Britain’s equality watchdog is reeling from a breakdown of trust between its board and staff amid concerns it has become politicised, senior insiders say.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) appointed a leading lawyer to carry out an independent investigation into 40 internal complaints, including bullying and harassment, made against its chair, Kishwer Falkner, but paused the inquiry last week after damaging leaks which laid bare tensions within the organisation.
Details of the complaints, made by 12 current or former staff members, were shared with Channel 4 News. But before the broadcaster could run its story, allies of Falkner appear to have briefed the Daily Mail.
The paper ran a front-page story reporting claims she was the victim of “a witch-hunt” by the “trans lobby” because she was “standing up for women”.
Under Falkner’s leadership, the commission has made a number of interventions into the highly charged debate on transgender rights. Most recently, after a request for advice from the equalities minister, Kemi Badenoch, Falkner wrote back in support of changing the Equality Act 2010 so that the protected characteristic of sex would mean biological sex. The change could allow transgender women to be barred from single-sex spaces and events.
While there are internal concerns about the handling of trans issues, EHRC sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Guardian those had been wrongly – and in their view deliberately – conflated with the allegations against the chair.
One said: “We’re being called trans activists to overshadow what this is all about. Of course we have major concerns about our positions on trans [issues] and the letter that we shared with government but it’s much bigger than that.” They said the wider problem was “a lack of independence, impartiality” in the EHRC’s work.
A senior EHRC insider concurred. They said that under Falkner the power of the 12-person board had been concentrated “to take forward whichever agenda they wish to take forward”.
They added: “It does extend beyond the gender recognition and trans rights/women’s rights issues – there have been issues around how they’ve handled complaints of race discrimination.
“The governance issues are about the board taking complete control and completely changing the way that the organisation operates – there’s huge overstep. The way the board is operating now is more like a private-sector organisation where there’s an enormous amount of power concentrated in the chair.
“And she and others – but mostly her – are overstepping and getting involved in things that are properly the role of the senior management team and chief executive. It’s really worrying.”
Others the Guardian spoke to variously described the commission as having been “captured” politically and made a “tool of the culture wars”, with an agenda “based on what is useful to the Conservative government”.
At one of her first meetings Falkner is said to have described Liz Truss, who appointed her when she was women and equalities minister, as her boss, despite the EHRC being an independent body.
The concerns raised by staff go back to those expressed about the commission’s independence when Falkner and others were appointed in 2020. At the time, Truss said the new commissioners would drive forward the government’s agenda, prompting a warning from the previous chair, David Isaac, that the EHRC was being undermined by political pressure.
As well as Falkner, who opposed attempts to define Islamophobia as it risked perpetuating a “narrative of victimhood”, there were other controversial appointments to the board in 2020.
David Goodhart is head of immigration and integration at the rightwing thinktank Policy Exchange and supported “hostile environment” policies. And Jessica Butcher said in a 2018 talk: “Feminism, like other forms of identity politics, has become obsessed with female victimhood.”
In the same year, the Guardian revealed that another board member, Alasdair Henderson, an earlier appointment, had “liked” or retweeted social media posts criticising Black Lives Matters protesters and describing the words misogynist and homophobe as “highly ideological propaganda terms”.
The EHRC said at the time it would talk to him about his social media use. He has since been made joint deputy chair.
Staff believe board members are briefing the rightwing press and that the EHRC has not defended them against the narrative that they are “ultra-woke trans activists”.
One described the modus operandi as being “straight out of the Dominic Cummings playbook”.
When the Guardian reported concerns raised by an anonymous former EHRC employee about its stance on race, their name was leaked to the Guido Fawkes website. Under questioning from a parliamentary committee, the EHRC wrongly suggested the Guardian was the source of the leak to the rightwing blog.
Those the Guardian spoke to said that concerns relating to the interventions on trans issues were based on the board ignoring internal advice and not engaging with many of those affected, but were being unfairly portrayed as activism.
One said: “The atmosphere is definitely [that] the board is on one side and the staff and the statutory committees on the other side.”
The independence of the committees for audit and assurance, people and workspace, Scotland and Wales was described as having been curtailed.
The Guardian was told that several staff members tried to persuade the commission to speak up for the rights of protesters from the anti-monarchist group Republic who were arrested before King Charles’s coronation in May, but were rebuffed.
Lord Woolley, who served on the EHRC between 2009 and 2012, said: “As a former commissioner, it deeply saddens me that too many people have lost faith in the present Equality and Human Rights Commission. I think that one of the reasons people have lost faith is that they have seen the commission be politicised as never before.
“A strong, independent EHRC is desperately needed; sadly there are far too many who don’t see that right now. I desperately hope that it can regain greater independence.”
Further evidence of an alleged symbiotic relationship between the board and the government came from ministers’ reaction to the allegations against Falkner. The prime minister’s spokesperson said the government had “enjoyed a constructive relationship” with her. Badenoch went further, with the government briefing that she would not allow Falkner to be “hounded from office”.
In the meantime, the investigation is on pause, while staff fear the allegations are being buried amid the culture-war narrative and are sceptical they will ever be considered. Falkner’s allies portrayed the inquiry’s suspension as a victory for her.
In a statement circulated to staff, and also published on the commission’s website, she said many people had offered to pay for her investigation-related costs and had sent her messages of support. Some staff who spoke to the Guardian questioned the appropriateness of such a message during the investigation.
A confidential document written by some senior staff in February, obtained by Channel 4, expressed concern about “an increase in bullying, harassment and discrimination” and “a lack of psychological safety ie the fear of who will be attacked next”.
About Falkner specifically, it said: “Unacceptable behaviour from the chairwoman is becoming normalised. Staff are not treated with courtesy and respect/bullying. And notably discriminatory comments/discussions have been openly had with officers present.”
Officially, the investigation has been paused while the EHRC seeks “legal advice on the impact of leaked confidential information”.
Georgina Calvert-Lee, employment and equality lawyer at Bellevue Law, said while the leaks were unhelpful, “no investigation is perfect”.
She added: “I do not see that the level of disclosure in this case is such as to render any investigation into the underlying allegations impossible. The fact of publicity will just have to be taken into account when assessing the evidence. The EHRC should be wary of pausing its investigation for too long, since all parties are best served by having the investigation completed as soon as reasonably possible.”
None of the EHRC insiders the Guardian spoke to were involved in the complaints against Falkner but all said they were unsurprised by them. One described her as “at best bullish, at worst bullying”.
Another said that the media narrative, encouraged by the board, was reductive and meant that Falkner could not lose. They said that if she was cleared, it would be seen as a victory against “woke”, while if she was not Falkner would be portrayed as a victim.
In the meantime, they said “committed, intelligent” staff were leaving the organisation because of the culture. Channel 4 suggested one in four quit last year.
Those who remain are stuck in what one called the “worst atmosphere of anywhere I have worked”. Another stated: “We’re really just fed up and frustrated. We’re waiting now to see what the outcome is going to be of the investigation – or whether it will happen.”
An EHRC spokesperson said: “The EHRC does not recognise this characterisation of the organisation. It operates openly and transparently in accordance with the Equality Act and its board undergoes regular effectiveness reviews. It remains united and determined to deliver for the British people.
“The investigation regarding allegations made against Baroness Falkner and the board has been paused to make sure that it is fair to all parties concerned.”
Falkner said: “No formal complaints have been brought against me and I remain confident in being exonerated.”
