Michael Taylor on Closing the Pay Gap
At our 2011 annual conference, Michael Taylor (fomer Director of Christian Aid) gave the keynote address. He talked at length about his experiences as a member of the High Pay Commission - and the urgent need to Close the Pay Gap.
- Click here to download a recording of his talk.
- Click here to see a video which Michael helped us to produce, talking about the 'Pay Barrier' for Poverty & Homelessness Action Week 2012.
- Or you can read his notes in full here:
l. Michael referred to two recent involvements: the High Pay Commission and the World Council of Churches Working Group on `Greed`
The report of HPC: `Cheques and Balances` was due to be published in the week following the conference. It contained some alarming, but by now fairly well known, statistics about the growing gap between rich and poor in the UK and the disproportionate increases in the earnings of CEO`s in the private and banking sectors. The growing gap was judged to be bad for business and for social cohesion. It made recommendations based on the principles of `transparency`, `accountability` and `fairness` including more and clearer information about high pay (how it is made up, how it relates to median and low pay); reforms to remuneration committees and a reconsideration of performance-related pay. These (12) recommendations made on a relatively narrow though important front, are only satisfactory if seen in their wider and deeper context which also has to be addressed: e.g. the culture of greed which has grown up certainly since the Thatcher era, and the unsatisfactory nature of the economy: premised on growth and greed, and imbalanced towards the financial markets rather than goods and services.
The WCC working group on Greed arose out of research done at the turn of the millennium on behalf of the churches in 24 countries on how they should be responding to poverty issues in the 21st Century. The report: Christianity, Wealth and Poverty, emphasised that wealth was as much of a problem as greed and challenged the churches to study a `Greed Line` above which people should not go to complement a `Poverty Line` below which people should not be allowed to fall. It was soon realised that such a line was hard to define and called for the use of MDI`s (Multi-Dimensional Indicators) and that, again, it was important to ensure that the discussion took place in a broad enough context – in this case that it could not be confined to personal and individual greed and morality but had to take account of structural greed as well.
2. This led to a discussion about an holistic approach to poverty issues.
It was perfectly satisfactory and indeed necessary to campaign for change on a relatively narrow or focused front such as Fair Pay, Fair Taxes, Fair Prices and a Fair Say. Nevertheless we had to ensure as far as possible that focused campaigns (of which the Debt campaign is another example) arise out of and are compatible with as rounded and `holistic` an underlying strategy as possible.
The point was illustrated in a number of ways besides the earlier references to HPC and the WCC working group. A re-reading of some of Peter Townsend’s work on poverty showed clearly that he held together very successfully the local and the global in talking about social policy but made no reference to environmental issues and on the economic front saw a return to growth as an important contribution to reducing poverty at a time when `growth` in the economy is a highly problematic issue – not simply as to whether there can be a return to growth but whether an economy premised on growth is now sustainable. Again recent WCC studies have held together ecology and economics but have had little to say about social policy. Organisations like Christian Aid are encouraged not just to address poverty as an emergency issue, but to work on programmes that may improve and sustain the lives of people in their immediate present, but also campaign and advocate for structural change. Similar multiple approaches are reflected in initiatives among deprived communities in the UK. Here is another attempt to be comprehensive.
Questions can of course be raised about the four `Fairs` of Church Action on Poverty. For example, like HPC recommendations, they may not be redistributive enough in their effects. They may in practice adjust the existing economy whilst leaving it fundamentally as it is. A Fair Say may not take seriously enough the growing crisis of democracy. The targets may not be strong enough on social policy e.g. universal and means tested benefits.
The point of the remarks about Holism however is not to be critical of the four `Fairs`, (indeed MT would support them and well understands the need for focused targets in campaigning) but to underline the need for our campaigning to grow out of as rounded and holistic an understanding or underlying analysis and strategy as we can achieve: wide enough, deep enough, `long` enough (long-term as against short-term).
Some practical implications of this were referred to such as trying to organise a Round Table of organisations etc relevant to poverty issues including the likes of the New Economics Foundation, social policy makers, environmentalists etc as well as agencies and churches, since together we are more likely to be wise and reinforce each other than apart (Church Action on Poverty`s building of Partnerships was noted.) A case could also be made for Christians giving far more support to the search for a new economic order (as a concern for the church in working for the common good, and as a vocation for Christians) at a critical time when the `solution` to problems is seen in terms of growth when growth may no longer be sustainable.
3. A second discussion looked at the slogan: `Close the Gap` and Christian Aid’s `Poverty Over` (P-OVER-TY)
Both, once again, perfectly understood and acceptable as campaigning tools etc. They are however potentially misleading. A Christian Aid video argued that since we have overcome apartheid and slavery we can overcome poverty. Apartheid and slavery of course still exist (slavery even more so than when it was officially abolished). The Gap may be narrowed but it will not be closed and poverty will not be over but more likely `always with us`. We have campaigning successes; things change for the better, but there are also reversals and poverty and injustice persist because human nature continues to be fundamentally insecure and therefore self-centred and self protective, using whatever power it has to make itself safe.
Again some practical implications were discussed. That we cannot do everything has never been a reason for doing nothing. The persistence of poverty underlines the central importance of power issues when it comes to poverty, at the local level certainly but at many other levels as well. We are also required (remembering Marx) to remember how `adjustments` to the present system, so that it seems a little fairer and less objectionable, may be welcome by the stronger and better off since, in effect, they allow the status quo to continue. Another implication has to do with a spirituality of endurance (an issue which the Debt campaigned also faced when it had achieved much but by no means everything, faced the prospect of the problem continuing, and also realising that some campaigners were growing weary in well-doing) and how we support and enable each other to persist. (Church Action on Poverty`s leadership and support is one important element in this. What of the churches?)
4. Some final comments were made in relation to Advent (which Christians would be celebrating within a week after the conference).
Some Advent themes are not particularly helpful or inspiring. For example, one of them looks to a second coming and the end of the world and predicts a catastrophe preceded by war, disease, earthquake, famine and death – all of which, and without any supernatural invasion from outside, looks increasingly likely as population growth, diminishing resources, unsustainable `growth`, conflict and climate change all collide (taking us back to the comments about holism).
Again many of the Advent hopes associated with the coming of the Messiah whether first or second time round, have not been fulfilled. The lion does not lie down with the lamb in a world of peace and plenty. The fortunes of the poor, as referred to in the Magnificat, are not reversed (taking us back to the comments about the persistence of poverty etc).
So can Advent lift our spirits?
The issues we are dealing with are inevitably complicated and Christian faith does not readily turn itself into detailed policies and actions. Christians cannot and should not avoid the complications or the hard work involved in fashioning with others policies and campaigns in favour of justice. But amidst all the complications it is necessary to keep a simple and principled vision in front of us and we may well lose our way without it.
That vision is of a child and a man who said he had come, as God might have come, to bring good news to the poor, as if that mattered above everything else and needed to be seen to first. He demonstrated in his life and work something of what that meant and still means in practice, including believing in people, accepting them as flawed human beings with potential, speaking truth to power, practising solidarity, standing in the prophetic tradition where piety and holiness equal justice, having integrity in his own way of life and going beyond comfortable compassion to costly love – a way of life we may not achieve but by which we always need to be disturbed – or stirred.
But the vision is also of a child and a man who demonstrated that whilst this world cannot be perfected it is never, even in the darkest moments which he faced as do we, completely closed. It can be prised open, more good can be done, it can be saved by love from the worst and changed for the better. Costly love, epitomised in the living and dying of Jesus, may not bring heaven on earth but it can breathe in new life and start rumours of a new creation – rumours which may well be echoed in the stories `celebrating success` which members of Church Action on Poverty are able to tell to one another.
