The government’s “common sense” minister, Esther McVey, has said that civil service equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) roles will be axed, claiming that money is being wasted on “woke hobby horses”.
McVey, who is a minister within the Cabinet Office, said there will be no dedicated EDI jobs in Whitehall outside of human resources, and the civil service will be ordered not to hire any new staff dedicated solely to EDI.
She expressed “major concern” about the amount of staff time spent on diversity and inclusion initiatives and wants to ensure that EDI activities benefit the public.
Jeremy Hunt calls for axing of civil service diversity roles – should HR be nervous?
Government says public sector four-day week should ‘end immediately’ – what do businesses think?
In an article for the Telegraph, she said programmes are not transparent about their impact, adding that their benefits are “unproven to say the least”.
In new government guidance on EDI in the civil service issued this week, it will be prohibited from spending externally on EDI unless it has been approved by ministers – including from charities such as Stonewall.
She said in a speech given at the Centre for Policy Studies: “Given the crucial role [civil servants] play in delivering these services, we need to stop the inappropriate back door politicisation of the civil service, which diverts time and resources from that focus on the public.
“We have too often seen them distracted by fashionable hobby horses, especially when it comes to issues like equality and diversity.
“People want the public servants to be getting on with the job of making their lives better, not engaging in endless internal discussions about ideology and I’m not prepared to see pointless job creation schemes for the politically correct.”
She also declared a ban on rainbow-coloured and other “random” lanyards in the civil service.
Sunita Harley, inclusion consultant at Collective Insight, said removing dedicated EDI roles will “ultimately impact the employer’s ability to attract and retain top talent which has a knock-on effect on team productivity and organisational performance”.
She told People Management: “Many EDI role holders bring specialist expertise of implementing successful EDI activities which positively impact employee engagement and help organisations to build welcoming and high-performing team cultures.”
Aggie Mutuma, CEO of Mahogany Inclusion Partners, said: “The removal of dedicated EDI roles is likely to create a significant gap in the civil service’s ability to drive and monitor diversity and inclusion efforts.
“Dedicated EDI professionals bring expertise, focus, and a strategic approach to embedding inclusive practices across organisations.”
She added: “Without these roles, there is a risk that EDI efforts may become fragmented and deprioritised, as existing HR teams, already stretched thin, may struggle to dedicate the necessary time and resources to these vital initiatives.”
Mutuma further highlighted that it is crucial to remember that the end users of the civil service include underrepresented and underserved communities, “so removing EDI roles will not only impact civil service staff but also has potential to affect the quality of services provided to the public,” she explained.
Suki Sandhu, CEO and founder of diversity and inclusion consultancy INvolve, said: “Culture transformation and inclusion requires intentional resourcing and investment and a rolling back of dedicated EDI roles doesn’t just risk stalling progress, it could see progress fall backward,” he said.
“Without the necessary infrastructure, barriers to entry into the civil service, promotion and even talent attraction risk being reinforced rather than dismantled as a result of eliminating the roles that exist to provide equity and fair access to all.”
But, Shakil Butt, founder of HR Hero for Hire, said the issue with some EDI initiatives is that “they are exactly that, initiatives often stand-alone detached from the core services being delivered or done as an afterthought”.
He told People Management: “These initiatives can materialise with big [expensive] showpieces such as painted buses or flags everywhere none of which have any real sustainable impact.
“These approaches give EDI a bad reputation and raise questions over the value to the organisation.”
However, he warned that eliminating EDI roles with the idea that HR will take over this responsibility is unlikely to “yield positive results”.
“Human resources would lack the time, capacity, and competency to take ownership of EDI. This speaks volumes of how EDI is being viewed.
“EDI needs to be owned by the organisation, driven by the leadership rather than delegated to Human Resources,” he explained.
What messages does this send to businesses?
Mutuma said the decision to eliminate dedicated EDI roles “sends a concerning” message to wider organisations.
“It suggests that EDI is not a priority, which could undermine the importance of building inclusive cultures in all sectors.”
She further explained that organisations might perceive this as a signal that diversity and inclusion efforts are “optional rather than essential,” which could potentially lead to a broader decline in commitment to these values.
Furthermore, she stressed that the argument that EDI programmes are “unproven” and their benefits “unproven to say the least” dismisses the substantial body of evidence showing the positive impact of diversity and inclusion on organisational performance, innovation, and employee well-being.
Similarly, Butt said: “The consequence of not having dedicated EDI roles is likely to diminish all existing EDI efforts and hamper any EDI work going forward because the message intended or otherwise is very clear, this is not important to the organisation which if you are a minority, is likely to marginalise you further.
“Outside of the civil service, permission is then given to other governmental bodies and institutions to follow suit. This does not bode well for the public sector,” he said.
However, he explained that there would be additional pressure to clarify why the EDI programme is required and what results are expected as a return on investment to demonstrate value for money.
But, Harley added: “Many organisations and employers in other sectors will continue to focus on and invest in their own EDI priorities as they have previously benefited from the positive impact led by their EDI team and related activities.
“Many organisations are deciding to invest more in their EDI teams and activities. For many organisations, their EDI and responsible business strategy remains closely linked to their overall commercial strategy,” she said.