MAGGIE PAGANO: Is it curtains for the CBI?
Are they curtains for CBI? If the lobby group were to close down, there would be much better alternatives for companies to join, says MAGGIE PAGANO
- Why have more members of the Confederation of British Industry not resigned?
- Some say they want to wait for the outcome of independent research
- Baroness Morrissey says ‘enough is enough’ and urges members to stop now
One of the mysteries of the sex scandal swirling around the Confederation of British Industry is why more of its members haven’t taken a harder line and quit.
So far, only Andy Wood, the boss of the Suffolk brewer Adnams, has said publicly that his company is considering leaving the lobby group after allegations of sexual misconduct against senior CBI figures, including claims of rape and drug use at staff parties.
But privately, many more of its 190,000 members would be shocked by the latest allegations by more than a dozen women against CBI personnel, and are about to turn in their cards.
Why is it taking them so long to make a decision? Some say they want to wait for the outcome of the independent investigation being conducted by Fox Williams before making any hasty decisions.
The law firm hopes to report to the board shortly after Easter. But should they wait or listen to one of the city’s most influential women, Baroness Morrissey, say ‘enough is enough’. She calls on members to stop now.
Making a move: Baroness Morrissey says ‘enough is enough’ and urges members to stop now
Imagine if prominent members like Alison Rose, CEO of NatWest, or Amanda Blanc, boss of Aviva, shared her opinion and ripped up their membership. The dam would break and others would follow soon enough. They would rightly argue that regardless of the outcome of the report, the CBI’s reputational damage is already so great that it cannot survive.
Another mystery is why a lobby group claiming to be the voice of British business has been so utterly silent since the scandal erupted. There has been no glimpse of the summit, not even a statement from the President, Brian McBride, or Vice President, Lord Bilimoria.
Of course, no one expects them to comment in detail on the allegations because of the investigation. But you’d think at least one of the top executives would be brave enough to apologize and say publicly, “We’ll get to the bottom of this.”
They were brave enough to shout from the rooftops when they warned that Brexit would kill British industry, or that Jeremy Corbyn’s nationalization plans would cost nearly £200bn – claims that have never been proven. Criticism of the CBI is not new. There has been widespread skepticism for years about the lobby group’s relevance, that it has outgrown its purpose.
Indeed, members constantly complain that it has become a pompous and secretive organization, that joining is one of those rituals you do, a bit like joining the expensive gym that just opened around the corner because you know you would should do, but you never use it.
There is a good explanation for this. The CBI has become less relevant today because the reason it came into existence in 1965 is long gone. At the time, his power arose because companies needed a counterbalance to the power of the big private sector unions flexing their muscles over wage negotiations and terms.
But those influential unions in the private sector more or less disappeared as power shifted to the public sector.
Now the CBI spends much of its time signaling and agitating virtues for more diverse boards et al. Is that worth paying thousands of pounds a year in membership?
Like those unions, the time of the CBI is over. And if the CBI were to close shop, there are much better alternatives for companies to join. The IoD, the FSB, Made UK or single issue activists such as FairFuel UK are all increasingly having a much stronger voice on the issues that really matter.