Rescinding decision to introduce parking charges to Ballycastle seafront carparks part 2
S75 Equality And Good Relations Screening Form
Dependants
In Causeway Coast and Glens 28% of households include dependent children, compared with the NI average of 29.21%.
Number of dependent children - households
MS-A24: Census 2021 CC&G Borough Council Northern Ireland
All households 57,577 768,809
No children in household 31,968 (55.52%) 423,956 (55.14%)
No dependent children in household/
All children in household non-dependent 9,490 (16.48%) 120,314 (15.65%)
One dependent child:
aged 0-4 1,816 (3.15%) 27,233 (3.54%)
aged 5-11 1,470 (2.55%) 21,123 (2.75%)
aged 12-18 2,919 (5.07%) 39,203 (5.10%)
Two dependent children:
youngest aged 0-4 2,293 (3.98%) 32,598 (4.24%)
youngest aged 5-11 2,635 (4.58%) 36,534 (4.75%)
youngest aged 12-18 1,398 (2.43%) 18,532 (2.41%)
Three or more dependent children:
youngest aged 0-4 1,773 (3.08%) 24,120 (3.14%)
youngest aged 5-11 1,562 (2.71%) 21,677 (2.82%)
youngest aged 12-18 253 (0.44%) 3,519 (0.46%)
District Electoral Area Provides no Provides 1 or more
2014 Label unpaid care hours unpaid care per week
Ballymoney 20,283 2,774
Bann 14,539 2,011
Benbradagh 14,612 1,974
Causeway 20,615 2,783
Coleraine 19,781 2,573
Limavady 13,577 1,804
The Glens 14,379 2,068
District Electoral Area Dependent child Not a dependent child
2014 Label
Ballymoney 5,760 18,581
Bann 4,161 13,304
Benbradagh 4,637 13,168
Causeway 4,705 19,506
Coleraine 5,163 17,962
Limavady 3,564 12,000
The Glens 4,018 13,270
Staff Family Status (Figures as at 21 October 2022)
Family Status Number of staff
Blank 298 (49.26%)
Adults(s) 11 (1.82%)
Child/Children 157 (25.95%)
None 138 (22.81%)
Other 1 (0.16%)
Total 605
Currently Council has no data on carpark usage in relation to Section 75 Categories.
There is no evidence to indicate that the proposal will have a positive or negative impact on any of this Section 75 group.
A consultation process will support the identification of any currently unknown impacts.
Disability
The Census 2021 showed that 35.95% of our residents has a long-term health condition or illness which limits their daily activities or the work they can do, which is slightly higher than the NI average of 34.67%.
Number of long-term health conditions MS-D04: Census 2021 CC&G Borough Council Northern Ireland
All usual residents 141,746 1,903,176
Does not have a long-term health condition 90,793 (64.05%) 1,243,371 (65.33%)
1 long-term health condition 26,690 (18.83%) 344,687 (18.11%)
2 long-term health conditions 12,121 (8.55%) 151,512 (7.96%)
3 long-term health conditions 6,220 (4.39%) 81,075 (4.26%)
4 long-term health conditions 3,440 (2.43%) 46,166 (2.43%)
5 or more long-term health conditions 2,482 (1.75%) 36,365 (1.91%)
Currently Council has no data on carpark usage in relation to Section 75 Categories.
Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council Long-term Condition
Deafness or partial hearing loss 8,914 (6.29%)
Blindness or partial sight 2,560 (1.81%)
Mobility or dexterity that requires the use of a wheelchair 2,145 (1.51%)
Mobility or dexterity that limits physical activities 15,951 (11.25%)
Intellectual or learning disability 1,340 (0.95%)
Intellectual or learning difficulty 4,334 (3.06%)
Autism or Asperger syndrome 2,282 (1.61%)
An emotional, psychological or mental health condition 11,787 (8.32%)
Frequent periods of confusion or memory loss 2,681 (1.89%)
Long term pain or discomfort 17,396 (12.27%)
Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing 14,525 (10.25%)
Other condition 13,214 (9.32%)
Source: NISRA, Census 2021, tables MS-D03, MS-D04 through to MS-D16
District Electoral Area Day-to-day activities Day-to-day activities Day-to-day activities
2014 Label limited a lot limited a little not limited
Ballymoney 2,908 3,211 18,399
Bann 1,693 2,392 13,450
Benbradagh 1,949 2,130 13,739
Causeway 2,715 3,501 18,326
Coleraine 2,999 3,584 17,042
Limavady 2,401 2,377 11,452
The Glens 1,964 2,478 13,034
Staff breakdown by Disability (Figures as at 21 October 2022)
With or Without a Disability Number of staff
No 591 (97.69%)
Yes 14 (2.31%)
Total 605
All signage is provided in the appropriate font to support those with visual impairment.
Signage uses plain English and simple wording to support easy read and understanding.
There is no evidence to indicate that the proposal will have a positive or negative impact on any of this Section 75 group.
A consultation process will support the identification of any currently unknown impacts.
Screening Questions
1. What is the likely impact on equality of opportunity for those affected by this function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance?
Section 75 Category - Positive impact (it could benefit), Neutral or Negative impact (it could disadvantage).
Gender
Women, Men, Transgender men/women, Other: Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that Gender was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Race The categories used in the Race section are those used in the 2011 census. Consideration should be given to the needs of specific communities within the broad categories.
Asian, Black, Chinese, Mixed race, Other: Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that Race was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Measures will be put in place to support individuals whose first language is not English to take part in the consulation.
Disability Long term health impairment could include mental health problems, asthma, heart conditions, chronic fatigue etc.
Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that Disability was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Measures will be put in place to support individuals with a disability to take part in the consulation.
Sexual orientation Heterosexual, lesbian, gay men, bisexual, others
Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that sexual orientation was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Age Older People: Minor negative impact on this section. Younger people and children: Neutral impact on this section.
The data identified the number of charged car parks may create an imbalance whereby older people may be impacted depending on where they reside, socialise or shop. This would still be an impact if the charging for Ballycastle was removed.
Political Opinion
Minor negative impact on this section. The data identified an imbalance with regards to political opinion demonstrated by voting patterns within each of the DEA’s.
Religious Belief
Minor negative impact on this section. The data identified an imbalance with regards to religious belief demonstrated by DEA related census data.
Martial Status
Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that marital status was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Dependants
Neutral impact on this section. The data did not identify that dependants was a factor which would be impacted by the introduction or removal of car parking charges.
Screening Questions
2. Are there opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity for people within any of the Section 75 categories?
Gender (Women, Men, Transgender men/women, Other please specify).
No. The proposal does not support opportunity to better promote equality of opportunity in relation to gender.
Race The categories used in the Race section are those used in the 2011 census. Consideration should be given to the needs of specific communities within the broad categories.
(Asian, Black, Chinese, Mixed race, White, Other please specify).
Yes. There is some opportunity to better promote equality of opportunity in relation to race by providing information in various languages which has been taken into consideration.
Disability Long term health impairment could include mental health problems, asthma, heart conditions, chronic fatigue etc.
Yes. The consultation process has incorporated mitigation measures to provide equality of opportunity for individuals with a disability.
Sexual orientation Heterosexual, lesbian, gay men, bisexual, others.
No. The proposal does not support opportunity to better promote equality of opportunity in relation to sexual orientation.
Age Older People, Younger people and children.
No. The proposal does not support opportunity to better promote equality of opportunity in relation to age.
Political Opinion.
No. The policy does not support opportunity to promote equality of opportunity in relation to political opinion.
Religious Belief.
No. The policy does not support opportunity to promote equality of opportunity in relation to religious belief.
Marital Status.
No. The policy does not support opportunity to promote equality of opportunity in relation to marital status.
Dependants.
No. The policy does not support opportunity to promote equality of opportunity in relation to dependants.
Screening Questions.
3. To what extent is the policy likely to impact on good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group?
Section 75 Category: Religious Belief.
Level of impact: Minor. The policy may detrimentally impact on good relations in relation to Religious Belief.
Section 75 Category: Political Opinion.
Level of impact: Minor. The policy may detrimentally impact on good relations in relation to Political Opinion.
Section 75 Category: Racial Group.
Level of impact: None. The policy is unlikely to impact on good relations in relation to Racial Group.
Screening Questions.
4. Are there opportunities to better promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group?
Religious Belief: No. The proposal has no remit to impact on good relations.
Political Opinion: No. The proposal has no remit to impact on good relations.
Racial Group: No. The proposal has no remit to impact on good relations.
Additional Considerations.
Generally speaking people can fall into more than one Section 75 category. Taking this into consideration, are there any potential impacts of the function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance on people with multiple identities? (For example: disabled minority ethnic people, disabled women, young Protestant men, young lesbians, gay and bisexual people.)
Measures have been put in place to support those with multiple identities, for example, older individuals will be informed of the process through more traditional forms of advertisements, e.g., newspapers and notices in the car parks and younger individuals on Council website.
Provide details of data on the impact of the function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance on people with multiple identities. Specify the relevant Section 75 categories concerned.
There is potential that older protestant individuals who reside in a Unionist area may be detrimentally impacted.
Disability Considerations.
Is there an opportunity to better promote positive attitudes towards disabled people by altering this function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance?
Yes. The Council as part of the consultation process could support translation and the use of QR codes to create direct links to the survey.
Is there an opportunity to encourage participation by disabled people in public life by altering this function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance?
Yes. Using the mitigation measures identified.
Screening Decision.
Likely Impact: Minor - Major
If the decision is to subject the policy to an equality impact assessment (i.e. likely impact – Major), please provide details of the reasons for this:
The impact on Political Opinion, Religious belief and age could have a minor to major adverse impact on service users. The EQIA framework will facilitate the identification of the impact level and support the identification of mitigation measures going forward.
If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment (i.e. likely impact = Minor) the Council should consider if the policy should be mitigated or an alternative policy be introduced:
As above.
If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment (i.e. likely impact = None), please provide details of the reasons for this:
N/A.
Mitigation.
When the Council concludes that the likely impact is ‘Minor’ and an equality impact assessment is not to be conducted, the Council may consider mitigation to lessen the severity of any equality impact, or the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity or good relations.
Can the policy/decision be amended or changed or an alternative policy introduced to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations?
No.
If YES, give the reasons to support your decision, together with the proposed changes/amendments or alternative policy:
N/A – EQIA is recommended.
Timetabling And Prioritising.
If the policy/decision has been ‘screened in’ for equality impact assessment, then please answer the following questions to determine its priority for timetabling the equality impact assessment.
On a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being the lowest priority and 3 the highest, assess the policy in terms of its priority for equality impact assessment.
Priority Criterion Rating (1 to 3).
Effect on equality of opportunity and good relations 3
Social Need 1
Effect on people’s daily lives 3
Relevance to the Council’s functions 3
Monitoring.
Please outline proposals for future monitoring of the policy/decision:
The impact of the proposal will be monitored as part of the EQIA.
Approval And Authorisation
Screened By: Car Parks & Concessionary Trading Manager, 17/09/24
Approved By: Head of Environmental Services, 17/09/24