Public sector buying

The Equality Act imposed certain duties on the public sector; these are often referred to as the PSED – or Public Sector Equality Duties. There are two types of Duties:

• the General Duty which applies to all public bodies; and
• Specific Duties which apply to some public bodies

The essence of the new PSED is to embed equality practice into the framework of the public body. That equality and diversity is no longer an adjunct or specialism that is somehow tagged on at the end of a project, but an issue that is part of the normal consideration in any project and understood by all those involved.

Sounds simple, and indeed the EHRC have produced good quality advice and guidance which should help.

The problem is one of action. From 2011 Public Bodies are meant to have included equality and diversity conditions in the tender process from where appropriate. But any cursory glance through the OJEC Buying Journals will show that there is not much evidence of it having been implemented at all by the main departments.

Now it might sound strange but this does business no favours. Many businesses are ahead of the game. They have taken the issue seriously reviewed their processes, trained their staff and even imposed equality and diversity requirements through their supply chain. They should be in a good position, indeed a favourable one, when it comes to bidding for public sector work. But that investment and that good practice is wasted if the public sector does not fulfil their own obligations.

Passing legislation that provides a clear indication of what is necessary is to be applauded but Ministers waste private sector time and money if they then fail in their own obligations. It seems disingenuous to maintain the line that business needs to be competitive and grow, while allowing the public sector to fail in its duties and put responsible businesses at a disadvantage.

Changes in the EU

While the UK argues about the worth of equality and diversity and how business should cope with the demands made on them, Europe has been forging ahead with creating a level playing field.

Much of the equality and diversity legislation in place in the UK stems from the EU. It therefore follows that the UK is not isolated and not disadvantaged by equality legislation because every member, and every potential member, of the EU has to follow the same basic legislation.

How each member implements that legislation does, of course, differ. Perhaps more significantly it is also about how each member enforces it.

Now the national press, politicians and many business advisers have said that some countries are simply not implementing or enforcing that legislation, particularly in terms of disability where there are costs involved. It is just lip-service which benefits those members in competition terms. It therefore follows that, to remain competitive, we should water down our legislation and remove some people’s rights.

Well the EU have agreed on the first point, but disagreed on the second. To correct the situation the EU want to pass a new Accessibility Act that levels the playing field in terms of access for disabled people. That is to be welcomed because it starts the debate about what we mean by access. All too often it is just taken as physical access – the ramp outside a shop or hearing symbol at a bank counter. Well it is far more than that – it is about product design, service design and intellectual access.

If we all develop a common understanding and a more level approach, then that is to be welcomed. It gives business security in how to accommodate certain issues but it also means that commonality is EU wide which levels the playing field. That benefits the UK, and indeed gives us a competitive advantage, as so many businesses have already embraced the issue.

Age and employment

Age is an emotive subject, it is personal to us all and we all feel differently about what it is and what it means. Some people long to be young again, some find fulfilment in work and others look forward to retirement to have time to do what they want to do and not be driven by the employment clock.

However, much of the recent legislative developments have focussed on later life. That undoubtedly has to do with an aging population with better prospects of enjoying a longer life and the pressures that puts on pensions and the provisions we have made for our eventual retirement. The scrapping of the default retirement age has certainly allowed older employees to continue in work which helps financially, but that freedom comes at a price at the other end of the age scale.

Working longer may be something that we will all benefit from, but in a static or even shrinking job market it means younger people can’t get on the first rung on the employment ladder. It is those same young people on whom we will also rely to provide the tax revenues to pay for the state and public sector pensions.

The market will correct itself over time but there needs to be a balance.

Age equality legislation is about discrimination based on age but it is perhaps less important when striking that balance. That balance needs to be struck in terms of life chances. When you can’t get on the first rung of employment because of the economic climate and a change in how we perceive equality then employers should not discriminate because of the lack of experience or of previous employment. That is the balance that needs to be made…an equal chance.

Government by sticking plaster

I have never been a huge fan of opinion polls but this government seems to think a continual barrage of consultation is a good idea. Now consultation has its place, and people’s opinions do matter, but in terms of government it is usually a good idea to consult before you start the legislative process, not after.

The Red Tape Challenge is the flagship initiative meant to give people a say on a huge number of regulations. But like all consultations it has its flaws. It can only be as good as the people that take part. In any consultation process you usually find a very low level of public awareness, except for the interested groups, and that means only those with strong opinions take part which skews the results. A continual barrage of consultations doesn’t do much to help either, it just desensitises people – “numbs down” the process as it were.

Even worse, with no feedback or further consultations on what has been discovered as a result of all that consultation process and with Ministers popping up everywhere announcing the next abolition of some regulation or removal or rights, how are you meant to understand how they arrived at that decision. Inevitably it is always based on some report or another which supports their opinion, but that report wasn’t part of the consultation.

Does all this frantic action get to the root of the problem ….no…it just highlights how badly legislation was drafted in the first place, how all those debates in parliament failed to spot those mistakes and how often politicians draft legislation as a knee-jerk reaction – a quick fix to some problem that has hit the headlines. And just to add to that heady mix how many politicians and their departments get involved in one area or topic simply creating a spiders-web of regulations with no real central direction or objective.

In a sense the Red Tape Challenge exposes those problems, but the Challenge does not help redress them. A popularity poll is no way to consider equality or employment issues. It’s not about what business thinks and is prepared to implement, it is about making opportunities open to everyone – life chances is the sexy in phrase. As some of the businesses are the cause of some of the problems, it’s a bit rich to determine policy based on their opinions only.

And that is where parliament comes in – it is meant to balance things out – consider the problem holistically, taking everything into account, and then if necessary, and only then, to frame the legislation, debate it and then pass it. So perhaps its time for parliament to step up to the plate – if the legislation is wrong, by all means consider it, but do it properly, no more quick fixes and off the cuff solutions.