Single-Use Disposable Beverage Cups Charge: Equality Impact Assessment – Interim Report

1. Executive summary

This interim Equalities Impact Assessment (EQIA) has been carried out to identify potential impacts resulting from the introduction of a charge on single-use disposable beverage cups. A charge on single-use disposable beverage cups may impact on some people with certain protected characteristics more than others. Initial analysis suggests that a charge on single-use disposable beverage cups could have a more significant impact (negative) on disabled people.

Other factors investigated in relation to other protected characteristics do not appear, at this stage, to raise significant equality-related issues or indicate that the proportionality of any potential impact has yet to be identified. There is potential this may be due to a lack of available published information. A direct engagement plan with equality groups and individuals during the consultation period may help clarify this and identify any further impacts.

It is important to note that protected characteristics are not independent of each other, and some people may be affected by complex and interconnected issues at any one time. It is also recognised that this intersectionality also applies to those experiencing socio-economic disadvantage, as highlighted in the interim Fairer Scotland Duty Assessment and those living on Island communities, as highlighted in the interim Island Communities Impact Assessment.

Given the importance of assessing the impact on each of the protected characteristics, the Scottish Government has considered the proposal against the needs of the general equality duty as set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 and has considered whether the measure could constitute direct and/or indirect discrimination.

Specifically, the EQIA considers impacts on equalities groups based on the three tests it is required to address:

• Does this policy eliminate discrimination for each of the 9 protected characteristics (PCs). If not is the discrimination justifiable? Can it be mitigated?
• Does this policy advance equality of opportunity for PC groups?
• Does this policy foster good community relations between people of PC groups.