Listen to the Voices of Lived Experience by Tracey Herrington

I have worked in the community for many years as part of Thrive and Poverty2Solutions and have directly experienced poverty and disadvantage. Through my experiences, it is clear that our socio-economically disadvantaged community has been targeted with punitive and harsh policies and been at the sharp end of confusing local decision-making.

Why are these decisions made? Are decision-makers trying to help and alleviate the situation or purposefully making things worse? Our community wants to see the enactment of the socioeconomic duty under section 1 of the Equality Act. We also want guidance on its best practice implementation and monitoring developed in partnership with people who have lived experience of socio-economic disadvantage.

Simply passing the duty into law without the involvement of lived experiences will not lead to better policy-making and fairer outcomes. However, by working collaboratively, we can take the first step in a longer and more ambitious journey, ensuring the implementation of the duty drives forward the transformative approach to policymaking intended by the spirit of the law.

Lived experiences may be seen as one of the buzzwords of recent years but it is important to fully understand what is meant by lived experiences and why they matter. Having lived experiences of an issue, for example poverty and/or socio-economic disadvantage, means having direct and recent experiences of it, which is best conceptualised as a form of expertise. This expertise informs how ‘issues and problem situations’ are understood in context. It makes visible the invisible, bringing insight that is not immediately apparent to the outsider and can ensure debates are fully informed and
can be harnessed to develop positive solutions for social change.

‘There is a big assumption that because someone is in a position of power, is educated and has a degree that they are somehow an expert on life. This can be the case, but sadly, does not guarantee it. For example, the best people to know how a factory works are the people on the shop floor and not the managers. Lived experience is essential, they know what is wrong and what needs to [change]’
- Mark, Thrive Teesside

Everybody has lived experiences and we can all bring this experience to decision-making tables to fully inform debates. Unfortunately lived experience of socio-economic disadvantage is rarely truly harnessed and generally overlooked. If this insight is included it is often in the form of consultations and tick box engagement exercises. This insight and knowledge is extracted and then left to be analysed by others in a professional capacity who then make decisions, decisions that all too often create further problems and hardship.

To meaningfully ‘pay due regard’ with the aim of reducing inequality, a participatory approach to local decision-making and national policy development is essential. The community we work alongside often talks about something more than their lived reality as it is now, they speak about their dreams and aspirations, about living life to the full and not just existing. They don’t just want to get through the grind of each day, worrying about what they will say to their children when they are asking to go on a school trip or visit the cinema. They do not want the job centre ‘on their back all the time’ or hearing judgements made on how they spend what little money they have. Life is tough in many ways and both local practice and national policies generally make life harder – never easier. Priority bills and food are going up at a phenomenal rate. Access to services and doctors is becoming increasingly difficult. Days out are nigh on impossible and it is futile keeping up with all the additional costs associated with the school day.

When looking at national policy responses and guidelines which trickle down to local practice to address specific areas of concern, there are many examples where the policy’s implementation has made life harder for people. Take for example third party debt deductions from either a low wage or social security entitlement. This policy is intensifying and exacerbating the precarious financial situations of many and thus widening gaps associated with inequality. Third party deductions should only be made when ‘it is considered to be in the best interest of the customer or the customer’s family… and… when all other avenues of recovery have been exhausted’. However, whilst working with people who have a deduction taken from an entitlement, I have seen that this has often not been the case.

J talked about how the first thing she knew about the deduction was when she went to access her benefit entitlement and realised money had been deducted. Nobody had got in touch with her beforehand or if they had sent a letter, she was not aware. J admittedly struggles to open letters; she is fearful of what they say, and it makes her anxious. ‘I know I am in debt and owe money, but how can I even think about paying back council tax or rent arrears when I can’t even afford to live. The amount of Universal Credit I receive doesn’t even cover what I have to pay out. I skip meals most days, don’t do anything for myself and can’t even get my little banger back on the road’.

It becomes clear when talking to J, that no conversations had taken place to assess affordability when imposing her repayment plan. There also appears to be a lack of awareness of the negative impact of reducing her household income when she is already struggling. The very immediate impact of J’s debt deduction was one of pushing her and her family further into poverty, hardship and increasing inequality. Already unable to fully participate in community life, making harsh choices around feeding herself or her children, forfeiting trips and days out, not being able to look after her own family’s wellbeing, J’s list of cutbacks continued to get longer.

It is when witnessing this lived reality and listening to the negative impact that policies can have on people’s lives that we reaffirm our vision to revolutionise policymaking. It is important to remain focused and determined to break through outdated policy development approaches and local practice by using participatory methods that prioritise people at the core, ensuring decisions that are made have a positive impact on lives and the ability to realise potential.

At Thrive we welcome the commitments in the Labour Party’s policy handbook to ‘enact the socioeconomic duty under section 1 of the Equality Act’ and embrace the positive development that would create a legal imperative for authorities to pay ‘due regard’ to the desirability of reducing inequalities caused by socio-economic disadvantage and poverty in their policy-making and budgetary decisions.

However, to safeguard the intention of the implementation of the socio-economic duty and decrease inequality in disadvantaged communities, it is imperative that policy responses are informed by lived experiences. This is an opportunity to ensure safeguards and a fairer and more resilient system are put in place. Having people who are affected by policies as part of the decision-making processes is key to ensure they are workable, effective, and honour the fundamental principles associated with democracy.

Tracey Herrington is project manager at Thrive Teesside, a small organisation that advocates for the voice of lived experience to be included in decision-making processes.

This essay is part of a collection of thought pieces curated by Amnesty International UK and Labour Campaign for Human Rights. June 2024

The views expressed in this essay are the author’s own and not those of Amnesty International UK or Labour Campaign for Human Rights.