“RETURN to Class War”, screamed the Daily Telegraph front-page headline. It might be argued that they and their most ardently devoted readers have never abandoned it. But it was not a call to arms. It was the newspaper’s take on the Budget, in which respect Tribune’s verdict last week clearly under-rated Alistair Darling’s intentions.
But while the Budget was a nod in the direction of wealth redistribution, the headline was premature. It should, if Telegraph readers really want to be worried, have been reserved for the unveiling of Harriet Harman’s Equality Bill, which unashamedly puts class at the forefront of a broad agenda parcelling up and reinforcing protections against inequalities affecting women, minorities, the old and the disabled. Intrinsically running throughout the bill is the intention to focus the entire country and its institutions on class inequalities. Up to a point.
Public authorities, indeed the whole public sector, will be required to adjust spending, recruitment and promotion policies on the basis of new criteria which take account of class histories. It is one of the great taboos, especially among those who have travelled the rags-to-riches path themselves, that accident of birth for the vast majority of people usually outweighs talent, merit or determination in the race to get on in life.
So far, so good – as far as broad intentions go. However, if the fundamental purpose of this bill is to be achieved, some contentious practicalities will have to be addressed. Achieving equality of opportunity in schools – for example, in the basic system of admissions – will require some bold actions which may upset a lot of middle-class Labour-voting parents who, like all other parents, want the best school for their children, but happen to have the right kind of class skills sets to achieve their goal.
But what most makes this bill an unfinished document is the way it shies away from including the private sector in this new national embrace of equality. What is it about the private sector, whether it’s making sure the banks we now mostly own do their job properly or ensuring an employee is rewarded with the career development and remuneration their ability deserves.
The CBI, the British Chambers of Commerce, the Engineering Employers Federation and the Institute of Directors have all condemned that part of the bill which proposes that all companies with more than 250 employees publish the average pay rates of male and female staff. That makes for good short-term headlines: Ms Harman defies business chiefs on pay equality.
But the proposal, part of a review of more than 100 pieces of equality legislation, is not due to come into force until 2013. It is contained in a statutory instrument which would only be triggered into statute by a government – the one elected after the next election – which was keen to see it enacted. Otherwise it will just gather dust. Given the odds on a Conservative government being elected, the only guarantee to get this radical measure into law is to enact it in the main bill.
The same applies to employment and pay transparency in the public sector and the promised linkage to procurement of public contracts. This had to wait for an equality review in early 2007, followed by a public consultation, followed by a white paper. Now there is to be enabling legislation on public procurement, subject t to…public consultation taking us into the summer.
And then where? Will the story actually turn out to be: “Business chiefs defy Harman”? Their case against pay audits is that they would simply show that more women are at the bottom end of the scale and more men at the top, which would be “misleading”. This so thoroughly misses the point that the reasoning reinforces the need for early, not down the road and possibly never, legislation.
Which raises a fundamental question: why has it taken 12 years of Labour government for this to emerge now? That it has is to be welcomed. But it remains a work in progress and time may be about to run out.
