26 September 2008
The CBI's director of public services brings a wealth of negotiating and HR experience to the role and will continue to push for more private provision, she tells Paul Dicken.
A robust defence of the role of the market in the public sector is what you would expect from the CBI's director of public services, particularly when it comes under fire from trade unions. And Susan Anderson, who took on the job in July, does not disappoint.
She is more than happy to assume the mantle worn by her hard-hitting predecessor Neil Bentley. But while she is a tough negotiator, Anderson has no qualms about looking for areas where business and the unions can agree – if only to differ.
'I hope it is a relationship based on mutual respect, but also a recognition that at times we have to agree to disagree,' she tells me with a smile.
Sitting in the CBI's offices in the iconic 1960s Centre Point building in central London, she looks the picture of conciliation. But perhaps that's not surprising, given that she spent the past eight years heading human resources policy at the confederation.
She's also a commissioner at the Low Pay Commission and council member for the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, so is no stranger to negotiation, and striking agreements.
A colleague at the CBI says: 'She's a tough negotiator but manages to maintain good relationships with all sides – that's a very useful skill.'
The new director is naturally most comfortable talking about her particular areas of expertise. In a total of 20 years at the CBI, she has covered employment issues in various roles, and this wealth of experience informs her discussion on public services. In fact, she frequently returns the conversation to employment regulation, an issue she feels strongly about. Business has gone as far as it can go, she says. There is 'no room for continual piling on of more employment regulation on to business'.
But when it comes to describing the private sector's role in public service reform, she is more cautious, choosing her words carefully. 'I wouldn't call it a turning point, but a sense that this is an industry that has come of age, that has got a voice.
'I think we have established ourselves very successfully as the voice of the public services industry.'
The growth of this 'industry', as defined by DeAnne Julius's review for the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, gives Anderson a bigger opportunity to represent the many interested parties in the private sector.
There is a growing sense that the private sector's role is unlikely to decrease, particularly as business secretary John Hutton has announced himself the champion of the industry.
Anderson speaks with relish about the prospects her new role offers, and is keen to see frontline service provision at first hand. At one point she suggests a visit to a private sector run prison. 'I've not gone there in a professional capacity or any other capacity,' she quips.
And the prospects for an enhanced private sector role in service provision are not limited to the UK, she says. The government-led trade mission to the US, which followed the Julius review's launch in July, is to be followed up by a trip to India to market British players in the industry.
If the Labour government has signalled clear support for this burgeoning sector, it is less clear where the Opposition, the traditional party of business, stands. CBI director general Richard Lambert complained in June that the Conservatives needed to be clearer about their intentions.
Anderson is reluctant to state where she thinks the Tories would take public service policy, saying simply that dialogue with key figures in the Conservative Party has increased in recent months, with 'a frank dialogue at times'.
She says the CBI's role is now a campaigning one, and the debate is 'moving away from this mantra that the public sector is good and the private sector is bad, or indeed, vice versa'.
Discussions with trade unions are now less adversarial. 'I think the debate is being conducted at a more intelligent level,' she says. 'There might be a measure of agreement, but headlines tend to focus on the areas of disagreement. What I would emphasise is, behind those headlines there is much more agreement. On education and skills, those are areas where there isn't anything between us and the TUC.'
More evidence-based arguments are helping this new approach. For example, she says, early fears about job security and employee wellbeing over outsourcing have been allayed by the facts, even if union leaders are reluctant to acknowledge it.
She also cites the recent agreement made on employee rights by the government's Public Services Forum, which includes representatives from employers and trade unions.
While striking this conciliatory tone, Anderson is quick to reiterate that there is a need to 'drive forward' the agenda for the public services industry – valued at £79bn – 'particularly at a time when demand for public services is growing and the economy is approaching some difficult times'.
PFsep2008
