“If you can see me, you can be me.” – Elaine Banton

What happens when a barrister who grew up on a Hackney council estate helps shape the future of equality, human rights, and AI? Elaine Banton from Doughty Street Chambers reveals why the law can no longer afford to be reactive and why fairness has to be built into systems from the start. 

Something that stood out most to me in this conversation was how strongly she framed the idea of “equality by design” — the belief that fairness should be built into systems, workplaces and even algorithms from the start, rather than added later after harm has already happened. We also explored how bias can be amplified by AI and why lawyers, institutions and businesses all need to understand the technology shaping decisions across health, education, employment, and justice.

So why should you be listening in? 

You can hear Rob and Elaine discussing:

– Equality Being a Systems Problem, Not a People Problem

– The Biggest Fairness Failures Happening When Institutions Worship the “Ideal Worker”

– Visibility Not Being Symbolic – It Changes What People Believe is Possible 

– Background Not Just as an Identity But a Strategic Intelligence

– How AI Bias is Not a Tech Issue – It Is an Accountability Issue.

Connect with Elaine Banton here – https://uk.linkedin.com/in/elaine-banton

Transcript

Absolutely everyone has some role to play in this. 

Different perspectives, different voices are the felt of information and knowledge. And we know that the best decisions are made by collections of different individuals with differ from different walks of life. 

Talent is absolutely everywhere, but not everyone has the opportunity. And so widening that ball, bringing people in is I think of great importance for the strengthening, the growth and the future of the profession. 

On today’s legally speaking podcast, I’m delighted to be joined by Elaine Banton. Elaine is a barrister at Dougy Street Chambers, specializing in employment, discrimination, and human rights law. Called to the bar in 1997, she has built an outstanding career advising and representing individuals, organizations, and public bodies on some of the most significant workplace equality issues of our time.

Elaine has become a leading voice on fairness, inclusion, and systemic change. Through her concept of equality by design, she advocates for equality in institutions, workplaces, and emerging technologies. More recently, Elaine contributed to international discussions on artificial intelligence, equality, and human rights when speaking at the United Nations in Geneva. She explored the implementations of AI for fairness and accountability.

Today we’ll explore Elaine’s journey from growing up in Hackney to becoming one of the UK’s leading barristers, her reflection on nearly three decades at the bar, and her vision for a representative legal system. So a very big warm welcome to the show, Elaine. Very pleased to be here, Rob. Thank you. it’s an absolute pleasure to have you on the show. And before we dive into all the great things that you’ve been doing, we have a couple of icebreaker questions here on the show. Firstly, what is your favorite beverage and what is your preferred choice of food?

Footwear on a typical work day. So favourite beverage, if I was on a night out, for example. I think summer times here, I’ll go for a glass of cold, crisp glass of rose. Nice, nice. And footwear on a work day? On a workday, a shorter heel, but a little heel, maybe a pointy toe. But not too high. Okay.

And then a tech question. What’s one piece of legal tech or everyday technology you now rely on which you would have thought would have been unthinkable when you started your career? Well, the phone is at like a desk from home. I I didn’t know that was gonna happen. But also earphones are really useful, obviously. Two practical and very sensible options. Okay, and now we’re gonna move on to talk

All about you. So could you give us a bit of a short version of your career from growing up in Hackney through to becoming a barrister at one of the top set of chambers? Yes. So I grew up on a council estate in Hackney at a time when the area was called the Murder Mile. It was pretty deprived. And I had a single mother who my parents got divorced and she was a nurse. She worked a lot. She worked all the time.

And we were kind of what you would have called latchkey kids before you I didn’t even know the terminology. But for some of the time we had to be quite responsible for ourselves. And so that was also another factor that could have been problematic. But I somehow, by about the age of seven, I had decided I was going to be a barrister. So I knew the difference between solicitors and barristers.

And I went on to tell my careers advisor that I was going to be embarrassed up. And I remember her saying, Slow down, slow down, I’m taking notes. I don’t know about this. I I arranged my own work experience with a local high street firm in Hackney. And they actually years later reached out to me, so still in touch with them. And the the actual principal took me for lunch, which was really sweet. but so I I carried on in that vein.

And I think it was partly growing up in an area where it was challenging. There was a lot of social injustice. There were things going on and I just gravitate I just gravitated naturally to the law as potentially something that looked interesting but also perhaps had some power or some voice behind it. And I never I never let go of that. I mean, inspiring stuff.

How did you actually navigate the challenges of pursuing your ambition? You know, you mentioned age seven. How did you actually navigate that? It was difficult because there were a number of obstacles. one was that one of my English teachers, she told us that the exam board had said no child in Hackney could get an A in English literature. So that was something that she was absolutely furious about. And I look at that now and I see that was a system in place.

It wasn’t necessarily individuals conspiring the room to hurt the children of Hackney, but it was the way the system was being produced. It was, if you like, that postcode was an algorithm and there was a bias at play. And so I had to navigate all of those issues when I was a a a young girl and and really trying to aspire for more.

And something I came across recently, which was when the wedding between I think it was Callum Turner and Jua Lepa, and I looked him up and he said something about growing up in a council estate that really resonated with me. And it was something about there being many worlds that you have to navigate. And and I absolutely agree. It’s not really code switching, it’s about

a richness that gets embedded in you that is a type of dynamism that means that you can actually cope with a lot of different aspects, which could be extremely good and some could be extremely bad and quite unpredictable. And so I think that that sort of encapsulated it. but yes, it was it was difficult. There was limited money. I didn’t have connections.

The way that some people come into the law with connections lined up. I had none of that. So I had to make my own. Well, as they say, tough times don’t last, but tough people do, right? And I think it’s it’s really impressive. And I wanted to lean into the the navigating those different worlds a bit further because you have moved before, you know, these different environments throughout your life and indeed careers. So so many experiences. How has that almost shaped the way that you understand people, institutions, propositions?

Professional spaces, do you think there are strengths that individuals from non-traditional backgrounds often underestimate in themselves? I think it can be a a really important point of power actually. At first, when I was going into the bar, people made assumptions of me. They thought and I was always well spoken even when I was in Hackney. It wasn’t something that just suddenly happened. I was going to be a barrister, I was, you know, interested in dance and theatre.

And it was just me. But I do think that people made assumptions about me. And I remember being asked, is your father a diplomat? And I wouldn’t necessarily dissuade people from their assumptions because it somehow felt easier to allow that to happen. But I did start to speak about it later on in my career. I became extremely open about the fact that I did grow up.

with a single mother in a council estate and had to learn how to navigate different spaces. And I think that is a really important story to share. So that people it’s breaking down barriers effectively. But I think what you do when you bring yourself into those different environments is that you are able to shine a light on different issues and different perspectives that resonate

and land in a really quite eye opening way. And so I think that’s been a strength for me. I do think that having different perspectives, different voices is some it’s a it’s a felt of information and and knowledge. And so and we know that, you know, the best decisions are made by collections of different individuals with diff from different walks of life.

And so I think that is something that I’ve been able to to utilise throughout my career, especially when I actually leaned into it more. And I think that’s so important, finding your voice, you know, in that authenticity. And you know, you’re doing great work now.

To help and educate and inspire other people as well. I guess it leads nicely on to the importance of visibility in the world that we live today. You know, representation is a significant topic of discussion, particularly in the legal profession. So why do you believe visibility matters and what impact does it have when people see someone with a similar background succeeding in a profession where they may not see themselves fully represented? I think it’s it’s fundamentally important. There’s a lovely saying that I like if you can see me, you can be me.

And I think that’s absolutely crucial. Yeah. When I was a young girl myself, I won an award for my grades at Hackney. I met the I was introduced to Gus John because he was giving the prizes. And Gus John was then the director of education for Hackney. He’s someone that Steve McQueen, filmmaker, actually made a film about. So he was pivotal in education at the time and still is. But he asked me what do you want to be when you you know, when you grow up, think I was sixteen or seventeen.

And I said, Well, if you’re barrister, and he Well, you’ve got to meet Courtney Griffiths. Now that was Courtney Griffiths who went on to become extremely well known. He handled a lot of the very big miscarriage of justice cases that that are infamous. And and he was he went on to become a syllabus. He took me under his wing as a as as a young black woman to see a black male barrister. You know, I saw him.

become a silk when I was probably about twenty, if that. So it was very inspiring being around him and seeing that he actually brought his full self to work. He was entirely authentic. He was crisp and he was sharp, but he was absolutely himself too. So that was also a real insight as to how you can benefit from that. And I think it’s really important because

To put it shortly, talent is absolutely everywhere, but not everyone has the opportunity. And so widening that pool, bringing people in, is I think of great importance for the strengthening, the growth and the future of the profession. Really well said. And you know, you’ve spent thirty years practising as a barrister. You knew, you know, from a very, very early age. So

Giving you a moment to reflect on your career, what are the most important lessons the courtroom has taught you about people, organisations, and indeed the pursuit of fairness? The courtroom is a lesson that never ends, really. It it varies so much. And I think that’s a fantastic question. You’re navigating so many different systems and individuals and perspectives, and you’ve got to actually operate in a multi world environment.

You’ve got client who doesn’t know the rubric, who doesn’t know the process, who might be intimidated, who might be shy, who might be fearful and may have you know h health conditions, mental health conditions. You’ve got an opponent who has their own game plan, if you like. You’ve got a judge who also is there to oversee fairness and make a decision and determination.

So you’re you’re navigating all of those different individuals and systems and I think it does teach you an element of flexibility and adaptability of how you approach individuals, how you will broach particular issues and subjects, because one size does not fit all. And I think that’s something that’s been ingrained in me from the very beginning. Yeah, agreed. Absolutely agreed. And

Human stories and personal, you know, experiences, you know, employment and discrimination law often does involve a lot of obviously personal experiences. So how have these cases influenced your understanding of legal principles and the real life experiences of individuals seeking justice? It’s really informed a lot in my practice over the last thirty years. I have been reflecting and I look back and I see that most of my career I’ve been arguing about

different types of systems and the results they produce, whether it’s in employment, health, education, different aspects of discrimination. It usually comes down to a system that’s in place which lacks a certain degree of flexibility. And so if you fall out of that norm, if you fall out of that ideal worker, for example, then you come up

into f it you come against a hard intercept. That could mean that you are dismissed. Whereas had there been a system that was designed with the fairness and the quality embedded within it as architecture, as you would design a bridge, load bearing, absolutely stress test, failure test, if we had been more careful

with some of those systems, we could actually reduce some of the litigation that’s brought because the issue the the key thing about litigation that we see is that it’s after the event, after the atom, after the incident has happened and the harm has been received. And then you have a delay. You have all these issues to navigate. Is your claim in time, is it out of time? You then may have to wait three, four, sometimes now, five years.

To get to tribunal in employment. And then you you wait that time, but it depends on your own individual resilience. And we know as well that the backlogs are growing exponentially. So we have a long delay, we have substantial backlogs. I see now increasingly it’s important that we spend time on designing.

the systems more efficiently, more fairly, to prevent some of that harm occurring in the first place. And then we may actually help some of this backlog as well and access to justice exponentially, if we can do that. I think it’s actually a something that we should all be cognizant of. Yeah. And

Being proactive, right? And you know, sticking with with with systems. Obviously you’ve learnt a lot about these policies and institutional decision making and creating fairer outcomes. Want to allow you to tell us a bit about a case with the king and maybe you act as a junior counsel for the claimant and involves sort institutional matters. Do you want to educate our listeners, give a bit more context around that to build on that point? Yes. So that was a case which was a judicial review and it was dealing with the windrush decision. And we know that in the wind w rush era

That there have been issues around how those individuals that came across during that time from the Caribbean and from other islands and other diaspora were subject to systemic issues around their status and their ability to stay in the country, even though they had been promised.

that they could stay, they have to actually go through severe loops to prove that they’d been in the country for a so you know for a period of time. And so a many, many individuals were being caught out and it was then exposed as a scandal. The government then said at the time, We we want to stop this, we don’t want this to ever happen. There was a big review, Wendy Williams Windrush Lessons Learned review, and it said

that we would never do this again and what we put in place various policies and practices that would absolutely ameliorate that risk from happening. But what happened and what led to the the actual litigation in Donald was that some of the most important recommendations were not actually implemented. And so

Myself as part of a team of lawyers, I was one of the junior lawyers, we actually brought litigation against the Home Office and we were at the Secretary of State and we were able to show that in fact recommendations that were about having a commissioner overseeing the immigration process should have been implemented. And it was not simply enough that the minister changed her mind.

So we’re able to win on that. And subsequently, there has been a Windrush Commissioner and that’s been appointed. So that’s really heartening to see that after a challenge like that, that there can be a change intact and you can see positive change come from litigation, which can affect many, many people, thousands of people. So that that was an example.

And and like you say, fantastic example as well and you know, positive change off off the back of that. just going a little bit deeper into sort of what we’re touching on before, a quality by design for our listeners. Because you recently discuss you described this topic and this sort of content, but for our listeners who may be unfamiliar with the term, what does that actually mean in practice? Absolutely. What I mean by quality by design is that we bring our

compare our planning, our analytical thought to designing systems which have intentionally embedded fairness and equality into it. So that way we lessen the impact of harm. Now I’d like to give an example of that. And it’s one of my more recent appellate cases. It’s one involving endometriosis and it was against at one of the big

global consultancies and it’s been reported wide widely. But my client in that case was a woman of endometriosis who hit the harsh part intercept of an up or out policy. Now she had endometriosis, she had an operation, came back to work, phased return, and was actually on hundred percent utilization.

And on an upward trajectory, but she was not promotable in this progression model is progression model pyramid. So she lost her job. She was actually dismissed. Wheref whereby if within that system they utilized the flex or it was built in in a better way, then you could have adjusted the system to allow her to

get to the required standard because she had obviously been off work and she had a disability. Now, all too often, employers do not operate in that way. They do not consider the wider position. But then what happens is you may find yourself litigating an issue for six, seven, eight years or more. Today’s episode is brought to you by Cleo.

If you’re spending more time managing your practice than practicing law, it’s time for a change. Clio is the intelligent legal work platform built for modern solicitors, combining context-aware AI with trusted legal research to help you work smarter, not harder. Switching is easier than you might think. Clio’s dedicated migration teams handled your client and case data every step of the way, so you can focus on what matters most, your clients.

Plus award winning support twenty four five via live chat, phone, and email means help is always on hand when you need it. Visit Clio.com forward slash UK to find out why thousands of UK solicitors trust Clio. Now back to the show. You know, once you say it, it sounds so obvious. But yet, you know, historically organizations have responded to sort of discrimination or inequality only after these issues have emerged. So again, maybe t to help them?

How can institutions move away from this reactive approach towards being proactively building fairness into their structure and to their decision making processes to hopefully avoid litigation and and everything else that goes with it? Absolutely. I think this is so important now, particularly as we are in this technology sphere, AI, etc. We’re now at the process where some of these decisions are algorithms.

And the propensity for bias gets exponentially higher unless you are extremely intentional as to how you design those algorithms. So we’ve got workplace systems and we’ve got the algorithm, which is becoming part of the workplace systems. And we already are seeing that. So it’s it’s crucial that we do think about the fact, okay, we’ve got policies, we’ve got governance, we’ve got all of these things.

But are we actually intentionally using it? Or is it just festering there in a nice bundle online somewhere and you look at it when something goes wrong? Yeah. That’s that’s not helpful. It needs to be streamlined into every aspect, every decision that’s being made. And you need to move away from the paradigm of the linear

ideal worker. Very few people are this in reality. We’re a lot more rough around the edges. Sometimes you might be that linear ideal worker and other times you’re not going to be. Yep. And and sometimes it’s just a a small adjustment in the system and you accommodate the issue that’s there and you avoid years literally years of cost, time, anguish

All the rest of it, on both sides. So I think it is challenging the way we look at these structures and systems, not in silos, but joining them up and looking across, you know, make sure that there is real training that’s practical that does this work, rather than just, I’ve got the policy, tick, it’s done, let’s move on.

Yeah, because it’s not a tick box process, is it? I think that’s very important. And you know, like having that ongoing training and a very valid point around, you know, maybe a little tweak can have a huge impact. And so it’s worth investing that time. You obviously went there on the technology points, and you know, of course we have to talk about tech and AI. You know, it’s becoming increasingly integrated into decision making. There are growing concerns, as you were alluding to, about the risks of bias being sort of replicated. So again, to help organizations, how can they minimize?

these risks, ensuring technological systems support fairness, but also keep up with what’s needed in terms of the implementation of tech within these businesses. Absolutely. So they’ll have to be very careful about the type of system they adopt. Obviously they want it to comply with all the EU regulations and all of that, in terms of governance, responsible, ethical AI is really the buzzword.

that we’re looking for. I think that’s that’s absolutely key. but it’s it’s really important that there is training about how we utilise it. We have to look at it from the very beginning to the end. So cradle to the grave. Who’s putting the data in? What is that data? How have they been trained? Have they been trained on equality? Do they understand what this means?

Because it starts really from that point. So you can have the best system. And if your your employee, your analyst who’s inputting the data is not trained, you can still fall into quite substantial difficulties. So you do have to have a system that is coherent in terms of the governance and the regulations, and there are many out there like that. But you have to make sure

That your staff are adequately trained and understand the synergy between what they are doing on a Monday and Tuesday and what happens to an individual later on down the line. And quite often there’s a disconnect. And just an example on this the government brought in a fraud detection scheme, and this was the Department of Work and Pensions, and it was a benefit fraud detection scheme.

And the algorithm discriminated on grounds of sex, disability and race. So this is what we’re talking about. Then the harm is scaled. It’s not one manager and one employee or a handful of employees potentially. It’s thousands of people. And so it’s really, really important that we don’t simply see AI as operating in a silo or that it’s

completely neutral because there is a tendency to look at systems and assume that it’s neutral and we know that with AI it it isn’t actually. It’s what the data that goes into it very much informs the output. So we need to be very consciously approaching all of that from the framework which I say which is equality by design, which is being

Very clear about issues of unfairness, the quality, th there is actual cis in in the system but also in the input of the data. All of those things are dealt with and interrogated from the very beginning, all the way through and on the other side.

Great wisdom though. I I talk very openly about, you know, it’s better to be clear than it is to be clever sometimes on these things and you’re looking for fusion rather than confusion when it comes to all of these sort of trends and when you’re training businesses, all of these various bits and pieces. want to stick with sort of AI, human rights, and the future of law now, because you recently spoke at the United Nations in Geneva about artificial intelligence and indeed equality. So why should lawyers be aware of developments in AI and why does this conversation extend beyond just the tech sector?

AI is absolutely for everyone. Everyone needs to know about A9. It is not just a tech issue. And I think for too long we were told that, but people are far more aware out that AI is an integral part of our life. It’s embedded into so many of the things that we use and do, the way that we are assessed. even, you know.

when you make a job application, that could be assessed easily by AI now. And very often it it it is. And so we do need to understand that and upskill. It is absolutely part of the fabric of society. And per se I came to this sphere about five, six years ago talking about bias, talking about algorithmic bias, because I realized there was another

form of discrimination that was, you know, it had the propensity for harm. But the way that things have developed in the last three years or so, I ended up studying a I myself last year. And I think that was really helpful for me just to really understand how it works from a technical aspect. But absolutely everyone has some role to play in this, whether you know it or like it or not.

It is already in your daily life. It could be something that determines what happens in your health, in your education, and in your employment. And that’s only some. We can talk about the you know the criminal justice system, the civil system. All of these systems now are using technology and AI in ways that can impact on the individual. This is this is where we are. They’re either using it or they’re considering using it.

And so we do need to see it as something integral and part of our society and not just floating up there for, you know, very techy people who know all about it. Yeah, it’s it’s here to stay very much so. And I love that you sort of invested that time to really go and, you know, educate yourself and, you know, understand, you know, what what the impacts are and how it can be used. And I think that’s a really good lesson and learn for our for our listeners to take away. you know, there’s clearly risks of heavily relying on automated

systems, clearly human oversight and judgment is essential when making important decisions. I think we still rely on that. But as AI is becoming more sophisticated, models are getting better all the time. What should lawyers or regulators consider when technology concludes a discriminatory or unfair outcome? Absolutely. I mean, this is who owns that decision. Yeah. You know, who who is actually owning that? I think that if you are a lawyer,

It’s your duty, first and foremost, to check. Treat AI like an assistant. You would check their work. You would check that it’s accurate. You would check that the references to legal you know, legal authority are correct. And so with AI, you need to do that as well. You it’s not a panaceum for everything. It simply cannot be used like that.

And I think we have to be very careful that we do not move away from actually embedding the human here. I think there’s a risk that the human almost gets downgraded. and we’re seeing, aren’t we, that there are reductions in recruitment for junior lawyers. And where does that take us ten years’ time?

At the moment where it’s fine, but if we do cut and we lose a lot of the junior lawyers, then later on down the line, where are we going to get them? Are we are we never going to need them? That’s unlikely. I think there’s a lot of big questions around the legal community’s use of AI, and h and how it’s going to progress in the future. And of course we’re we’re very good at talking about it.

we talk about it a lot. Yeah, I’m sure it’s all of us are talking about it daily. Well, let’s talk about shaping the future and from a barrister’s, you know, role in this. You know, what do you think barristers can and should play in shaping ethical legal frameworks which will govern emerging technologies? I think barristers are well placed to actually have a voice in this arena. I myself am involved in governance, something that I got involved with as a

student actually. I first became a school governor when I volunteered at with a charity and they placed me in school. So I became a governor when I was doing my undergraduate. So throughout my whole career I’ve been involved in governance. And I think as a lawyer, the governance lens is a really useful one in the in the sphere of AI. I’ve been really fortunate to be involved in something called grade, which is in conjunction with

Ada Lovelace and the BBC and UCRE and Edinburgh University. And it’s about bridging those divides in between culture and technology. And so as a lawyer and someone that’s been involved in culture, you’re able to have those conversations where you’re trying to make sure that we’re making decisions and we’re facilitating the ability to take everyone with us on this journey.

I mean i it is literally and should be for everyone. So I think as lawyers that is an aspect that we can naturally tap into, the governance side of it. And certainly that that felt interesting to me. Yeah, and very interesting to me and our listeners I’m I’m sure. A reflection question now. You know, you’ve spent twenty five years at the bar. Can you share what you’ve learned about growth and indeed reinvention throughout your career? Absolutely. This is I think so key.

to longevity in your career, interest, growth. I don’t think you ever stopped learning. For me, my career has developed over the course of many years. And things that I thought I was going to practice in, I didn’t. And other things that I discovered, such as along the way, such as employment law being founded by you know, human rights

principles and discrimination, it just took my mind away in a different direction. So I f I followed that. And then my equality areas expanded and I followed that. And all of it underpinned by almost algorithmic human rights and the lens that I see that through. So that is where my growth has been and it evolved in a way that perhaps I didn’t see at the very beginning.

However, for me, I do see a lot of synergy in that I sort of now ended up where I started. Started with the human rights underpinning lens and now I’m s I’m there again, very clearly there, with everything being underpinned by human rights, which I think is increasingly important in this technol technological, you know, developing

world that we are heading straight into. Yeah, it’s right, isn’t it? You know, it’s it’s it’s a tech first world now. You just look at the amount of paper documents that are all digital now, even, you know, w it we we are in that world and I think the human rights piece, as you say, couldn’t agree more. So so so important. Okay, going back then to s some advice for the next generation here.

What would you give to someone who feels advice wise that maybe they don’t belong in the room, whether applying for a new role, putting themselves forward for a new opportunity? What advice would you share? I think that they should do it. They should absolutely take a chance and do it. But what I would say to them is get some advice. It’s fantastic if you’ve got a mentor. If you could learn from someone who’s navigated that space and they can share some of her wisdom.

Because that will help you to have the confidence to take that step. But I do think if you’re thinking about it, that’s a a sign that you do need to explore it more. And I think, you know, those opportunities for growth, those are sometimes the most scariest moments of your career. But yet if you pursue it, it can become the defining moment. So I think, you know, do your groundwork.

Do your research, get a mentor. You know, I think that is extremely helpful. But go for it. The comfort zone is great, but nothing ever grows there. Go out there and and get it. And and like I say to a lot of people, you know, the other side of fear is everything everything you ever wanted, you know, just go out there and what’s the worst that can happen. okay, final piece of advice from you now, Lane. Really enjoyed today’s discussion. Learn about your journey from from Hackney to all the work that you’ve been doing and and just generally for the the wider legal community. If you had to complete

This particular sentence, how would you finish it? The people who create the greatest impact are not always those in the most power. They are the ones who they are the ones with the greatest vision, courage, fortitude, and verve to do it. I love that. And just for our listeners.

Elaine was not expecting that question. We do live questioning as to go. So that was very much off the top of your head and just flew beautifully and I think very sage advice. Elaine, this has been wonderful. It’s been really nice having you on the show. If our listeners do, which I’m sure they will, would like to follow you, would like to learn more about your work or collaborate or or indeed use your services, where can they find more? Feel free to share any websites, any social media handles. We’ll also share them with this episode for you too. Absolutely. You can find me on LinkedIn.

Elaine Banton. You can also find me at Dow Street Chambers website. That’s easy. and also on Instagram, you can find me as Elaine R. Banton on Instagram. So I’m I’m probably mostly more likely to find me on LinkedIn than Instagram, but I’m on both. Well, it just leads me to say, Elaine, this has been brilliant. I think your career absolutely demonstrates that excellence law

It’s very much more than just legal knowledge alone, right? It’s about understanding people, it’s about creating systems that promote fairness, encouraging progress, innovation, technology, remaining grounded in accountability, which you’ve alluded to, as well as of course human dignity. So from all of us here on the Leader Speaking Podcast, sponsored by Cleo, wishing you lots of continued success with your advocacy work.

Basically advancing equality and everything else that you’re doing in and around the world of helping to reduce that access to justice gap. It’s been an absolute honor having you on the show today, wishing you all the best. But from now, from all of us, over and out. Thank you for listening to this week’s episode. If you like the content here, why not check out our world leading content and collaboration hub, the Legally Speaking Club, over on Discord? Go to our website, www.legallyspeakingpodcast.com.

There’s a link to join our community there. Over and out.