Westminster Hall
Thursday 12 March 2009
[Hugh Bayley in the Chair]
Race Equality
Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting be now adjourned.—(Chris Mole.)
2.30 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Mr. Sadiq Khan): It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr. Bayley. It is first time that I have served under your chairmanship. I welcome the Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen to this important debate.
It is more than 40 years since race relations legislation was first enacted. We are now at a crossroads on the way to race equality. There are some dead ends that we must avoid, but I believe that the right way forward can be found if we are prepared to be bold; we need also to listen to communities.
Some of my black and Asian right hon. and hon. Friends blazed a trail so that I was able to become a Member. I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) and my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), as well as Paul Boateng and the late Bernie Grant, for the huge role that they have played.
I was born after the introduction of the Race Relations Act 1965. I would like to think that I could pass for someone born after the Race Relations Act 1976 was passed, but public office takes its toll. However, I have been fortunate enough to be able to use my abilities to progress in my chosen field, as have other black, Asian and other minority ethnic groups. Many prominent public figures from those communities, through their talent and effort, and sometimes their unwillingness to accept defeat, have achieved huge success and made a significant contribution to our society—for example, the role models from that most maligned of groups, black men, whom we found through the REACH programme, who now travel across the country, in their own time and for no financial reward, to tell a generation of young men that they too can make it.
It was not always like that. My parents’ generation frequently had to settle for less. Theirs was a generation of migrants, working in factories and textile mills, driving buses or cleaning hospitals, in the hope that the dream of a better life would be there for their children to enjoy. The obvious question is whether they got what they hoped for. In some ways, yes, they did. People from black, Asian and minority ethnic groups are increasingly likely to be in employment and to get good exam results, and they are more likely to go into higher education. We have also seen a sea change in attitudes: there is less casual racism and most people are comfortable with and proud of the multi-ethnic country that Great Britain is today.
There are many success stories, in all walks of life. In the media, the judiciary and—dare I say it?—in politics, in medicine, business, teaching and science, in arts and
in acting, people from ethnic minority backgrounds have done exceedingly well. However, we cannot sit back and tell ourselves that the job is done. For example, black people’s experience of the criminal justice system remains too negative and their representation within it disproportionate. British families of Pakistani and Bengali origin are three times as likely to be on low incomes as white families, and minority ethnic people are still under-represented in institutions such as Parliament. Put simply, too many talented men and women are still being held back from achieving their potential.
The next question to ask is what has been done to tackle the problems. The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 was one of the most far-reaching pieces of equality legislation in the world. One of the fruits of the public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Stephen Lawrence, it has helped to drive a cultural change across the public sector. People now understand why equality is important and that promoting equality is part and parcel of their jobs. The public sector clearly needs to think hard about the needs of everyone.
We have also invested in programmes and policies to respond to the specific needs of black, Asian and minority ethnic groups—for example, through outreach programmes to help economically inactive minority ethnic women into work. Work done by the Department of Health and the NHS will help to address the needs of minority ethnic groups in the mental health system. Those programmes and policies are based on our belief in fairness, not favours.
In education, the most recent GCSE results are hugely encouraging. In 2003, only a third of British pupils of black Caribbean origin achieved five good GCSEs; in 2008, 54 per cent. did so. A few years ago, British children of Bengali origin were among the lowest achievers of any ethnic group; they are now only one percentage point below the national figure.
We find ourselves today in a very different world from that of 1976, or even that of 1996. The world is changing fast. The Government’s work on the wider equality agenda is progressing, with the establishment of the new Equality and Human Rights Commission and an equality Bill to be laid before Parliament shortly.
What are the challenges? Unemployment is still high for many minority ethnic groups, and at board level in most organisations there is still no one who is not white. People from minority ethnic groups often find themselves at less prestigious universities, and too often having a degree is not a guarantee of success in the workplace. Despite significant efforts to reduce disproportionality in the criminal justice system, black people are still several times more likely than others to be stopped and searched or to be imprisoned.
In 2005 we launched the first ever cross-Government race equality strategy, which sought to set out the Government’s approach to race equality. More than 100 specific policy commitments were made. The strategy provided a framework for tackling race inequality, and the regular reporting provided valuable accountability and transparency. The reporting period and the action plan have now come to an end. What has not ended, however, is the need to focus on those important issues.
We are in difficult times economically. What will be the effect of the downturn on minority ethnic groups? Evidence suggests that they suffered more than the
overall population in previous downturns. It is not yet clear whether that will be repeated. For example, will resentment build up among those who are struggling, and will that threaten good relations between different groups, as some fear it will?
The new framework on equality, the economic problems that we face and the end of the reporting period on our old strategy all mean that the time is right to look at our approach to dealing with race inequality. Recently, on the 10th anniversary of the publication of the Macpherson report, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government announced that we are beginning a fundamental reappraisal of where we go from here in our efforts to tackle race inequality.
We have published a discussion document, which can be found on the fantastic DCLG website and which invites views from a wide range of stakeholders—the public, the voluntary sector, local government, businesses and unions. We want to know what people think the Government’s priorities should be, what further practical measures should be taken, and what action can be taken to ensure that the progress that we have made in narrowing gaps is not reversed by the current economic problems. We want to know how to encourage and support more people from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds to become involved in public life.
We also want to engage in the debate on social class and ethnicity. Some people feel that the presence of minority ethnic communities and recent migrants contributes to the problems faced by poor white communities. They feel that we focus on visible minority groups at the expense of disadvantaged white people. The reality is more complex. However, we must acknowledge those genuine concerns and it is important that we explain why our work on equality is needed.
We must also change the terms of the debate somewhat. It is not simply about dividing limited resources among deprived people; it is about making opportunities available to everyone and raising aspirations. Without doubt, being born into a disadvantaged family, whatever one’s ethnicity, makes it much less likely that one will succeed in education and work; one is also more likely to suffer ill health in later life.
The investment that we have made to deal with child poverty, to regenerate neighbourhoods and to improve education and skills for all has made and continues to make a huge difference to the lives of millions. However, I would argue that minority ethnic groups face additional challenges: as well as being much more likely to be poor, and in some cases being disadvantaged by barriers of language, there are other unexplained differences. If we compare like for like—if we take out class, where people live and so on—it can be seen that minority ethnic people do less well. It is that hidden difference, the X factor, that we need to overcome. However, we need to communicate to people the reasons for doing what we do and to show that we take seriously the concerns of those who feel that they are being left behind. That is one of the reasons for consulting on our future approach.
That work does not sit in isolation. Our work on community empowerment will also give people of all races more of a voice. We need to place ever greater power in the hands of communities to enable them to challenge and overcome the problems faced by
disadvantaged people. We want to build strong and positive relationships between people of different backgrounds, including those from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, as well as different faith communities. By focusing on what people have in common, as well as recognising the value of diversity, we can foster a shared vision of the future and a sense of belonging, built upon the strong foundations of equality.
As I have said, over the next few weeks, we will consult with as wide a range of people as possible, through road shows, the internet and other means, to enable us to plan, in an informed manner, our future approach to race equality. I know that hon. Members here will want to take part in that consultation, and I look forward to their contributions, not only in this debate, but to the consultation document.
2.40 pm
Mr. Paul Goodman (Wycombe) (Con): This is the first time that I, too, have had the good fortune to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Bayley. I welcome this debate on future strategy on race equality and, like the Minister, I am delighted at the presence of the other two Front-Bench Members. I also congratulate the Minister on his speech, which contained a minimum—if not none—of the party political nonsense that sometimes obscures debates in this Chamber; I shall try to deal with the issues in exactly the same way. I apologise if I speak for slightly longer than he did, but I shall try not to detain the Chamber for too long.
I shall reflect on my own experience, not as a member of the official Opposition Front-Bench team, but as a constituency Member of Parliament. When I was elected in 2001, the Wycombe Race Equality Council, to whose work I pay tribute, the local district council and other local interest groups were, by and large, focused on important bread-and-butter issues, including homes, schools, jobs and opportunities. However, they were of course also dealing with the effects of discrimination and racism. A few months after my election, 9/11 took place, and since then we have had 7/7 and the attacks on Glasgow airport, which have resulted in a shift of focus. Much discussion in my constituency is now about the threat of violent and more general extremism.
Next week, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is coming to my constituency, which I welcome, and I am sure that she will learn a great deal from the visit. However, the shift in focus suggests that in recent years religion has become a source of potential division, and may have taken the place that race and ethnicity occupied in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s in terms of the fervour of the discussions that it can arouse—we debated some of those issues in this Chamber yesterday. What is true in my constituency is—I think—also true nationally. Since 9/11, the Cantle reports and the disturbances in Oldham, Rochdale and so on, there has been intense focus on integration and cohesion. Commentators have queued up to denounce what could be called the traditional multicultural settlement, including the Chief Rabbi, the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, and George Alagiah, the BBC journalist, who apparently has written an entire book attacking multiculturalism. And then, of course, there is Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
When I was a Conservative student, Trevor Phillips was a member of the left bloc, and it is for others to judge whether, in the years since then, he has ended up to the right of me. However, in some respects, he seems to have developed his views. He has said that the word “multiculturalism” has ceased to be useful in modern Britain—this is the chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission!—and that it suggests separateness. He said bluntly that it is necessary to
“assert a core of Britishness”.
We believe that there is much in that, but it is crucial to recognise that specific communities have specific problems and that the equality agenda remains important, and to ensure that attention to it is not lost in the midst of the focus on the important matters of integration and cohesion. Ultimately, the equality agenda is about raising life chances, as is done through the REACH programme and organisations such as those to which the Minister referred.
I welcome the Government’s consultation document, and I want to consider the position of equality in Britain today. The traditional picture, which still remains in the public consciousness, is that society is a pyramid, at the top of which is an establishment of Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, public-school-educated men—an establishment from which I am disqualified on two grounds. I shall leave it to hon. Members to ascertain which ones. There is some truth in that picture, but it is misleading, to a degree; the Minister alluded to that in his remarks. He was right to say that we have come a long way, but it is worth putting on the record that Trevor Phillips—him, again—said quite recently that Britain is
“by far the best place in Europe to live if you are not white”.
I cannot comment on that particular perspective, but over the years, despite all our difficulties, the vast majority of people in Britain have remained decent, tolerant, hospitable and liberal—in the best sense of the word.
To some degree the traditional pyramid picture, to which I referred, is misleading. To illustrate that, I shall quote some statistics. The group now most likely to achieve five or more GCSE A* to C grades consists of people of Chinese origin. Chinese, Indian and “white Irish” people are now more likely to have degrees than those referred to as “white British” in the 2001 census. The employment rate for Indian men is very close to that for white men. It remains true, of course, as the Minister said and as the Government’s research indicates, that black, Asian and minority ethnic groups are, on the whole, far more likely than other groups to have lower levels of academic achievement, to be unemployed and—this is very important—to be victims of racially motivated incidents.
The picture, however, is mixed. Extremist groups, whether Muslims who hate the kuffar, such as those on the streets of Luton this week, or those aligned with the British National party and preaching hatred of Muslims, are trying to exploit the current economic downturn and recession. The Department’s research into ethnicity and opportunity indicates that class—were they here in large numbers, Labour Members might appreciate this point—is as much a determinant as ethnicity and religion. In support of that assertion, I cite the thorough work of Munira Mirza, from Policy Exchange, in the report, “Living Apart Together”, as well as the Government’s own paper, “Tackling race inequalities”.
Page 22 of the Government report states:
“Research from the Department for Children, Schools and Families suggests that deprivation has a greater impact on pupils’ progress than ethnicity does, and that once factors such as deprivation are controlled, most minority ethnic groups make more progress at school than White British pupils with the same levels of prior attainment and with similar characteristics.”
Research tells us many things, and that is a very interesting element buried in the report. In some respects, however, I found the document very cautious and quite hesitant, the reason for which, I think, is that, understandably, Ministers are trying to balance difficult factors of integration and equality.
Ministers are trying to balance the push towards integration, which suggests that funding and support should be provided without regard for ethnicity, with the needs of equality, which suggest that funding and support should sometimes be provided with regard to ethnicity. I want to set out our view on that very difficult balance and ask some questions of the Minister.
First, I will address the issue of multiculturalism because it has been raised by so many people, including Trevor Phillips. To say that Britain is a multicultural society is a statement of the obvious. In essence, we agree with Trevor Phillips that the balance has gone badly wrong. There needs to be more emphasis on the learning and speaking of English and rather less on the automatic translation of documents. The Government are doing some of that work.
My noble Friend Baroness Neville-Jones suggests—it is not policy yet—that history in schools should be a core subject. Moreover, she suggests that there should be a national holiday on the Queen’s birthday. Therefore, we are interested to hear the Minister’s view on the whole debate of multiculturalism versus integration.
Next, I turn to what might be called Britain’s forgotten communities. I have already referred to the neo-Nazi leadership of the British National party and its attempt to stir up hatred and division in Britain’s communities. It is undoubtedly true that the BNP seeks to exploit poorer white deprived communities. In that context, it is worth quoting some statistics to illustrate the problems with which mainstream political parties must deal if extremists are not to make headway.
According to the DCSF, in 2007, white British children on free school meals performed worse at GCSE than others. Only 6 per cent. of white boys on free school meals go on to higher education. In ethnic minorities—where there is, of course, considerable variation—the figure is 24 per cent.
The Government document, “Tackling race inequalities” refers to such problems. However, the summary of questions in appendix A refers only to black, Asian and ethnic minority groups. It is worth noting that in the document the Government ask whether there is a need for a separate strategy to tackle race equality, which indicates just how cautious and hesitant their approach is.
Let me move on very quickly to the immensely controversial issue of single-group funding that arises when we consider Britain’s forgotten communities. Our view is that, generally, it is better to fund in ways that bring people together rather than in ways that separate them. Single-group funding should not be the norm. It always carries a risk, but one has to look at the whole
picture; in trying to tackle and remove inequalities that hinder people’s life chances, it may sometimes be necessary to have an element of single-group funding. On the whole, though, the presumption should strongly be against it. We are looking closely at that territory, and I shall be interested in hearing the Government’s view.
Finally, I am curious to hear the Minister’s view on the degree to which the whole social justice agenda, on which my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Mr. Duncan Smith) and the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) have worked together so closely, focuses on early intervention and raising the life chances of people from different ethnic groups who find that there are barriers in their way. Moreover, should that early intervention come in the form of improving the home learning environment, tackling family breakdown, working with parents to improve literacy or tackling peer pressure and the anti-learning culture? In our discussions, we have found that the black Churches and others are extremely receptive to the social justice agenda. Indeed, they have been blazing a trail for it over the years, well ahead of the politicians. Again, I welcome this debate and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s response.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |