S75 Equality And Good Relations Screening Form

General Information: Strategy

This is a revised strategy.

Operational Area: Harbour Master and Harbour Team

Title: Draft Harbours & Marinas strategy 2026–2036 Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council

Brief Summary

The draft strategy provides a ten year framework for the management, development and investment in 13 Council owned harbours, marinas and slipways.

What is it trying to achieve? (intended aims and outcomes)

Aim of the Strategy

To provide safe working harbours. To prioritise investment to ensure safety and sustainability and where viable improve infrastructure to enhance user experience for local people, business and tourists to the area. To strengthen relationships with internal and external stakeholders and to use the harbours and marinas to promote healthy and vibrant communities and local economic development.

The Objectives of the Draft strategy

  • To maintain safe working harbours and good quality infrastructure and facilities in harbours and marinas.
  • To strengthen relationships with users and stakeholders and work in partnership to achieve common goals.
  • To be a premium vibrant destination by supporting existing and developing leisure tourism and commercial sectors; making a significant contribution to the local and blue economy.
  • To have a balanced budget whilst building the ability for investment and new initiatives in the harbours.
  • To celebrate each harbour’s natural and cultural heritage by integrating the harbours into the community and linking with the wider natural and cultural offering.
  • To protect Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council’s (CCGBC) natural capital by operating best practice in environmental management in harbours.

Who owns and who implements each element of the function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance?

Owned by Environmental Services – Capital Works, Energy & Infrastructure. Implemented by the Harbour Master, Senior Harbour Master, Harbour Team.

Aspects of the draft strategy are also implemented in partnership with relevant Council departments such as Leisure and Development, Corporate Services and Performance. Planning.

Other policies etc. which have a bearing on this function, service, policy, procedure, project, strategy, plan or guidance?

  • The Causeway Coast and Glens Borough Council Corporate strategy 2021-2025.
  • Causeway Coast and Glens Community Plan 2017-2030.
  • The Local Development Plan means Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS).
  • Play & Recreation strategy.
  • Climate Change Action strategy.
  • Rathlin Island Action Plan.
  • Destination Management Plan.
  • The Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) Northern Ireland Marine Plan.
  • Relevant tourism, heritage, environmental and coastal management policies.

Available Evidence

Desk Based Research McCarthy and Brown.

  • Asset condition surveys.
  • SWOT analyses.
  • Fee benchmarking.
  • Tourism and socioeconomic data.
  • Ferry infrastructure review.
  • Consultation findings McCarthy Brown Report (2025).
  • Equality related evidence – the Five-Year Review of the Equality Scheme.
  • Consultation information with stakeholders held by the council.
  • NISRA statistics NI Census 2021
  • Source DAERA Audit of Inequalities 2021-2025
  • Causeway Coast and Glens Labour Market Partnership Action Plan 2023-2024
  • Electoral Office for Northern Ireland website https://www.eoni.org.uk

This screening has been completed at a strategic level to assess the overall equality and good relations implications of the Harbours & Marinas draft strategy 2026–2036. The Draft strategy sets the framework for a wide range of future actions, capital works and operational changes across multiple harbour locations with differing characteristics, user groups and community contexts.

As individual projects, programmes or operational changes are developed under this strategy, each stage of implementation must be reviewed to ensure that due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity and regard to the desirability of promoting good relations continues to be exercised. This includes confirming whether:

  • the strategic level screening adequately covers the specific proposal; or
  • a separate, project specific screening is required because the impacts differ in scale, location, user group or potential differential effect.

Where new impacts emerge, or where the evidence base changes, the screening should be revisited and updated, and appropriate mitigations or adjustments should be made to ensure ongoing compliance with Section 75 duties.

Section 75 Category and Details of Evidence/Information

Religious Beliefs

Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Where heritage interpretation or community programming is developed in future, it should be designed to reflect the area’s diverse traditions in a balanced and inclusive way.

Religion / religion brought up in

Roman Catholic CC&G: 40.12%
Roman Catholic NI: 45.70%

Protestant & Other Christian (including Christian related) CC&G: 51.17%
Protestant & Other Christian (including Christian related) NI: 43.48%

Other Religions CC&G: 0.78%
Other Religions NI: 1.50%

None/Not stated CC&G: 7.94%
None/Not stated NI: 9.32%


Political Opinion

In some communities, investment in public assets can be interpreted through political identity. The Strategy itself applies transparent, evidence based criteria, which helps minimise any perception of differential treatment.

At the last local elections (2023) in Causeway Coast and Glens Councillor seats were deemed as follows:

Councillors total

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) 13

Sinn Féin 12

Alliance Party 5

Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) 4

Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) 3

Traditional Unionist Voice 2

Other 1

Racial Group

The CC&G Borough Council five-year review of the Equality Scheme notes there is increased diversity within the Borough.

Anecdotal evidence from staff confirmed there was an increase migrant worker (mainly Filipino and Eastern European) in fishing, hospitality and tourism. Changes in the representation of ethnic minority communities in the population may create potential language and access barriers.

Rural areas are becoming increasingly diverse, populated more frequently by communities who are no longer simply concentrated in urban areas. There are significant numbers of migrant workers within farming and fishing industries and those employed in food production plants, many of whom also have families living in rural areas Source DAERA Audit of Inequalities 2021-2025

The 2021 Census detailed 98.55% of the population is white, with 1.45% from an ethnic background. The largest minority ethnic groups in Causeway Coast and Glens are the Chinese (0.22%), Indian (0.15%) and Filipino (0.10%). The proportion of ethnic groups from a non-white background has increased in Causeway Coast and Glens over the last 10 years by 0.95% slightly increasing the diversity in the population.

The draft strategy will be publicised on the Councils website which supports translation into various languages for the 2% of our population noted below.

Main Language Census 2021; CC&G Borough Council

English 98%

Other languages 2%

NISRA census 2021

A commitment is given in the five-year review to inclusive consultation.

Age

The consultation on the draft strategy raised the following concerns for older people: seating in recreational areas, and competing demands in terms of access to parking and facilities during peak tourist times. McCarthy Brown consultation Report (2025)

The profile of users who use the harbours for sailing activities tends to be in the upper age range and as they retire the cost and physical access can become an issue. Anecdotal evidence from staff.

Age Bands

0-14
CCGC 18%
Northern Ireland 19%

15-39
CCGC 29%
Northern Ireland 31%

40-46
CCGC 34%
Northern Ireland 32%

65+
CCGC 19%
Northern Ireland 17%

The 64+ age group has seen a 4% increase since the 2011 Census.

(NISRA census 2021)

The population of CCGC Aged 60+ is expected to rise to 34.3% of the projected population for the area by 2037.

11% of households are lone pensioners.

Source: Community Plan for CCGC 2017-2030

Older people may be affected by physical access barriers given the lack of access to some of the facilities by public transport and the impacts of tourism on residents.

The consultation on the draft strategy raised the following concerns for young people: that the harbours are used by young people for sporting activities such as swimming, rowing and boating. (McCarthy Brown 2025)

There will be a comparatively large decrease in the proportion of children and working age population, compared to wider NI trends. By 2043, the number of children is projected to make up 14.8% of the Borough’s population, compared to 29.4% of the population aged 65 years and over.

Causeway Coast and Glens Labour Market Partnership Action Plan 2023-2024.

There are school visits in the facilities, and they are also used by the Sea Cadets. Anecdotal evidence from staff.

The number of young people aged 16 to 24 years across the borough not in employment, education or training has risen sharply from 15.2% in 2016 to 18.2% in 2022.

CCGB was the only Council area to show an increase and is significantly higher than the NI average of 10.9%

Young people will benefit from enhanced training and water based activities in some venues.


Marital Status

8% of parents across the CCGC area are lone parents with children.

Source: Community Plan for CCGC 2017-2030.

14% parents across NI are lone parents Source NIRSA census 2021.

No evidence of differential impact.

Sexual Orientation

Sexual orientation

Straight or heterosexual
CC&G Borough Council: 104,205 (91.28%)
Northern Ireland: 1,363,859 (90.04%)

Gay or lesbian
CC&G Borough Council: 906 (0.79%)
Northern Ireland: 17,713 (1.17%)

Bisexual
CC&G Borough Council: 596 (0.52%)
Northern Ireland: 11,306 (0.75%)

Other sexual orientation
CC&G Borough Council: 135 (0.12%)
Northern Ireland: 2,597 (0.17%)

Prefer not to say
CC&G Borough Council: 4,502 (3.94%)
Northern Ireland: 69,307 (4.58%)

Not stated
CC&G Borough Council: 3,816 (3.34%)
Northern Ireland: 49,961 (3.30%)

All usual residents aged 16 and over
CC&G Borough Council: 114,160
Northern Ireland: 1,514,743

Census 2021.

No evidence of differential impact.

Men and Women Generally

On Census Day 2021, 51% of the Borough’s population was female (n 71,898) and 49% was male NISRA Census (2021).

Women may experience harbours differently due to safety, lighting and facilities, gender imbalance in marine sectors.

Importance of ensuring any local employment benefits without discrimination as fishing and associated businesses tend to be predominately male.

Source: DAERA Audit of Inequalities 2021-2025.

Dependants

28% of households in CCGC include dependent children, compared with the NI average of 29.21%.

Source: NISRA Census 2021.

Families may be affected by affordability, safety and family friendly facilities.

Disability

The Census 2021 showed that 35.95% of the 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%.

Source NISRA Census 2021.

The economic inactivity rate across the Council area is one of the highest within Northern Ireland at 29.9%. Causeway Coast & Glens Borough Council remains above the Northern Ireland average, which currently stands at 26.2% for 2021. Of the economically inactive residents, 32% of those are disabled. This is the largest reason for economic inactivity in the borough. This is like the Northern Ireland average where approximately 34% of the economically inactive population have disabilities.

The specific needs of people with disabilities were identified in terms of access to transport, parking at facilities and that the harbours are accessible for people with mobility impairments and the residents are balanced with needs of tourists McCarthy Brown Consultation Report (2025).

Access Barriers for people with disabilities to pontoons, slipways, toilets, changing facilities, to transport and providing safety information in accessible formats for people with disabilities were also identified in through anecdotal information from staff.

There are significant access barriers across multiple harbours; disabled people face the greatest differential impact.

Screening Question 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: Minor Negative impact.
Men, Transgender men/women, Other: Neutral impact.

Women may experience harbours differently due to safety concerns, lighting, visibility, and the availability of appropriate facilities (WCs, showers, changing areas).

Employment patterns in marine sectors also show gender imbalance; improvements in training, recruitment and volunteering/community participation opportunities can help address this.

Women with caring responsibilities may also be affected by affordability and access issues.


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 and Mixed race White: Neutral Impact.
Chinese and Other please specify: Minor Negative Impact.

Minority ethnic and migrant workers are present in fishing, hospitality and seasonal tourism. Barriers may arise through language, limited access to consultation processes, or lack of culturally accessible information. Without targeted engagement, these groups may be underrepresented in decision making and may not benefit equally from opportunities created by the draft strategy.

A commitment is given in the five-year review to inclusive consultation.


Disability

Long term health impairment could include mental health problems, asthma, heart conditions, chronic fatigue etc.
Minor Negative Impact.

Disabled people face the most significant differential impacts. Many harbours have legacy access barriers: steep gradients, ladders, uneven surfaces, overtopping, inaccessible pontoons, limited accessible WCs, and poor slipway profiles.

Sexual orientation

Heterosexual, lesbian, gay men, bisexual, others: Neutral Impact.

No direct impacts identified. However, ensuring harbours are perceived as safe, welcoming and free from harassment is important for LGBTQ+ users. Inclusive signage, staff training and visible codes of conduct help maintain a positive environment.


Age

Older People: Minor Negative Impact.
Younger people and children: Positive Impact.

Young people benefit from increased access to water based activities, training pathways, youth sailing, and safer infrastructure. Initiatives with local schools could be promoted to encourage young people to become interested in sports or careers in this area. Apprenticeships would also be a useful way of encouraging young people into careers in this sector.

Older people may be disproportionately affected by digital only systems (bookings, payments, information), fee changes that impact those on fixed incomes, and physical access barriers such as steep gradients, overtopping, degraded pontoons, missing ladders, and poor slipway profiles. Improvements in safety, lighting, signage and accessible facilities will have greater benefit for older users.

The impact of the tourists and the issues this may create in terms of accessibility for older people may need to be considered.


Political Opinion

Minor Negative Impact.

There is no evidence to indicate that this draft strategy will have a positive or negative impact on this Section 75 group.

In some communities, investment in public assets can be interpreted through political identity. The Strategy itself applies transparent, evidence based criteria, which helps minimise any perception of differential treatment.

Any Policies associated with access to, or usage of the harbours will need separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


Religious Belief

Minor Negative Impact.

Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Moreover, the harbour events and school visits promote cross-community involvement in harbours. However, Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Where heritage interpretation or community programming is developed in future, it should be designed to reflect the area’s diverse traditions in a balanced and inclusive way.

Inclusive messaging and balanced representation can reinforce shared space and avoid inadvertent exclusion, particularly in areas with layered histories.

Any Policies associated with access to, or usage of the harbours will need separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


Marital Status

Neutral Impact.

No evidence suggests differential impact linked to marital status. Impacts are more closely associated with caring roles, income, access and rurality rather than marital status itself.


Dependants

Minor Negative Impact.

Families and carers are affected by affordability, safety, and the availability of family friendly facilities. Fee increases, congestion, or reduced access for local users could disproportionately affect low income families and lone parents.


Screening Question 2

Are there opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity for people within any of the Section 75 categories?

Section 75 Category If Yes, provide details If No, provide details.


Gender (Women, Men, Transgender men/women, Other please specify).

Yes.
Physical access deficits disproportionately affecting disabled people, women and carers.

These considerations should be considered in investment and design considerations for the harbours.

Partnerships with other organisations to promote careers in working in harbours and in businesses allied to the harbours.


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.
Inclusive communication, translated materials, and outreach through employers and community groups are essential.

Disability Long term health impairment could include mental health problems, asthma, heart conditions, chronic fatigue etc.

Yes.
The draft strategy offers opportunities for improvement, but unless access upgrades are prioritised early, disabled users may continue to experience exclusion. Accessible information formats, safe pedestrian routes, and disability access audits are essential.

The needs of this group also need to be balanced with the influx of tourists proposed.

Consideration could be given further support for sports or leisure activities in the harbours or marinas that would promote positive attitudes to people with disabilities.

Sexual orientation Heterosexual, lesbian, gay men, bisexual, others.

No issues emerged through the research and analysis of consultation information.

Age Older People, Younger people and children.

Yes.
Engaging with organisations representing older people and with users on the future development of the harbours and on access to them.

Political Opinion

Yes.
In some communities, investment in public assets can be interpreted through political identity. The Strategy itself applies transparent, evidence based criteria, which helps minimise any perception of differential treatment. Any Policies associated with access to, or usage of the harbours will need separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.

Religious Belief

Yes.
Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Where heritage interpretation or community programming is developed in future, it should be designed to reflect the area’s diverse traditions in a balanced and inclusive way.


Marital Status
No issues emerged through the research and analysis of consultation information.

Dependants

Yes.
Improvements in safety, toilets, seating, wayfinding and low cost youth participation options can enhance inclusion.

The influx of tourists may need to be balanced with the inability of those with dependants being able to access the facilities.

Screening Question 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 Details of policy impact Level of impact major/minor/none.

Religious Belief
Minor Impact.
Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Moreover, the harbour events and school visits promote cross community involvement in harbours. However, heritage interpretation, community events and tourism activity must be designed sensitively taking into account and carefully considering potential impacts across the various communities. Inclusive messaging and balanced representation can reinforce shared space and avoid inadvertent exclusion, particularly in areas with layered histories. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will need separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.

Political Opinion

Minor Impact.
Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments used by people from across the political spectrum. The Strategy itself is operational and evidence based, with no inherent political dimension. However, because some harbours sit within communities with strong political identities, investment decisions or changes to facilities must be communicated clearly. Transparent, criteria driven decision making and consistent engagement with all user groups help to mitigate this risk. Inclusive messaging, open consultation and clear explanations of how priorities are set can reinforce confidence that the Strategy is applied fairly and consistently. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will require separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


Racial Group
Minor Impact.
Harbours are open, shared civic environments used by people from a wide range of backgrounds, including minority ethnic residents, migrant workers and seasonal workers in fishing, hospitality and tourism. The Strategy itself has no inherent racial dimension and applies equally to all users. However, language barriers, limited access to consultation processes, or a lack of culturally accessible information may affect how some minority ethnic groups experience or interpret changes to facilities or harbour operations. Clear communication, translated materials where appropriate, and engagement through employers, community groups and local networks can help ensure that all communities feel informed, welcome and able to participate. Inclusive messaging reinforces the harbours as safe, shared spaces for everyone. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will require separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


Screening Question 4

Are there opportunities to better promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group?

Section 75 Category If Yes, provide details If No, provide details.

Religious Belief
Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments with no inherent religious dimension. Moreover, the harbour events and school visits promote cross-community involvement in harbours. However, heritage interpretation, community events and tourism activity must be designed sensitively taking into account and carefully considering potential impacts across the various communities.
Inclusive messaging and balanced representation can reinforce shared space and avoid inadvertent exclusion, particularly in areas with layered histories. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will need separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.

Political Opinion
Harbours operate as open, shared civic environments used by people from across the political spectrum. The Strategy itself is operational and evidence-based, with no inherent political dimension. However, because some harbours sit within communities with strong political identities, investment decisions or changes to facilities must be communicated clearly. Transparent, criteria-driven decision-making and consistent engagement with all user groups help to mitigate this risk.
Inclusive messaging, open consultation and clear explanations of how priorities are set can reinforce confidence that the Strategy is applied fairly and consistently. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will require separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.

Racial Group
Harbours are open, shared civic environments used by people from a wide range of backgrounds, including minority ethnic residents, migrant workers and seasonal workers in fishing, hospitality and tourism. The Strategy itself has no inherent racial dimension and applies equally to all users. However, language barriers, limited access to consultation processes, or a lack of culturally accessible information may affect how some minority ethnic groups experience or interpret changes to facilities or harbour operations. Clear communication, translated materials where appropriate, and engagement through employers, community groups and local networks can help ensure that all communities feel informed, welcome and able to participate.
Inclusive messaging reinforces the harbours as safe, shared spaces for everyone. Any policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will require separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


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.)

People may experience combined impacts across disability, age, rurality, gender and income.

Examples include:

  • Disabled island residents or residents with children.
  • Disabled older people could face compounded barriers.
  • Older rural residents with digital exclusion.
  • Migrant workers with language barriers.
  • Women with caring responsibilities affected by affordability and safety.
  • Minority ethnic women in marine related employment.
  • Rural disabled residents may be impacted by influxes or tourism in their towns and face parking and transport access issues.
  • Cumulative impacts across disability, age, rurality and low-income groups may be significant.
  • Digital-only systems risk excluding older people, disabled people, rural residents and low-income groups.


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.

Rural and island communities (including children older people and disabled people who may experience impacts as a result of a combination of characteristics) experience impacts differently due to dependency on harbours for daily life.

Digital only systems risk excluding older people, disabled people, rural residents and low income groups.

Fee structures can create indirect discrimination if not carefully designed for older people and those with disabilities.

Physical access deficits disproportionately affect disabled people, older people, women and carers.


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.

If yes, please give further information and examples:

Positive attitudes towards people with disabilities could be promoted through supporting events for people with disabilities in the Harbours.

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.

Please give further information and examples:

Yes, the future development of the harbours could create more opportunity for people with disabilities to access the harbours and to engage in recreational activities.


Screening Decision

Likely Impact: Minor


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:

N/A.

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:

No full EQIA required at this stage.
Rationale: Impacts are manageable with mitigation; draft strategy includes commitments to address access, affordability, safety and inclusion. Further screening of individual policies that affect access and usage is necessary as these are not covered in enough detail.


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?

Yes.

If YES, give the reasons to support your decision, together with the proposed changes/amendments or alternative policy:

The formal consultation process to be undertaken once the draft strategy is adopted by Council will support the identification of any currently unknown impacts and mitigations.

Mitigating actions have been identified in the report as follows:

Consideration could also be given further support for sports or leisure activities in the harbours or marinas that would promote positive attitudes to people with disabilities.

Opportunities for improvement, and upgrades for people with disabilities are prioritised early.

Considering how older people may be disproportionately affected by digital only systems (bookings, payments, information), fee changes that impact those on fixed incomes, and physical access barriers in the implementation of the strategy.

Balancing the impact of the influx of tourist’s inability of those with dependants, with a disability or older people to access the facilities.

Accessible information formats, safe pedestrian routes, and disability access audits are prioritised.

Enhanced engagement with users and local community groups.

Inclusive communication, translated materials, and outreach through employers and community groups.

Women may experience harbours differently due to safety concerns, lighting, visibility, and the availability of appropriate facilities (WCs, showers, changing areas) prioritising these needs.

Acknowledgement that policies associated with access to, or usage of, the harbours will require separate equality screening to ensure due regard to the equality duties.


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: N/A.

Social Need: N/A.

Effect on people’s daily lives: N/A.

Relevance to the Council’s functions: N/A.


Monitoring

Please outline proposals for future monitoring of the policy/decision:

This can only be determined once the full formal equality screening exercise has been completed and the council has taken a decision on the strategy and actions.


Approval And Authorisation

Screened By: Head of Capital works, Energy and Infrastructure
Date: 6 March 2026.

Approved By: Director of Environmental Services
Date: 6 March 2026.