Quality | 2009.07.27
The wrong leadership | Kay Hampton
Trevor Phillips\'s style as head of the EHRC led to dissatisfaction and a breakdown in trust
The last week has been one of the bleakest for equality in Britain. Concerns over the leadership of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and its value for money have accelerated. But as pressure mounts over Trevor Phillips\'s role as chair, we must separate the unquestionable significance of human rights and equality from the issue of poor leadership driven by self-interest.
All too often the public is distracted by allegations about the behaviour of individuals – at the risk of destroying years of work by the committed and principled among us. Jane Campbell, who last week resigned from the commission, is a colleague who dedicated her life to the fight against inequality. The efforts of people like her must not be undone because of personal, organisational or structural failures.
The resignations of three commissioners over the last few days, on top of the two earlier this year, came as no surprise to me. Their departure is not only a loss to the EHRC but to society as a whole; but the issues raised by their leaving are neither new nor unexpected. Those who asked difficult questions regarding the commission\'s governance were often ignored, or kept in the dark. In particular Phillips\'s leadership style, which is better suited to a political party than a human rights organisation, led to deep discontentment and dissatisfaction. Not surprisingly, cracks soon appeared on the commission\'s board, leading to a breakdown in trust and confidence in the chair.
And after yesterday\'s criticism of the commission by the National Audit Office, the public will expect an explanation for the reappointment of staff who had just received redundancy packages from the outgoing Commission for Racial Equality, of which Phillips was also chair. Not only did some work closely with Phillips while in the CRE, they also continued working for him throughout the transition period and beyond, in his new role.
As the last chair of the CRE, I am gravely concerned about the damage caused to its reputation. I hope that it will be remembered for its 40-year legacy, the advancements it made and its strong leaders. Few of these leaders would have allowed practices like the most recent to slip by under their watch. When I took over as chair, I raised several concerns with the government about a number of staff appointments and payments, as well as the unauthorised additional payment of certain commissioners for "special projects". What is worrying is that a similar pattern of irregularities is now emerging within the EHRC, if the published accounts are anything to go by. My hope was to transfer only the best CRE principles and practice, not its flaws.
Restructuring the board will do little to address the EHRC problems, and the appointment of new member\'s will not help. Despite a recent independent review of its governance structure, most key recommendations appear to have been ignored, with the focus being on the size of its board.
Yet I still believe the EHRC is not a lost cause, rather a missed opportunity due to poor judgment and the wrong kind of leadership. However, the question remains whether a body so battered by criticisms and resignations can actually meet the expectations of the millions who have invested in equality and human rights in this country. While I remain positive that with or without the EHRC, the volume of work already done on the ground by thousands of voluntary sector and community bodies will continue, a dedicated body with statutory powers to hold social institutions to account is still very necessary.
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/[...]es-and-human-rights-commission
