Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Archive for category Society

Wanted: more burdz for business

Jul 9

Posted by The Burd in Economy, Europe, Society | 22 Comments

From recent events, you might think my timing is awry.  But we need more women in business.

Because more women means fewer Rebekah Brooks.

This week, the European Parliament voted in support of quotas for women in business and if voluntary measures do not work, for EU legislation to be used.

Currently, women make up 10% of directors and only 3% of CEOs at the largest listed EU companies.  Progress is painfully slow, only half a percent per year.  At this rate, the European Parliament predicted that it would take another fifty years for women to have at least 40% of seats in the biggest boardrooms.

Scotland is no better.  A recent survey for the Herald found that there are only 29 female directors in the 30 largest listed companies in Scotland.  Ten have no women directors at all, including major companies like A G Barr (Irn Bru manufacturers), Robert Wiseman dairies, Aggreko, Scottish Investment Trust and the Wood Group.

It is truly depressing stuff, but not nearly as depressing as the views of women who have made it to the top.   Progress has been made in recent years, you need to look at other sectors too, there are more women there in equivalent positions, merit must always come first, and the hoariest chestnut of them all.  That old faithful – women are too busy juggling careers, children and partners (!) to find time for extras like non-executive positions.

But let’s not rehearse the old arguments – and invite the usual comments – of equality and opportunity.  Except briefly to allow the EU Vice President  Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, (Christian Democrat MEP from Greece) whose resolution on the report on Women and Business Leadership was adopted by the European Parliament, to comment:

“Europe cannot afford to leave talent untapped! Empowering the role of women on management boards of companies is not only about ethics and equality, it is also essential for economic growth and a competitive internal market. With the adoption of the report on Women and Business Leadership, the European Parliament has sent a strong message to governments, social partners and enterprises in Europe”.

The resolution urges the European Commission to “propose legislation including quotas by 2012 for increasing female representation in corporate management bodies of enterprises to 30% by 2015 and to 40% by 2020”, if voluntary measures do not manage to increase the proportion of women.  The report and debate pointed to the success of similar quota legislation in Norway and welcomed the threshholds already set in France, the Netherlands and Spain.

In the UK too, there have been moves to increase women’s representation in leadership roles voluntarily, through the establishment of the 30% club and in Scotland, the current and soon-to-be chairs of CBI Scotland are women.  Indeed,  the new CBI chief, Nosheena Mobarik OBE, has already called for women to be given more senior roles in Scottish boardrooms.

It’s all good but it’s not enough.  So let’s encourage business to meet these potential quotas voluntarily by focusing on the only arguments that matter to them, the ones that affect the bottom line.

Studies have shown that companies with a higher percentage of women tend to perform better commercially and financially.  Women have just as many skills and as much experience to offer as men.  Indeed, their different experiences and perspectives could help create a much needed cultural shift in the way in which business is approached and conducted.  And there is evidence – cited by David Watt, Director of the Institute of Directors in Scotland – that shows that companies with a diverse and gender balanced boardroom make better progress and have better returns than all-male boards.

So more women directors and in senior leadership positions, more moolah.  For us all.  And if that doesn’t appeal, then I don’t know what might.

Oh this.  More women, fewer Rebekah Brooks.  Because we’ll get more women of better quality, whose morals and ethics are more sound, and with a shift in culture, there will simply be no room for the likes of Brooks who got to the top by playing men at their own game.

 

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Definite Contributions and Grubby Purchase

Jun 30

Posted by Jeff in Society | 3 Comments

One of the saddest reflections of the state of our planet at this current time is the growing phenomenon of elderly people committing suicide out of a forced compassion from not wanting to be a bother to their offspring and to the state. This problem is at its worst in Hong Kong and Japan as these parts of the world have the highest life expectancy. However, as more and more corners of the globe see a higher share of its population in the retirement age, the trend is only set to continue apace and become a wider problem.

There are not many issues that can be solved by simply throwing money at them but, nonetheless, there is little doubt that access to care, ability to heat your own home, buy food and even just have a roof over your head are all factors that affect older people more once they reach retirement age and these concerns are all largely wrapped up in the strikes and protests that we shall see today. The level of public pension is a difficult needle to thread as, if you pay too little, then you have poverty issues for a lot of vulnerable people but, if you pay too much, there is not enough money left over to run the country efficiently.

So, what’s the answer? Well, it’s not abundantly clear and you certainly won’t find it on here but, from what I have read, the unions are only bringing problems to the table, not potential solutions, and so I cannot find much sympathy for, let alone solidarity with, the strikers today. Ed Miliband is being criticised for not supporting the strikes given he leads the ‘Labour’ party; but in calling the strikes “a mistake” he is doing just that – leading, otherwise he would just be following a crowd because they happened to lean the same way politically.

A Labour leader with an understanding of but not in thrall to the unions is a good thing and long may it continue.

In terms of the problems of an ageing population in an unequal Britain, the answer as far as I am concerned is to implement much greater equality into the system across the public sector as a whole and try to ensure that the private sector will follow suit.

There seems to be a dogged belief across the UK that the public sector has to mimic the private sector in order to be at its most efficient and optimal. It has led to PFI, raids on long term pension schemes to aid day to day cashflow, privatisations of vital national services and many other ghastly monstrosities that should never have come to pass. Why should public sector works receive a lower pension just because private sector workers do? And why should there be such a wide disparity between the pensions of the lower paid public sector workers and the higher paid?

After x years of service, regardless of the job you have worked at, be it head of a local council or sweeping the streets, you should be awarded a pension that is equitable with anyone else in the public sector that has worked for the same period. A system where each public employee pays in, say, 8% of their salary and knows that when that golden age of 64, 65, 66 or whatever it is comes, they will get a pension that they can comfortably live on, well, it would solve a lot of today’s problems.

Yes, people would take out less than they have paid in and others would take out more; but that would be a price worth paying for a fair country where minimum standards are above the poverty line and each citizen is valued.

Why should fat cats who enjoy fat cat salaries also be rewarded with a fat cat pension? They have forty years to build up a big fat private pension with their annual salary if they so choose. When did the public decide that certain pensioners deserve more money to live on than their peers after they have finished work?

When we start treating all elderly citizens as equal human beings, rather than defective goods at the wrong end of life’s conveyor belt, maybe then we can start getting somewhere in terms of a better balance to our society. And maybe so many more of the wiser, tireder generation will look ahead with enthusiasm and joy to the rest of their lives, feeling like a valuable contributor to the UK rather than an unwanted hindrance on borrowed time.

The flaws and failings of Armed Forces Weekend

Jun 25

Posted by The Burd in Defence, Society | 74 Comments

AFDIt’s Armed Forces Weekend and it has two purposes, apparently.  It aims to raise “public awareness of the contribution made to our country by those who serve and have served in Her Majesty’s Armed Forces”. But it also “gives the nation (sic) an opportunity to Show Your Support for the men and women who make up the Armed Forces community: from currently serving troops to Service families and from veterans to cadets”.

Helpfully the website suggests ways to do so.  We can see, thanks to a map of Great Britain and lots of little Union flags, where there are flag raising ceremonies, beating the retreats and marches to head along to.  There’s a page with suggestions on the sorts of parties to hold among your family and friends if you cannot find an offical event to participate in – and advice on how to share your photos.  There’s a Facebook page for you to visit to show your support and a AFD Goodies page where you can purchase bunting, hand sized flags and big banners, all emblazoned with more of red, white and blue and big bold statements like “honour our armed forces past and present”.

Is my distaste for all this really so transparent?  Good.

It’s not as though I’m a pacifist.  I was once, borne of natural anti-authoritarian sentiment but affirmed by the study of various wars and their impacts on populations and politics as a history student.  But I do accept that there are sometimes wars that need to be fought and that having a well-resourced armed forces is as relevant to a nation adopting neutrality as much as a pugilistic bent.

And it’s not even the political distortion inherent in the designation of a weekend for Armed Forces, nor in the language and symbols used to sell the concept.  Nope, I can see through their cunning plan.  Let them wrap themselves in the Union flag and attempt to make us all feel like a single nation in the process.

Moreover, I can see through the attempts at cod psychology.  That if we do not get involved or somehow “show our support”, ergo, we are against our armed forces.  That the bigger geo-political issues should not get in the way of acknowledging that these people are brave actors on our behalf, doing a job most of us would baulk at.  To not participate is to imply that we do not agree with these notions.  In some politicians and generals’ tiny minds.

My issue is with the need for it at all.  I grew up honouring the contribution made by those who go to war on our behalf.  It’s a bit of a tradition in my family for starters, so I have close up and personal accounts to inform me.  And even as a teenager, in some kind of anti-rebel rebellious stance, I always made sure to attend the Remembrance Sunday service and silence at the local cenotaph.  Somehow, it seemed like the least I could do, for all those holders of familiar surnames imprinted immortally on its walls.  So many of them, far too young.

We do not need an Armed Forces day or weekend to honour their contribution;  we have Remembrance day for that.  And because of its attachment to the Armistice of World War One, we are encouraged to place our remembrance in its proper context.  That the greatest thing to celebrate and honour – always – is peace and the ceasing of battle.

The thing that really sticks in my craw?  The idea that by purchasing a little bit of plastic tat and waving it enthusiastically at marching ranks in a parade, we are honouring these men and women.  The whole concept of this weekend is designed to seal over the cracks and hide the inconvenient truth.

That still we allow our politicians to play fast and loose with people’s lives by sending them into illegal, inappropriate and ill-thought out conflagrations.  That we are quite content to destroy people’s lives, homes and communities – not here but in whatever amphitheatre we have chosen for the purpose of flexing our muscles – because the greater global good somehow demands it.

Far from here, it is easy to forget that the biggest casualties of war, no matter how just, are women, children and old people.  Needless to say, we pull out when reconstruction is still a planner’s dream and invest little in repairing the physical, emotional and mental damage inflicted on civilian populations.  No amount of the handing out of sweeties to weans repairs the trauma caused by fear and loss dominating your life over a sustained period.

Neither are we particularly mindful of the trauma sustained by our armed forces.  Oh, they get better NHS treatment than before but still it is down to charities to attempt to repair the obvious and hidden damage.  And this veneration of everything armed forces is double-edged for them.  Sure, the media are more willing to promote their stories and their cause but a whole host of new charities has sprung up spreading the jam of their fundraising efforts still further.  Even big business has jumped on the bandwagon -  Tesco is currently running a goodies parcel initiative, whereby you pay and they get the credit.  Ultimately it results in less funding from all our pockets for vital recovery and rehab work with veterans.

There is something distasteful too at the very idea that we – a richly resourced kingdom in so many ways – should be supporting our armed forces by sending home comforts to the front line.  There is little honour in paying people a pittance for doing the most dangerous job there is, of wrangling with them over pension and benefit entitlements when they return, broken, and of expecting their families and communities to make their sojourn in dangerous places bearable by regular supplies of shaving foam, jam and batteries.

No, if you truly want to honour our armed forces this weekend, ignore the artifice of the official celebrations. Instead, take yourself off to your local memorial and spend a moment or two saying thanks.  Then come home and write to your MP demanding that the money being spent on this weekend’s charade is diverted into the reparation and restoration of lives and communities laid waste by recent activities.  At home and abroad.

Progress, but at a snail’s pace

May 14

Posted by The Burd in Democracy, Holyrood, Parties, Society | 44 Comments

There is much to celebrate about the make up of our new Parliament.  Yes, we can lament the loss of experience but some of the gushing eulogies written about some of the departed stalwarts, particularly from the Labour ranks, need a reality check.  Such a sweeping clearout, whether the parties wanted it or not, brings in fresh blood which is, by itself, a very good thing.  Whether or not they will deserve the epithet *talent* remains to be seen…

But in certain key areas, the Parliament is making very slow progress indeed.

Dennis Robertson has found himself wheeled out at the forefront of the SNP group and the subject of much media interest because he is blind.  And even better, has a telegenic dog to guide him.  Dennis is canny so he knows what he’s doing and he deserves his election, not because of his visual impairment, but because he has a lot to offer.  He is clever and a great campaigner on issues that are often ignored or worse, patronised at Holyrood.  He has a careful decision to make – does he become a champion of disabled people simply because he is disabled or does he eschew such issues, as Anne Begg did in her early career, to avoid being defined simply as the blind MSP?  It’s a tough one.  And the bottom line is that it simply should not be remarkable that someone with a visual impairment can be elected:  it should be the norm.

But with Siobhan McMahon becoming the first woman born with a disability, joining Margo MacDonald whose disability has been caused by her long term condition, our Parliament is now more visibly, differently abled.  And hurrah for that.  They will bring a very different perspective and life experience to their work and that is what a more representative legislature is all about.

Readers will be pleased to note that progress was also made on the ethnic status and gender balance of Holyrood.  Women’s representation increased by a whole one, yes one MSP, taking us to nearly 35%. It’s nowhere near the nadir of 1999 but it is progress, if at a snail’s pace.

The Labour group by electoral accident rather than design has achieved almost complete balance with 17 out of 35 MSPs women.  The Conservatives have added to their tally too, with 40% of their group now women.  Margo, of course, achieves 100% while the Scottish Greens are perfectly poised with a woman and man MSP.  But it is the Lib Dems and the SNP who let the side down.

Reduced to a group of five, only one Lib Dem MSP is a woman, 20%.  And despite having a record number of MSPs – 69!  some of us still can’t quite believe it! – a shockingly low number are women.  Nineteen, but Tricia Marwick now doesn’t count as belonging to any group, so the figure is down to 18.  Would I have traded an extra woman MSP for the SNP Group instead of having a female Presiding Officer?  Of course not.  But even at 19, this equates to only 27%, slightly over one in four, SNP MSPs being women.  Disappointing doesn’t cover it.

Already the cry is that something must be done.  Shame no one made that cry before the election when candidates were being selected.  Severin Carrell of the Guardian deserves special mention for championing this issue and he is right:  we need “somebody” to sort this out.  And not just on gender balance but also on ethnic representation.  We have made some progress, going from 0 after the tragic, early death of Bashir Ahmad in the last Parliamentary session, to 2. But at 1.5%, the number of MSPs from the BEM community does not equate with the ethnic diversity of our population which is approaching 4%.

The issue of ethnic diversity is a controversial one – for everyone who comments that there are folk of Italian descent (Linda Fabiani and Marco Biagi being two) and many, many more of Irish descent, they are missing the point somewhat.  This is about melting pots, multi-culturalism and assimilation and ethnic and cultural diversity – far too complex for this post but perhaps worthy of a future one.  There is no one of Chinese or Polish descent, despite both being statistically significant commnities in our society.  Scots Asians yes, but no blacks either from African or Caribbean communities.  Our Parliament should be representative of all our people.  That should be a given.

So what to do, other than moan about it on blog spaces or in newspapers?  I agree with Sev.  Something has to be done and the parties seem incapable of doing it without support and guidance.  We don’t need a new body, there are a plethora of them, particularly on women’s issues:  Engender, the Fawcett Society, the Scottish Women’s Convention.  And now the Hansard Society has got involved.

It needs an all-encompassing organisation with a remit to promote democracy more generally, to address all the issues of under-representation of key groups and communities.  It needs to engage positively with the parties and the work has to start now, before candidate selections begin again.  There is a window open now in which to examine and explore possible solutions but the starting point has to be an acknowledgement by all the parties that there is a problem to be addressed.  And an agreement to work on a cross-party basis to achieve real progress.

 

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Football does not cause domestic abuse

Mar 8

Posted by Guest Blog in Society | 20 Comments

A guest post today for International Women’s Day, from Lily Greenan from Scottish Women’s Aid. We are most grateful, also because the Better Nation editorial team has a marked gender imbalance.

Lily GreenanLast week’s Old Firm game raised a few questions for me. The aggression used by some players during the game was more than matched afterwards by their managers/assistant manager. Was I shocked? I wish I could say yes, but sadly, I wasn’t shocked. There was nothing new here. Displays of macho posturing are not unique to football and though I agree that Lennon and McCoist should be more mindful of the influence they have and the messages they give out, I would say the same of many men in positions of power and influence in Scotland.

There has been a fair bit of coverage of the link between the Old Firm game and a reported rise in domestic abuse incidents. This isn’t news to anyone working in the field; nor is it news to the women, children and young people who live with it. Around Scotland, reported incidents increase after local football matches. I don’t know whether there is a bigger problem in relation to Old Firm games or not.

What I do know is that football doesn’t cause domestic abuse, any more than alcohol does. Women who experience domestic abuse talk about being controlled by their partner, isolated from family and friends, made to feel worthless. The violence their partner uses has a purpose – it reinforces the control he has over them. It happens every day, not just match day.

Men who abuse their partners don’t act in a vacuum. Their behaviour may be supported or challenged by what is happening in the community around them, by the effectiveness of the justice system and by the political priorities of the State. In Scotland, an incredible amount of work has been done since devolution to tackle domestic abuse. Cross party support has ensured a consistent message from Holyrood that domestic abuse is a political priority. This has been reflected in improved justice system responses, increased service provision and some world class work to address the needs of children and young people who experience domestic abuse.

What is missing is real engagement with the wider public. In particular, what is missing is the voices of men. What is missing is a much needed conversation about what it means to be a man in Scotland today and why it is so intrinsically linked to violence and aggression. As Gerry Hassan said in his thought-provoking exploration of some of the issues – “why do we seem to be uncomfortable and unwilling to begin a debate about men behaving badly?”.

It’s a question that begs a conversation. It’s a conversation that shouldn’t – and perhaps can’t – be started by women.

Today is the 100th anniversary of International Women’s Day, a day which celebrates the struggles and achievements of women around the world. Today Alex Salmond will host a Summit bringing together the SFA and the Old Firm teams to “chart a way forward”. I wish them well and offer this suggestion – start the conversation about why men behave badly – not just at football matches, but in the streets and in their homes.

We won’t stop domestic abuse until you do.