Woman on Board

It has been 'Wimmin's Week' in Oz, and like the old warnings against women on board ships, the women who have been pushed upward to Corporate Board office have shown why zozchial engineering is not the best idea we have had foisted upon us. Several 'high fliers' elevated by the 'Diversity' drive have come crashing down to earth to the detriment of competent women everywhere.

Far from the Boardroom being the 'Last Frontier', feminism has not been eagerly pushing women into such traditionally male jobs as roofing or garbage collection, sewerage works or even that most glamorous of careers, electricity linespersons.  There are very few lady wall plasterers. The tide was STEMed long ago, simply by the dirt, danger and outdoor weather.

I am all for the top jobs going to whoever is most suitably skilled, experienced, competent and intelligent enough to cope with the demands of our complex organisations upon which much depends, but we have been cajoled, blamed, denounced and forced to elevate some on the basis of just their genitals and cosmetic artistry.

Feminism is behind it of course. And how we are suffering for it.

Women like the arch misandrist JuLiar Gillard, who weaseled her way into the topmost of top jobs as Prime Minister, were vociferous in claiming a glass ceiling which must be smashed.

I also agree with those who point the fingers at bad men in charge: the crooks, the greedy, the power-mad. Just why our society thinks that women cannot be just as bad, nasty and immoral beats me. But the ladies have cornered the market in 'nurturing', 'empathy', communication skills and a host of assumed qualities that are supposedly needed in the Board Rooms to counter and replace the crass, hairy, 'old-white-male' emphasis. Men, it is said, do not have such refined qualities.

Why women are called the 'Fairer Sex' is more to do with complexion and cosmetics than character.

But despite our banks and financial houses, lead by men, managing to survive the last big financial crisis without being 'bailed out', we now find their share prices falling like lead weights and taking down with them the women who sat in the Big Chairs. 

The sharp pointy shards from the smashed glass ceiling are showering down on $300 hairdos.

Dallas Beaufort brought Graham Richarson in for a pint or two to tell of big-bottoming women.

Fairer sex, but not always best

It was only this week that I realised just how much political correctness has distorted the normal functioning of our society and cowed me into being a wimp of the first water. What’s more, it was a woman of courage who made me come to my senses.

In Wednesday’s Daily Telegraph, Miranda Devine wrote what many of us have believed for some time to be true but lacked the intestinal fortitude to proclaim publicly. 

The first paragraph pretty well sums up the situation in which we find ­ourselves: 

“The obsession with diversity in corporate Australia had a decade to prove itself. The results show that experiment has been an abject failure.”

You can all recall how a decade ago it became an irresistible tidal wave of belief in the view that more women on boards would make corporations more sensitive to their customers. Boards would somehow become more ethical and fairness would replace any ­rapacious desires of those awful men who held all the board seats.

While every institution to come before the Hayne royal commission has come out poorly, by far the two worst offenders have undoubtedly been Commonwealth Bank and AMP.

The obvious question therefore has already been answered firmly in the negative. Could anyone possibly believe that these two organisations had been fair or ethical? 

Livingstone. Chair of Commonwealth Bastards of Australia.

Both companies have been chaired by women — Catherine Livingstone has the helm at Commonwealth Bank and Catherine Brenner, until last Sunday, had the top job at AMP. 

The ­extent of wrongdoing at these ­financial ­giants has staggered every Australian from the Treasurer down.

Brenner. Spent $600 a  week on 'beauty'. ! Chair of All Making Piles.

The financial advice industry that sprung up in the past few decades was supposed to help people. At CBA and AMP it was often about exploiting people, and that is putting a benign spin on this. 

Given the thousands of customers who have been given rotten advice — which in the case of Storm Financial meant many retirees had to start over again in their 70s after mortgaging their homes to invest with crooks recommended by CBA — 

nothing changed under female leadership.

The Austrac scandal, the robbing of clients and all the other dramas at CBA apparently were ignored by the board - four women and six men. 

I would love to be able to see the minutes of board meetings so I could see how many times directors asked probing questions about the appalling treatment of their customers. I suspect that would be a search doomed to failure. It would seem the CBA board (to be fair Livingstone has been on it for only two years) rested comfortably while the bank could report quarterly profits in the billions.

Only two years? Just how long does anyone expect a leader to get a grip. Imagine a ship's Captain not being fully in command after two years!! 

Diversity, eh? Not a man in sight

It is not as if I am suggesting that the abysmal failure of the CBA board should be placed squarely at the feet of the chair or the other female directors. The men failed as miserably as the women. 

It is crystal clear though that the women at the board had no effect on the culture of the company. 

They collected their huge cheques (from $300,000 to $700,000) but made zero contribution in terms of what diversity was supposed to bring with it.

Over at AMP, if anything, the situation was worse. That something was wrong at the company has been obvious for at least 18 months. We didn’t need a royal commission to tell us its share price had been heading south. While the commission has accelerated the drop, it was not its original cause. The company looked old, tired and flat but still too many Australians went to it for financial advice ­because of its iconic and historical status.

Where was Brenner when the company she chaired lied to the Australian Securities & Investments Commission on 20 occasions? 

Where was she when dodgy financial planners were kept on the payroll even when their advice was known to be dreadful and had cost customers serious amounts of money? 

It is even alleged that she knew her in-house lawyer was vetting a supposedly “independent report” to be submitted to ASIC. Again, I am not suggesting Brenner and other women on the AMP board were responsible for a culture which led to the company being accused of criminal conduct, but I’m absolutely certain they did nothing to alter that behaviour.

If she was not responsible, having taken responsibility and fat cheques for every kudo for so long, just who does Graham think was? 

It took Brenner way too long to acknowledge the inevitable and drift off into the sunset. Like the rest of the CBA board, Livingstone will be hoping that the hoo-ha will blow over and those plush board seats will be waiting for them.

New CBA boss Matt Comyn was quick to announce that every one of the recommendations contained in that damning Australian Prudential Regu­lation Authority report on the bank would be implemented as soon as possible. I trust the board is not so stupid as to believe that this response could herald the end of the aftershocks following the quake of the past fortnight. 

Heads must roll at the board and executive levels to restore some faith in the once-revered institution. If she has sufficient pride and sense of occasion, Livingstone should be the first to know her time is up.

Now, on that. Like politicians, these top bods may lose position and salary (only to find sinecures elsewhere) but their superduper superannuation is assured. They should be jailed.

But let us look at the 'before' part that preceded this 'after' problem.

Diversity is one half of the problem when boards select new directors, and in practice boards do the picking and the annual meetings of shareholders almost always elect the board-recommended directors. 

And all too often when women get the nod, their main interest is simply in women. Not customers. Not company. 

The other prob­lem is that if you can join the right “in” crowd you can expect a slew of directorships to come your way. If you can become good mates with someone like the brilliant David Gonski and he puts in a good word for you then the doors are opened to the boards of the 50 top-listed Australian Securities Exchange companies.

Gonski is a svengali mate of Gillard's who pops up all over, raking in vast bags of taxpayer's monies while he wrecks everything he touches.  He does like his ladies.

Gonski has backed his share of winners but there have been a few losers as well. There is a good club in Melbourne, too, and in these clubs, while you will be told merit has its place, so does obsequiousness. Followers in the club can be given leadership jobs on boards. Some make the transition, many don’t. Nonetheless, a rich vein of cash can come your way as you hop on to two or three boards.

The question then becomes how seriously does a director take their duties. Regardless of gender, there should be proper legislative definitions of what those responsibilities are. Then perhaps we may sort out the wheat from the chaff.

Merit, not sex or connection, should be the only determinant.

I find 'merit' to be too easy a word, soon enough to be stolen by the left and have its loose meaning tidied up. Try the few words I mentioned above. .... most suitably skilled, experienced, competent and intelligent

The genitals ought not be seen. 

The lipstick should go.

There are fine, morally strong women about, with brains, intellect, skills and competence, who do not need and do not like the fawning obsequiousness  that over-sells womanly qualities. They are scandalised by feminist rhetoric that casts them as 'needing' political support and path-straightening. They do not wish to be seen as 'token', even in the Chair. They do not seek faux 'empowerment'. They are powerful individuals in their own right.

So drink to ladies of worth, but not to their sistas.

Pax.