X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Coffee House

Labour’s mixed up views on race and diversity are driving voters away

31 May 2014

1:28 PM

31 May 2014

1:28 PM

In the past few weeks, Sadiq Khan has made a couple of interventions that show how hopelessly confused the Labour Party is on issues of race and diversity – and Ukip looms large in the background.

First up, a couple of weeks ago, Khan made a Labour’s pitch ethnic minority votes in a speech to Operation Black Vote. He said:

‘The fact is that if you are black or Asian in Britain today: you are significantly more likely to be unemployed. You will earn less and you will live a shorter life than your white neighbours.’

Invoking Policy Exchange’s recent ‘Portrait of Modern Britain’ report, he added:

Entire racial groups are significantly poorer, have lower educational achievements and worse life chances than their [white] neighbours’.

Leaving aside the strange claim that whole races are much worse off than any white people they may live next to, this sort of language seems somewhat…divisive. Khan went on to point out how people of Bangladeshi or Pakistani descent are twice as likely to be on the Minimum Wage as – again that phrase – ‘their white neighbours’, adding that these stats show ‘an injustice that causes untold economic and social damage to our country’ and outlining a number of measures of positive discrimination to follow under a Labour government.

[Alt-Text]


You can imagine the howls of protest if these categories were reversed, and white people were highlighted as being much worse off than neighbours of another racial group. Beyond that, the idea of favouring white-skinned over dark-skinned people would be to jump straight into BNP territory.

But the idea that great injustice is being committed, based on a dubious reading of numbers wrenched from all context (like language skills), means that racial favouritism in areas like the civil service, judiciary and business, is precisely what Labour plans to implement.

After the European elections we saw a very different intervention from Khan: an open letter sent to the Express addressed at UKIP supporters.

In this, he said:

In the past, we were too quick to dismiss concerns about immigration, or even worse – accused people of prejudice… We all remember Gillian Duffy. We were wrong. We are sorry.’

Khan then ran through Labour’s list of pretty sensible but limited interventions, on the need for immigrants to learn English, not send child benefit out of the country, and for employers to actually pay the minimum wage and train local workers if they hire from outside.

These are all welcome, but the point remains that Labour does play racial politics, and does it at a time when such favouritism looks increasingly anachronistic.

Ed Miliband and his colleagues speak in hushed tones about how they understand the concerns of UKIP voters, but meanwhile Labour is promoting a ‘fightback’ campaign: ‘UKIP doesn’t speak for me. I’m fighting back’. Miliband seeks to promote Labour as a ‘One Nation’ party, but then Tessa Jowell, one of its most liked and respected figures, boasts after the local elections that ‘these results show London to be an open, tolerant and diverse city’ – in contrast to the rest of the country.

These mixed up messages reflect how Labour hasn’t come to terms with where its identity politics naturally leads. When you show preference to some groups, you shouldn’t be surprised when the others turn away.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close