Letter in support of Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson

FiLiA warmly welcomes the Government’s choice of preferred candidate for the next Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson. As part of the process, she appeared in front of two Parliamentary committees and her performance was assured, knowledgeable, and principled. It is clear the Government made the right choice. We are extremely disappointed, therefore, to learn that the Committees are not endorsing Dr Stephenson. We have written to the Minister for Women and Equalities to express our support for Mary-Ann.

Dear Secretary of State,

I am writing on behalf of FiLiA, a women’s rights organisation with charitable status in England, Wales and Scotland. FiLiA’s purpose is to defend women’s human rights, amplify the voices of women, particularly those who are seldom heard, and to build sisterhood and solidarity.  We hold the largest annual feminist conference in Europe, with our next in October expected to welcome over 2000 attendees.  Alongside this, our national projects focus on a range of areas affecting women, particularly those who are often deemed ‘hard to reach’.  

Alongside many other organisations which focus on women’s rights and needs, we warmly welcome the Government’s choice of preferred candidate for the next Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson.

Dr Stephenson is deeply respected across the women’s sector and among wider equality and human rights organisations. Her record speaks for itself, but we also know from personal experience that she is as impressive in person as she is on paper. Dr Stephenson has spoken at FiLiA’s annual conference and on our podcast, where she has consistently demonstrated intelligence, empathy, and an unwavering commitment to human rights and social justice. She listens, engages respectfully across differences, and brings strategic insight informed by her years of experience.

Dr Stephenson’s performance before the Women and Equalities Select Committee and the Joint Committee on Human Rights was assured, knowledgeable, and principled. She answered each question with calm clarity, demonstrating a deep understanding of the EHRC’s duties and the ability to withstand intense scrutiny. She was particularly impressive in relaying the importance of impartiality and of balancing conflicting rights – issues more pertinent than ever. Her responses on issues of sex, gender, disability, and race were thoughtful and grounded in legal and ethical principles. Dr Stephenson was confident, compassionate, and credible, precisely the qualities one would want to see in the Chair of Britain’s equality regulator.

We are extremely disappointed, therefore, to read the letter from the Committees not endorsing Dr Stephenson. Their published letter leaned on vague criticisms around her "lack of specialist knowledge" of race and disability, and supposed inexperience in running a large organisation and of being a strong leader. As pointed out by Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, the independent policy analysis collective, it is important to note that the Chair’s role is not to run the organisation but to chair the Board. It is hard to understand how the committee is truly concerned about these issues, in the light of the very little time they spent referring to race, disability and running a large organisation in the hearing.

The letter from the Committees suggests that the role of Chair is to ‘advocate effectively on behalf of all protected groups, including some of the most vulnerable in society’. This is not right - in fact, the role is to enforce and uphold the laws that safeguard everyone’s right to fairness, dignity and respect. It has been reported that the Committees have been lobbied by trans activists and their letter alludes to the known talking points of these groups and representative organisations. It is worth noting that these are the same or similar organisations which have struggled to accept the recent Supreme Court judgment, which clarified important aspects of the Equality Act. Dr Stephenson’s profound knowledge of equality law provides the confidence that, under her leadership, the regulator will be able to enforce equality legislation as was intended by Parliament.

Dr Stephenson is in many ways a highly qualified candidate, with over 30 years of experience in equality and human rights. As you know, she is a former Commissioner at the Equal Opportunities Commission, Director at the Fawcett Society, and most recently Director of the Women’s Budget Group. In these roles she has worked with and for women, disabled people, and marginalised communities to help shape public policy and to hold institutions accountable. Her leadership at the Women’s Budget Group has been widely recognised, not just for its sex and gender expertise, but for embedding intersectionality – including analysis of race, disability and class – in economic policy.
She is also the co-author of the report Layers of Inequality: A Human Rights and Equality Impact Assessment of the Public Spending Cuts on Black Asian and Minority Ethnic Women in Coventry and clearly has a deep understanding of the structural inequalities faced by Black and other minoritised groups.

We would very much support you if you stand by your original decision, which recognised that Dr Stephenson is the best candidate to be the next Chair of the EHRC, picking up the baton from Baroness Falkner, whose leadership and tenacity in difficult circumstances are highly commendable. We value the vital role the EHRC plays in protecting human rights and promoting equality for everyone. We commend the EHRC for its crucial work in supporting organisations to uphold the Equality Act 2010 and the rights of vulnerable groups and to remain vigilant in addressing discrimination and prejudice. Dr Stephenson will be an asset to the EHRC and everyone it serves.

Yours sincerely,

Kruti Walsh
Director of Policy, FiLiA