish Government ethnic status statement
(http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/People/Equality/gypsiestravellers/ethnic
)
4. Equality and Human Rights Commission (2010) p21 (cites the legal
status on the basis of this case and the research)
http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/Scotland/Research/research_report_assessing_the_accomodation_needs_of_gypsy_traveller_in_scotland.pdf
5. Equal Opportunities Committee, Scottish Parliament 1st
Report 2013 - Where
Gypsy/Travellers Live (case cited to define ethnic group, p2)
(http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EqualOpportunitiesCommittee/Reports/eor-13-01w.pdf)
6. Race Equality Foundation 2009 "Gypsies, Travellers and accommodation
(http://www.raceequalityfoundation.org.uk/publications/downloads/gypsies-travellers-and-accommodation
)
7. http://www.casecheck.co.uk/Default.aspx?tabid=1184&EntryID=11243
(citing the case in relation to employment law)
8. Royal College of Nursing:
http://www.rcn.org.uk/development/practice/social_inclusion/gypsy_and_traveller_communities
(revising the legal judgment for nursing and social exclusion)
9. British Association of Social Workers (BASW): http://cdn.basw.co.uk/upload/basw_105656-9.pdf
(p10-11) - implications of the judgment for Social Work practitioners in
combatting discrimination again Scottish Gypsy/Travellers.