|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Analysis News & Opinions
Firms permanently removed from PPC
Five companies – Diageo Scotland Limited, Diageo Global Supply IBC Limited, Diageo Northern Ireland Limited, Diageo Great Britain Limited and Unilever UK Limited – have been formally removed from the Prompt Payment Code (PPC) after failing to honour their commitments. The voluntary code requires companies to
pay 95% of invoices within 30 days to their small suppliers and pay 95% of all invoices within 60 days. All fi ve companies have had the opportunity
to voluntarily withdraw their code membership but have not engaged with the Small Business Commissioner who runs the PPC on behalf of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Latest Payment Practice Reporting (PPR)
data highlighted that: Diageo Scotland Limited were paying 42% of invoices within 60 days Diageo Global Supply IBC Limited, were paying 32% of invoices within 60 days Diageo Northern Ireland Limited were paying 33% of invoices within 60 days Diageo Great Britain Limited were paying 36% of invoices in 60 days Unilever UK Limited were paying 51% of invoices within 60 days. Liz Barclay, small business commissioner, said: “It is always disappointing when a company can no longer reach the payment standards set by the Prompt Payment Code. “The code is there to make sure
that
suppliers get paid as quickly as possible and when fi rms leave or are removed there is a risk that payments to suppliers will be slower. “We will work with the fi rms mentioned
to get them back onto the code as quickly as possible should they wish to return, because that is to the benefi t of the suppliers and to the companies themselves.” The government has set a standard of 95%
of all supply chain invoices to be paid within 60 days for organisations who want to do business with government. Suppliers who do not comply with this standard could be prevented from winning government contracts Small business minister Paul Scully said: “As our small fi rms recover from the pandemic,
March 2022 Liz Barclay
the last thing they need is for some big fi rms to hold back the cash that is owed to them. “I urge the companies that have been
removed from the code to get their acts together to improve their performance.” The PPC Compliance Board, made up
of Andy Chamberlain (iPSE), Mike Cherry (FSB), Elizabeth Crowhurst (CBI), senior civil service representative Directorate
of Business Growth in BEIS, Yvonne Gale (chair),
Suren Thiru (British Chamber of Commerce), Martin Traynor (Cabinet Offi ce), Iain Wright (ICAEW), said: “The removal of these six companies from the code demonstrates that we will crack down where we fi nd that signatories are not paying suppliers on time. “We want to see all code signatories adhere
to the commitments they have signed up to and see continual improvement in payment.” Government announced in November 2018
from 1 September 2019, any organisation that bids for a central government contract more than £5m a year will need to demonstrate it has eff ective payment systems in place. From 1 September 2019, organisations bidding for government contracts more than £5m a year may be required to provide: Confi rmation of systems in place to ensure organisations in the supply chain are paid on time, including procedures for resolving disputed invoices. Details on payment performance, including the percentage of invoices paid within 60 days.
www.CCRMagazine.com
To coincide Day, we
with International Women’s released research showing that over
a third (36%) of business leaders feel that UK business is not doing enough to address gender discrimination in the workplace. In the survey of almost 700 business leaders
in February 2022, the research found that less than a quarter (23%) of directors felt that UK business addresses the issue of gender discrimination in the workplace to a large extent. UK fi rms have made promising progress in tackling gender discrimination and increasing female representation in senior positions in recent years, with a third of FTSE 250 board positions now being held by women. However, clearly the job is not done. There
is more that business can do to stamp out gender discrimination at all levels and strive for greater representation by women. We know that an inclusive approach makes
good business sense, both in terms of how the company is viewed by society and through its positive impact on decision-making. As an organisation, we have seen benefi ts an
inclusive board and executive team can bring in terms of business results. We encourage other fi rms to take action to develop a pipeline of female leaders for their boardrooms.
Alex Hall-Chen Senior policy adviser, the Institute of Directors
Opinion
‘Need to more to address gender discrimination’
7
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
