However we should not let that one statement overshadow the rest of his argument, because the rest of it is utterly retarded too:
Since making its extraordinary pact in May, the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition has pronounced on many things - money woes, scroungers, bloated and lazy public servants, military mess - but it has said nothing about race and racial integration. The Labour opposition, meanwhile, has been preoccupied with integration problems of its own.Yes it is almost as though wars in Afghanistan & Iraq and economic disarray are more important than racial bean counting.
The silence is loud and widespread. Apart from Yasmin Alibhai-Brown's proclamation that diversity was part of the strength that helped London get through the 7 July 2005 bombings and their aftermath (which it was),So just think how non-diverse London fell apart during the Blitz....
and some odd mutterings in the press about whether or not it is anti-Semitic to claim that some residents of the Jewish enclaves of north London can be rude, race has disappeared not only off the government's agenda, but out of the public discourse, too.This is within a month of the government blocking an EDL march in Bradford on the grounds that is racially sensitive.
Concern has been expressed that the coalition's cuts to public spending will hit the poor and women hardestThe famous parody of a New York Times headline springs to mind "World to End: Women, Minorities Hardest Hit".
what seems to have been missed is that these cuts will have just as disproportionately adverse an effect on minority groups.So presumably minority groups were benefiting disproportionately from spending previously. Don't get me wrong I understand the concern and no doubt London's Brazilian community need spending cuts like a hole in the head but when you cut spending the people who get money spent on them tend to lose out.
Are the Muslim communities that were so alienated by the difficult choices made in counterterrorism policy suddenly going to forget all about it and become cheerful?I think the absence of a publicity hungry Met Chief will make everyone happier about counter terrorism policy.
And how could London's Conservative-run Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) announce recently that the Met is no longer affected by institutional racism?Presumably because they believe this to be the case. Given that "institutional racism" didn't require any evidence of its existence in the first place I don't see how evidence of its absence could be provided.
I believe that the MPA was wrong to do so. The Met is, without doubt, still affected by institutional racism,Plainly it is not "without doubt" as he has just stated that the MPA doubts it.
as are almost all British institutions, and will be for years to come.What exactly is the evidence for this, because if he provided a definition of "institutional racism" that could be tested then maybe I would believe him. Without a standard to measure against it is an unfalsifiable statement.
In less regulated markets, with more opportunities for lateral entry, the question should perhaps be asked even more fiercely. Just how many black editors and journalists, FTSE-100 CEOs, think-tank chairs and hospital bosses are there? How many black judges and QCs? Or government ministers, not to mention MPs?Statistical disparities are not evidence of discrimination. The statistical over reprepresentation of Asians in the medical profession is not because whites are discrimintated against, nor the over representation of Blacks among professional footballer. Groups with very different histories and cultures tend to behave differently amazingly enough.
The answer in each case is some, but not many. Institutional racism may have diminished but it is still alive and kicking. Opportunities for citizens from ethnic minorities have improved, but they are not equal to others'.Yet amazingly some ethnic minority groups have higher income and educational levels than the majority group.
There are at least more minority members of the Lords than the Commons because, wisely, they can be appointed there.)Says the appointed member of the House of Lords
I am getting bored now because brevity is not one of Lord Blair's strengths so I will skip down to the bottom (so to speak):
Do we think it has all been solved? When the next attack by individuals inspired by a perverted view of Islam is successful, will voices be raised in defence of a minority not yet fully reconciled with a British state?I hope so, but I can't help but feeling that in planning for that hypothetical circumstance he is concentrating on the less important issue....
Will British citizens of Pakistani descent not be bothered by the apparent unwillingness of people around the world to respond to calls for aid for the flood-stricken Asian country?Actually donations have picked up a fair bit but in any case I am sure that that those most familiar with Pakistan will be most familiar with why people are reluctant to donate.
It may seem strange to some that this is being written by an ex-police officer. But surrounded by the silence of others, and following conversations with friends, former colleagues and even perfect strangers from black and minority communities, I have concluded that it is perhaps best for these questions to be coming from an unexpected direction.
Unexpected? Given the trajectory of your career and priorities shown up until now this is exactly what I expect of him.
Anyone who wants to make a claim about racism should be obliged to state what they consider proof of racism and how an accusation of racism could be falsified.