It’s time to commence the socio-economic duty. This guide is intended to help parliamentarians implement the duty in a way that is meaningful, effective, and makes a real difference to the UK.

INTRODUCTION

TIMELINE

SUCCESS STORIES & CHALLENGES

WHAT PARLIAMENTARIANS CAN DO

TALKING POINTS

CONTACTS AND FURTHER RESOURCES

Introduction

This briefing outlines the development, current status, and future potential of the socio-economic duty — Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 — which, despite being passed into law, remains unimplemented in Westminster. In contrast, Scotland and Wales activated the Duty in 2018 and 2021 respectively, demonstrating its feasibility and impact.

Successive UK governments have failed to commence the duty—a delay that has attracted criticism from civil society organisations, including the United Nations. With the Office for Equality & Opportunity (OEO) recently concluding its public consultation on implementation, this is a timely moment to revisit the duty’s purpose and prospects.

Looking ahead to commencement, this paper provides:

Background and legislative timeline of the duty
The current status and lessons learned from devolved administrations
Success stories from voluntary adoption by over 40 local authorities in England
Practical resources for parliamentarians and staff, including:
- Media talking points
- Public debate framing
- Actions you can take to activate the duty
- Links to further reading and guidance

Crucially, it also highlights practical enablers for effective implementation and rectifying technical limitations within the detail of the duty — issues that can be resolved via statutory guidance and secondary legislation, without amending the Act itself.

We encourage you to play an active role in finally commencing this historic, first-of-its-kind legal duty to address socio-economic inequality in England through cross-nation policy making from the UK government. This briefing identifies practical steps you can take to help bring this duty to life, with meaningful implementation to address pressing crises of inequality, supporting the government’s aims on delivering an improved economy, and to make a difference to people’s lives.

The big question: What if…?

What if reducing poverty, and socio-economic inequalities, was put at the heart of all policy making decisions by government and local authorities?

Consider the transformative potential this could have across policy areas—education, health, housing, and the economy. Imagine how this focus could change the human impact of policy decisions. Reflect on how this could help tackle child poverty, reduce unequal access to essential resources, and mitigate the postcode lottery that dictates life chances. Visualise the real, tangible difference this could make to people’s everyday lives. And now, imagine being part of a historic moment—when you help activate a legal duty that turns this vision into reality. That’s the promise of the socio-economic duty.

What is the socio-economic duty?

The socio-economic duty, or SED, is Section 1 of the Equality Act 2010. It requires government and named public authorities, including councils and police and crime commissioners, to consider how they can deliver strategic decisions, such as setting priorities and objectives “in a way that is designed to reduce the inequalities of outcome which result from socio-economic disadvantage.”

The explanatory notes to this clause state that “such inequalities could include inequalities in education, health, housing, crime rates, or other matters associated with socio-economic disadvantage.”

Though the duty was passed within the Equality Act 2010, it requires a commencement order to activate it.

Timeline and Current Status

2009-10: Key publications inform analysis of inequalities and development of the SED: The Spirit Level (Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009), The Marmot Review (2010) and An Anatomy of Economic Inequality in the UK (National Equality Panel, 2010).
April 2010: Equality Act 2010, including the SED, is passed in parliament.
May 2010: The general election brings the coalition government to power, which announces it is “scrapping the duty.” The duty is left uncommenced, but not repealed.
2018: Government of Scotland activates the SED as the Fairer Scotland Duty
2021: Government of Wales activates the SED as A More Equal Wales
April-June 2025: The UK Office for Equality & Opportunity (OEO) launches public SED consultation via the Equality Law call for evidence, with questions on implementing the SED.
2026: The OEO has indicated activation in late summer or autumn of 2026; however, a personnel change, with loss of knowledge and momentum, presents a risk of delay.

The case for parliamentary support & timely commencement

Evidence based

The duty was developed in 2010, informed by data analysis and recommendations, including government-commissioned reports (see Timeline). These highlighted the need to shift from piecemeal initiatives on poverty and socio-economic inequality to a consistent, embedded approach across all areas of public policy. The evidence demonstrated that a proactive ‘invest to save’ approach delivers best value: for example, prevention of heightened health risks linked to socio-economic disadvantage averts the higher financial and human costs and demand upon public services.

However, since 2010, the duty was left dormant and indicators of poverty and inequality have worsened, with far-reaching consequences for society. In response, research and public reports have presented the increasingly urgent evidence of need; these include Nothing Left in the Cupboards: Austerity, Welfare Cuts and the Right to Food in the UK (Human Rights Watch, 2019), The Marmot Review 10 Years On (2020), The Lawrence Review (2020), and The Spirit Level at 15 (2024), which highlight the disproportionate and intersectional inequality effects of policy choices, and specifically recommend the duty’s activation.

Inequality and Poverty Needs Solving Now

Child poverty: 4.5 million children live below the poverty line. 2/3 of parliamentary constituencies have a child poverty rate of 25% or more (End Child Poverty, 2024). The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2025) reports that child poverty rates in Scotland (24%), where the SED has been adopted alongside policies to lift families out of poverty, remain lower than those in England (30%) and Wales (29%).
Destitution: around 3.8 million people experience destitution where they could not afford to meet their most basic physical needs to stay warm, dry, clean and fed in 2022. This included around one million children. These figures have more than doubled since 2017 (Joseph Rowntree Foundation).
Intersectional inequality: racialised people, disabled people, women, and children face heightened rates of poverty, disproportionate negative impact of austerity policies, and specific barriers to accessing support (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2024). Activating the SED supports the wider goal of narrowing inequalities, and the PSED (Public Sector Equality Duty) to advance equality.
Poverty wages: around 1 in 9 workers living in poverty despite being employed (Joseph Rowntree Foundation).
Concentrations of individual wealth rise, general wealth declines: billionaire wealth has skyrocketed, and the richest 52 families in the UK now have more wealth than the bottom half of the population. If this trend continues, by 2035, the richest 200 families will have more wealth than the entire UK GDP (The Spirit Level at 15, 2024).
Decline erodes trust and is fertile ground for scapegoating narratives and a more divided society: Just 12% trust governments to put the interests of the nation above those of their own party just about always or most of the time, a record low (British Social Attitudes Survey, 2024). Inequality dramatically lowers trust, social cohesion, and levels of democracy. The rise of the far right and collapsing trust in democratic institutions across the world has gone hand-in-hand with exploding wealth and power for the ultra-rich, alongside austerity and scarcity for the many (The Spirit Level at 15, 2024). The SED represents an opportunity to change this, to inform public policy making for social good, and to guard against policies that cause social harm.

Strong civil society and public support

Civil society organisations have called upon governments to prioritise the duty to address policies that have caused social harm and the crises of rising poverty, child destitution and widening inequalities. Among the SED’s advocates, is the 1 for Equality alliance including the Equality Trust, Just Fair, Amnesty International UK, Resolve Poverty, Equally Ours, and the Royal College of Physicians, and the Make Equality Real coalition facilitated by the General Federation of Trade Unions.

Polling by Compassion in Politics found that 57% support the commencement of the duty, with only 6% disagreeing. Polling commissioned in 2020 by the Royal College of Physicians found that 78% agreed that all parts of government in each part of the UK should have to consider the impact of their policies on people who are less well off.

Remedying the unjust delay of fifteen years of non-commencement

Successive governments since 2010 have been criticised by the United Nations for failing to commence the SED. The duty being dormant enabled unbridled austerity policies with harmful effects spanning rising child poverty, allowing ‘Foodbank Britain’ and untimely excess austerity-related deaths. This point is evident in Coroner’s cause of death reports citing DWP policies. The EHRC’s (2018) review of progress on socio-economic rights and implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, stated concern about the dormant status of the SED:

“The negative impacts of the cuts in social security entitlements on people sharing protected characteristics, for example, disabled people’s rights, could have been analysed and mitigated if decision-makers had paid due regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic disadvantage.”

Scholars, in sociology and law, have argued that the duty could have challenged the harms of austerity policies, such as the two-child limit on benefits; the academic discussions also point to its utility in the context of tackling the housing shortage, health and educational inequalities, and the prevention of the loss of life in the Grenfell tower block fire.

Aligned with domestic and international commitments

The duty is a tool that can assist the government in its aims to address child poverty and deliver fairness and opportunity to improve the economy. The duty can serve enhanced strategic policy decisions on issues from housing to high street decline, and reverse the increase of hardships from baby food poverty to funeral poverty. Furthermore, the duty is a positive step towards fulfilling the UK government’s commitment to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, including Goal 10 to reduce inequalities, and the International Covenant Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Cross-party support

When the SED was debated in Parliament in 2010, the Hansard record shows examples of cross-party support. For example, a prominent Conservative MP argued:

“the biggest single problem with which we are confronted in all parties in this House is that social mobility, which is palpably a good after which we should all strive, has stalled at best and regressed at worse. That has happened under successive Governments, with attempts to do good here and there. It is a long-standing phenomenon, and we have to seek to arrest and reverse that trend. Hence the introduction of clause 1, with its imposition of the socio-economic duty… it simply entails an acknowledgment and a recognition that leaving things entirely to the market and the free play of those forces is not enough—one must have some action from Government and Parliament of a protective and enabling character.”
— John Bercow, speaking as a Conservative MP for Buckingham

An early day motion on the commencement and enforcement of the socio-economic duty in the 2017-2019 UK Parliament received support from 83 MPs across six parties; a similar motion in 2024 received support from MPs in seven different parties.

The cross-party Women and Equalities Select Committee’s report on Levelling Up and Equality (September 2021) notes that there is an “oven-ready” solution to addressing socio-economic inequality through the enactment of section 1 of the Equality Act 2010.

Learning from success stories and challenges

Where the duty has been adopted by law in Scotland and Wales and voluntarily by over 40 local authorities in England, it has led to greater involvement of people living with socio-economic struggles. This has illuminated otherwise unknown policy consequences and generated joint solutions.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s (2021) evaluation of the duty in the devolved nations found that over the long term, public bodies expected that the duty would provide real and measurable improvements to people’s lives, including:

lower rates of poverty
eradicating the need for food banks
reduced gap between rich and poor people
improved opportunities and retention of young people in rural areas
less judgement and stigma around socio-economic deprivation
improved and more equal educational attainment
better overall health and mental health
better quality of life for all

Adding the socio-economic dimension to decision-making, including through Equality Impact Assessments (EIA), in the devolved nations has led to different policy choices. The greatest potential of the duty is from the combined effects of embedding it at both the national and local levels. A case study from Falkirk Council (Just Fair, 2025) illustrates how incorporating the duty into a combined EIA in a local authority can avert proposed cuts with harmful consequences; the cuts considered to Early Learning and Childcare (ELC) places, school bus routes, and to teachers and classes, would have had a disproportionate effect on people facing socio-economic disadvantage, and especially children. The SED’s pause for thought and consideration informed an alternative solution to balancing the budget without the unfair consequences.

Our place-based SED work brings together local authority policymakers and community stakeholders with lived experience of socio-economic disadvantage in England.

From our work on the ground, including in Brent, Birmingham and Derby, we can report that this has led to policy changes, including the following examples:

Ethical debt policies: Pledges to significantly reduce or cease use of bailiffs to collect council tax arrears and other debts, instead adopting an ethical debt policy; support to help households get back on track is now provided, in response to residents’ stories of the impact of bailiff visits upon families, including those facing domestic and economic abuse. Additionally, the improved approaches also deliver better value.
Care leaver grants: Reviewing the delivery of care leaver grants and transition to adulthood support in response to listening to care leavers’ experiences of financial struggles and inadequate social housing, and lack of agency in deciding how their grants were used. Some reported that their grant was used up to address shortfalls in social housing provided with bare floorboards, no carpets or flooring, and without curtains or blinds and basic household items, totalling over the value of their grant.
Bulky waste collection: Changes to bulk waste collection fees on hearing testimony from people living in homes with damp and mould, which transfers to furniture. This causes a shorter lifespan of bulky household items and many people cannot afford collection fees or are without transport to take large items to the tip. Left with no option but to leave items on the street, this adds to decline and rodent issues in deprived areas which become more costly to address than taking a preventative approach.
Living Wage: Calls to commit to the living wage have been taken on board and applied, not only to council employees but across the supply chain workforce, extending the positive impact.

Relevant examples from our place-based work and from partners in the 1forEquality alliance on positive steps that local authorities are taking to reduce inequalities, linked to adopting the SED or wider work, include:

Bristol City Council: One City Plan using data to create a fair, inclusive city. Almost 50 local indicators give an overall picture of citizen wellbeing with measures of sustainability, equality, unemployment, overwork and deprivation
City of York Council: Financial Inclusion Steering Group distributes £300,000 of funding in crisis loans and initiatives
Newcastle City Council: Council tax reduction scheme for single parents, care leavers, people facing hardship; it is estimated to help almost 15,000 people
Manchester, Westminster, Haringey and Middlesborough: Ethical debt policy or pledge to cease or limit the use of bailiffs to collect council tax arrears
Manchester City Council: Grantmaking to voluntary sector projects that have an understanding of socio-economic disadvantage
Preston City Council: Community wealth-building – the ‘Preston Model’; socio-economic issues at the heart of commissioning and procurement, to improve job prospects and social assets
Derby City Council: Joint SED learning sessions facilitated by the Equality Trust; this Fair Chance Derby initiative brought together council managers and lived experience participants, generating joint ideas for a multi-year action plan to tackle inequalities
Transport for Greater Manchester: Adopted the SED in 2022 and listens to voices of lived experience through a Poverty Reference Group, including to review their customer charter; stakeholders were recruited through Trafford Poverty Truth Commission
Gloucestershire County Council: Engages individuals affected by policy changes, including those experiencing socio-economic disadvantage, at the beginning of the policy development process
Shropshire Council: Market Drayton and Rural Parishes Community Covenant neighbourhood-level initiative to make joint decisions with the community, including about a new Community & Family Hub, such as the location, offering and local needs e.g. rural poverty
Governments of Scotland and Wales: Policies to tackle child poverty and socio-economic disadvantage, including free school meals for primary pupils, social housing programmes, Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilot in Wales and appointing champions to drive progress e.g. Future Generations Commissioner in Wales, the First Minister in Scotland making eradication of child poverty a priority mission, with a whole family approach

Limitations and implementation pleas

To achieve the fullest potential of the SED, there are some limiting factors that need to be addressed. We highlighted these in our response to the recent OEO call for evidence, and in a joint submission with the 1 for Equality alliance, with over 100 signatories (see appendices). In brief, key implementation pleas include:

Expand the list of public authorities subject to the duty.
Provide statutory guidance with clear definitions, a focus on delivering outcomes and good practice standards; this must include the involvement of people with living experience of socio-economic disadvantage in the delivery of the duty and participatory decision-making.
Develop monitoring, co-evaluation of progress with stakeholders, and effective enforcement mechanisms, included adequate resources for the EHRC to deliver its watchdog duties.
Learn the lessons of austerity policy harms; invest in public services and social assets, with resources for local authorities to mobilise the SED to make a difference.

What Parliamentarians can do

Check the status of SED implementation in your local area. For local authorities in England, advocate for prompt and meaningful voluntary adoption – this will support local interventions to tackle poverty and prepare for legal commencement.
Urge the government to bring a swift commencement order announcing the start date for the duty. This will secure activation, enable duty-bearers to prepare, and prevent delays.
Advocate for meaningful implementation, including: clear statutory guidance with effective enabling resources; monitoring and enforcement mechanisms; and, importantly, the involvement of people with living experience of socio-economic disadvantage.
Champion participatory approaches to decision and policy making at national and local levels, such as Poverty Truth Commissions, participatory budgeting, co-production, and diverse lived experience panels.

Talking points & FAQs

	Supportive Framings	Opposition Framings
Examples	Biggest idea in a decade – A public-sector duty to close the gap between rich and poor will tackle the class divide in a way that no other policy has (Guardian, 2009) Theresa May dismissed the act as ‘socialism in one clause’. In fact, it was a moderate and sensible effort to provide exactly the ‘framework for equality’ she claims she wants (Guardian, 2010) Failure to enact public duty law ‘has worsened England inequality in pandemic’ “If there were genuine intent to ‘level up’ society, our government would invest in jobs, education and training, and narrow the gap between the working class and the rest of society,” said Dr Halima Begum, the Runnymede Trust’s chief executive and author of Facts Don’t Lie. “Implementing the section 1 public sector duty would be a decisive first step in that direction.” (Guardian, 2021)	Keir Starmer plots equality law ‘to penalise middle class and privately educated’, Tories claim (Daily Mail, 2025) Labour plan to put middle-class people ‘at back of queue for access to services’ Money could be diverted from affluent areas to those less well-off with council tax rising to make up the difference. (Telegraph, 2024) Confused messaging; politicians opposing the SED call it both ‘putting class war on the statute books’ and ‘middle classes to lose out’ yet criticise it for being a weak, vague, clause that will have no effect. (Hansard records and media quotes)
Aim	Disruption of inequalities	Preservation of the status quo
Narrative	Poverty as a systemic issue of injustice; collective responsibility for society	Poverty as individualised failing or tragedy; individual responsibility, there is no society
Scrutiny	Scrutiny of systemic root causes, human impact of policy decisions and vested interests	Scrutiny of people facing disadvantage with stigmatising deficit narratives
Solution presented	Progressive social policies and challenging the rigged system as fairness	Neoliberal policies and competition in the free market presented as fairness
SED message	The SED will alleviate poverty and be good for everyone	The SED will be bad for hard working middle class families
Basis	Evidence-based research	Grudge-based populism
Underlying values	Equality Justice Compassion Better society for all	Protect vested interests Keep unequal order of society

The following talking points will help parliamentarians and their staff to contribute to public debate, and respond effectively to media scrutiny and those with vested interests resisting change.

Misconception	Talking points, stats and myth-busters
Isn’t this just more bureaucracy that the public don’t want?	Polling commissioned by the Royal College of Physicians (2020) found that 78% agreed that all parts of government across the UK should have to consider the impact of their policies on people who are less well off. Polling by Compassion in Politics (2021) found that 56% support the commencement of the duty, with only 6% disagreeing.
Aren’t the British public getting fed up with all this talk of poverty when we all know we’re well off in this country?	Actually, according to the British Social Attitudes Survey (National Centre for Social Research, 2023) people are increasingly likely to perceive poverty in Britain, and their definitions of what constitutes poverty have become substantially more generous.69% think there is quite a lot of poverty in Britain, compared with 52% in 2006 – a change of 17 percentage points.People are now more likely to think that poverty has risen in the past decade, compared with any point since the survey began; 78the u% say this, compared with 32% in 2006 (an increase of 46 percentage points). 39% think someone is in poverty if they have enough to buy the things they need, but not the things most people take for granted. This is an increase on 29% in 2019 and 19% in 2013.
The public are growing more suspicious and resentful of people on benefits – they don’t want more spending on welfare do they?	The perception that benefits recipients are undeserving has reduced substantially since 2010 (British Social Attitudes Survey) Just 19% say that most people who get social security don’t really deserve any help, down from a high of 40% in 2005. Responses in 2019-22 are the lowest since the question was first asked in 1987.22% think that unemployment claimants are ‘fiddling in one way or another’, down from a high of 41% in 2004.There has also been a rise in support for extra spending on benefits: 37% think that the government should spend more money on welfare benefits for poor people, even if it leads to higher taxes, up from 29% in 2010.
So, will people in middle class areas miss out?	The duty is not only about helping people who face poverty – though it is right to make sure we help people at the sharp end, this will also be good for the ‘squeezed middle’. It’s about everyone facing socio-economic disadvantage and stress and avoiding public policies that make things worse. Research shows that in countries that are more equal, with resources shared across the population rather than lots of wealth concentrated with the few, there are benefits to the whole of society. There is less homelessness, high street decline and crime, and better rates of safety, thriving economies, environmental protection, health, and wellbeing for everyone.
Won’t this duty cause all the rich entrepreneurs to leave the country and take their jobs and contribution to the economy with them?	The SED simply requires policymakers to consider the human impact of their policy decisions. Public bodies avoiding decisions that will worsen inequalities and financial struggles – that’s a good thing for the economy, for everyone.
Isn’t social class a thing of the past?	Over three-quarters (77%) now say that social class affects someone’s opportunities ‘a great deal’ or ‘quite a lot’, up from seven in ten (70%) in 1983. In 1987, 46% identified without prompting as middle or working class. In 2015, 42% still did so. When asked if they were one or the other, in 2021, 52% said they were working class while 43% indicated they were middle class. (British Social Attitudes Survey)
Isn’t this just a woke tick box exercise that won’t make any difference?	It’s been tried and tested in Scotland and Wales where it’s already active law, and voluntarily adopted in over 40 local authorities across England. There are success stories where it has informed the campaign for free school meals for all primary pupils, and sparked enhanced sick pay for low paid frontline care workers in precarious work exposed to Covid-19, action to level up lower access to healthcare for people in poorer areas and to help lift kids out of poverty.

Contacts, further reading & resources

Socio-Economic Duty Briefing