Examination of witnesses (Questions 212
- 219)
WEDNESDAY 25 OCTOBER 2000
MR GURBUX
SINGH and MR
BOB PURKISS
Chairman: Mr Singh and Mr Purkiss, thank
you very much for coming and for your very comprehensive memorandum.
Sorry we delayed your appearance slightly, at least it gave you
the opportunity of judging that we are a very affable Committee,
although the Ministry of Defence is probably not quite of that
opinion. It is with a brilliant sense of timing, for which either
you or the clerk is responsible, that your appearance today coincides
with a lecture at the Imperial War Museum on the Sikh Martial
tradition, entitled "A Portrait of Courage, the Sikh Regiment
in France and Flanders 1940-50". We shall meet later on.
Please tell them I will be slightly late. I think the timing was
fortuitous. May I say at the outset, in the last 14 or 15 years—Mr
Viggers and I have been on the Committee that long—I have
seen quite a remarkable transformation. We even found it impossible
in 1986 to find out from the Ministry of Defence how many ethnic
minority personnel were in the Armed Forces. The MoD steadfastly
refused to tell us how far they had progressed—we could
have told them it was not particularly far. We all met General
Colin Powell and we asked how long it would take before there
would be the first black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
That caused some considerable mirth at the time. Although the
situation is far from ideal I do take some consolation from the
fact that considerable progress has been made. There is much,
much, much more to do. We look forward to hearing your verbal
presentation in addition to your written testimony.
Mr Viggers
212. The last major Parliamentary investigation
on racial equality was the Select Committee on the Armed Forces
Bill in 1996 where we said we were disappointed that so little
progress had been made since the last Committee expressed concern
and recommendations: "For too long the Ministry of Defence
has dragged its feet on this issue". That was paragraph 29
of our Report in 1996. We then, of course, urged the Ministry
of Defence to agree a programme with the Commission for Racial
Equality. I remember being particularly keen that the programme
should come to a conclusion in advance of the next meeting of
the Select Committee on the Armed Forces Bill, which will be in
the early part of next year, 2001. Can you give us a progress
report on the situation as it has emerged since 1996? Will you
be in a position to produce a considered report in advance of
the Select Committee on the Armed Forces Bill in early 2001? Do
you feel that policies are now in place in relation to ethnic
minorities and that progress is being made?
(Mr Singh) In essence the messages we make to this
Committee are essentially mixed messages. You will recall that
the CRE's involvement into the Armed Forces was triggered by our
formal investigation into the Household Cavalry, that commenced
in 1994 and concluded in 1996. We were minded at that stage to
issue a non-discrimination notice against the Household Cavalry,
but were persuaded by the MoD that if we were to embark on a partnership
agreement with an action plan which would look at all three services,
that would avoid us issuing that notice. You will recall, also,
at that stage our formal investigation showed considerable discrimination
within the Household Cavalry. The mixed messages that we have
for you today are, one, we believe there has been some progress.
Over the last three or four years there has been some progress,
some real progress around the Household Cavalry. If you were to
look at things like the increase in the number of ethnic minority
personnel, there has been a shift from 8 to 66. There has been
some real progress in the number of personnel which the Household
Cavalry has recruited. Secondly, it true to say that the Household
Cavalry have accepted that mistakes were made in the past. They
believe they have failed in the past. Now they want to tackle,
in a sustained way, the issues that confront the Household Cavalry.
It is also true to say that we believe that the success of the
Household Cavalry is due to the sustained and consistent leadership
which is there, and is very clear. I do not believe it is there
in absolute terms for the three Services across the board. I suspect
it is true to say that there has been a real culture change in
the Household Cavalry, where race equality is imbedded in the
organisation. That is the plus. The second positive point that
I would make today is that ethnic monitoring, something I know
this Committee was and has been concerned about in the past, is
now something that is universally accepted. As a principle it
is accepted and, indeed, our view is that there is now nearly
100% ethnic record keeping within the organisation. The system
is in place which enables the information to be gathered. There
is a separate question mark as to whether the information is adequately
analysed. That is another point I wish to come back to. There
has been considerable enthusiasm, energy and effort by the three
Services to change the public's perception, particularly the minority
communities' perception, about the nature of the Services and
about the nature of race discrimination within it. There is some
real effort to persuade minority communities that these are organisations
well worth being employed in. That is the plus side. I have to
say, however, there is some considerable down side to all this.
The Defence Secretary in 1998 agreed ethnic minority employment
targets with the three Services. They were year-on-year analysed
targets, 2%, 3%, 4%. Those targets have not been achieved. Those
were set by the Secretary of State, not by us. They have not been
achieved. The bottom line position is that there has not been
a significant increase in the period 1996 to now in the number
of people from minority communities within the Armed Forces. The
figures for serving personnel show something like a shift from
less than 1% to 1.3%, or 1.4% if you are being generous. The view
we take is it is about 1.4%. There has not been a significant
shift over the last four years. Certainly the recruitment targets
that were set were deemed to be achievable. General Sir Charles
Guthrie made the point that the targets that were set by the Secretary
of State and the Chief of Defence Staff were achievable and should
be achieved. The first point I would make to you is that those
targets have not been achieved and they have not had a fundamental
impact on the nature and profile of the three services. Secondly,
we do not believe that the good policies and the fine words have
actually been translated into real action of a sustainable nature
throughout the whole of the organisation. That, we believe, has
not been formally delivered across the three Services. That is
a matter of deep concern to us. Thirdly, we believe there are
some real problems around recruitment. Bob Purkiss can go through
some of the details about that. There are real specific problems
within the recruitment process, which act as barriers or hindrances
to addressing the question there. On balance, what we are saying
is, there is some evidence of good practice, some evidence of
some good progress, but by and large the position is not impressive.
By and large the Services have not made the sort of changes that
are necessary to achieve the targets that are set.
213. In looking for reasons why the targets
have not been met—and it looks unlikely that they will be
met—one starts from the thrust at the top, the determination,
then, perhaps, the reputation or, perhaps, the climate within
the country that makes it unattractive for people from ethnic
minorities to join the Armed Forces. Do you think the Government
has the commitment at the highest level?
(Mr Singh) We are absolutely convinced that at the
very highest level there is that commitment, we have no doubt
about that. At the highest levels within the MoD, both in the
civilian and the uniform section of the MoD, we believe there
is real commitment from the top. However, the problem then is
further down the organisation. We do not believe that that sort
of commitment and the leadership is translated further down the
organisation. That is where we believe the fundamental weaknesses
are. There is inconsistent leadership. Leadership changes, people
go. I think one of the major success stories of the Household
Cavalry is due to the consistent leadership that has been there
over time. That has led to some real sustainable change.
(Mr Purkiss) If we take the Household Cavalry, we
have had the same Major General there for the past three years
now. He has not just shown the commitment, there is a consistency
of how that is driven down through it. The three senior officers
in the Army, Navy and Air Force change on a regular basis, some
18 months to two years and, therefore, there is a different personal
interpretation of that commitment and drive, almost to the point
where it becomes a little bit of a competition as to who can do
better than the last one. I think it is the commitment of the
nature of the job that we are looking for to make sure that this
is driven down in each different service.
214. In terms of the chain of command, do you
also feel there is the commitment there?
(Mr Purkiss) There is the commitment, there is evidence
of it, especially the fact that it has now been brought into the
promotion structure, the appraisal system and the analysis and
the understanding of the implementation of equal opportunities,
particularly at senior officer level. However, that is not consistent
all of the way down. They need more consistency there to ensure
it is not just giving the command, it is winning the hearts and
minds of people and getting that consistent understanding. We
are seeing evidence of different interpretations. I refer to two
sister frigates, both having the same policy, both having the
same instructions under the chain of command but the interpretation
by the two captains meant that on one there were no black people
and there were two women and on the other there were something
like ten ethnic minorities and 20% women. That was two ships both
sailing out of Portsmouth. It is that consistency factor that
needs to be implemented.
215. Could that be peer group pressure as well,
in that once a certain target has been reached it is easier for
people to come in because they feel they are more welcome?
(Mr Singh) There is this general point, that once
you get a cluster of people working in any organisation drawn
from minority communities, that then projects a different image
of that organisation and, therefore, at the point at which you
get critical mass within that organisation you are likely to actively
encourage others to move into it. The problem we have here is
the step before, that frankly there is gross under representation.
Even now, the Armed Services are still not seen as an equality
friendly organisation. The public perception within minority communities
is it is still the view that race discrimination is live and active
within these three services, and that it is not a friendly place
to work. If that is the perception then the reality is that you
will not get people who are rapidly, desperately wanting to go
and work there, it is that that we have to change.
216. You have produced this very helpful briefing
note for us. You have put in a restriction against using some
names or units. Will you be producing an open report which will
be available for the Select Committee on the Armed Forces?
(Mr Singh) We most certainly can do.
Laura Moffatt
217. You were saying that in the Armed Forces
they had not reached their targets, which it would seem on the
surface they should have been doing. Have you done any work with
the Cadet Forces, which are rich recruiting areas for the Armed
Forces? Of course many have some very good practice to share,
those from the inner cities, and, happily, I should say, from
Crawley where we are very much a diverse community. Are they doing
any work to assist the Armed Forces, because they obviously need
some help?
(Mr Purkiss) It is a dilemma that you get such activity.
The Chairman and myself went somewhere recently where we met a
load of ethnic minority cadets, who were all in the Army Cadets,
and when we said, "Are you going to join up?" They said,
"No, we are going to join the Air Force". It is making
those links between the Cadet Forces within the schools and colleges
and what is on offer from that, and making those links too in
terms of the ability to go to university, the ability certainly
to go in as officers. We know, particularly, of the struggles
that many people now have for sending their sons and daughters
to university, yet there are grants available from the three Services
and they are not really understood by parents in particular. I
do not think there is enough of the relationship of what is happening
in the Cadet Force and what that could possibly lead to. There
is a big element of competition at the moment for people with
ability at that level, particularly ethnic minority ability. If
you are black nowadays the uniform services are begging for you
to go in, just to make sure they are seen to be right. Therefore,
you have to be attractive in that sense and make those links at
an early age. If I can make a reference here, in numerical terms
it is quite amazing when you look at the efforts because, as the
Chairman said, there has been a lot of effort and a lot of enthusiasm
that has been put in by the various Forces at different levels.
If you take the Army as an example, they had some events through
the Focus Consultancy Group which attracted 190,000 ethnic minority
young people. If you take some of the other activities we are
talking about, over 200,000 ethnic minority people last year were
brought to the door, if you like, but then when we look at how
many went through, it was only 338. We have been saying in the
meetings that you need to analyse why you cannot make those links.
That is one of the failures that we referred to, that there is
not enough analysis done of the failure to convert.
Mr Brazier
218. The Cadet Units in my constituency have
a small ethnic minority and also in the East End of London, where
I served with the Territorial Army, they were very, very well
integrated. It was an example of the young people from all different
ethnic backgrounds working together in uniform. It struck me as
extraordinarily disappointing when we had the three personnel
officers in front of us, pressed for over an hour on this issue,
that not one of them ever mentioned the Cadet Units as resources.
Can I make a possible suggestion? We have at last got the figures
for ethnic minority numbers in the regular forces. Could you not
press them to provide them for the Reserve Forces and Cadet Units
too, because when people see the resource there that might be
the most effective way of pressurising them to do something about
it.
(Mr Purkiss) They are different regiments and there
is almost this competition factor if one regiment is connected
with a Cadet Force. There does not seem to be that centralisation,
which we would all say is a better way forward.
Mr Hancock
219. You quoted Sir Charles Guthrie in the 3%
target. The figure for 1999/2000 is a phenomenal situation. The
Armed Forces need to recruit 25,533, and they actually recruited
less than 300 in that year.[7]
I would be interested to know what Sir Charles' response to that
statement is and has he come back to you since he made his statement
saying he believed it was achievable? Your comment that 25,000
got to the door and only 300 passed through the door. What analysis
has there been of those 24,500 who did not go any further and
why they did not?
(Mr Purkiss) It was 200,000.
7 Note from witness: The figure is 338, and
relates to ethnic minority recruits to the Army. The Army recruited
a total of 13,433 soldiers and approximately 1,0000 officers in
1999-00. Back
|
