Forget the credit crunch and think more logic crunch.  The credit crunch is a global phenomenon that only the least charitable can blame solely on the Government.  The new Single Equality Bill is another matter entirely.

One of the measures it puts forward is allowing employers to pick someone from an under-represented group when they have the choice between two or more candidates who are equally suitable.  This they term 'Positive Action' and by doing so have re-defined what Positive Action means.  This I would define as discrimination, pure and simple. 

I have two strong objections to their proposal:

• I design selection processes for organizations that will select the best candidate. They work exactly because I can identify the best candidate for each position. They wouldn't be happy if I came up with a list of several and said, ‘here you go, these all seem ok, choose the one you need to meet your equality targets'.
• The ‘Positive Action' proposed in this Act is not fair. The one binding theme of all the equality legislation to date has been its underlying fairness. In this way it has created an inclusive approach to the treatment of individuals that we can all buy into, regardless of our demographic make-up. However, this new proposal sounds way too biblical for my liking with its approach of ‘an eye for an eye' or ‘past discrimination for one group perfectly justifies future discrimination of another'. How on earth does the Government think this is going to lead to happier organisations where people are treated fairly? This is a huge step backwards and plays directly into the hands of equality and diversity skeptics.

I would ask the Rt. Hon. Harriet Harman, the Minister responsible for this Bill to rethink it.  Perhaps putting herself in the position of someone giving feedback to an unsuccessful candidate might help?  Maybe her conversation would go something like this:

HH:  I'm afraid you were unsuccessful in this application process.
Candidate:  I thought I was a strong candidate. Do you have any feedback?
HH:  You were very strong in some areas, especially your ability to influence and communicate.
Candidate:  But I didn't get the role. Do you have any negative feedback for me?
HH:  Well, not really... the real issue is that you are male...
Candidate:  So from a development perspective, is there anything I can do about that?

As you can see, this approach makes a complete mockery of effective selection processes.  You need to discriminate in terms of performance so that you don't have to discriminate on the grounds of ethnicity, gender or any other group membership.  If only the Government could see this.