Skip to main content

sslct022

<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">

<TEI.2><teiHeader>

<fileDesc>

<titleStmt>

<title>Managing race</title></titleStmt>

<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>

<idno>sslct022</idno>

<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any

way</p>

<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>

</publicationStmt>

<sourceDesc>

<recordingStmt>

<recording dur="00:55:35" n="5048">

<date>04/11/1998</date><equipment><p>video</p></equipment>

<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>

</respStmt></recording></recordingStmt></sourceDesc></fileDesc>

<profileDesc>

<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>

</langUsage>

<particDesc>

<person id="nm1166" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="m"><p>nm1166, main speaker, non-student, male</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="m"><p>ss, audience, medium group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="m"><p>sl, all, medium group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="3"><p>number of speakers: 3</p></personGrp>

</particDesc>

<textClass>

<keywords>

<list>

<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">Politics and International Studies</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ss</item>

<item n="partlevel">UG</item>

<item n="module">unknown</item>

</list></keywords>

</textClass>

</profileDesc></teiHeader><text><body>

<u who="nm1166"> in the previous lecture to today we # on British politics we <pause dur="0.3"/> explored <pause dur="0.4"/> # the issue of immigration <pause dur="0.4"/> and saw how immigration was <pause dur="0.2"/> the prism <pause dur="1.2"/> through which <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> the politics of race has played itself out <pause dur="2.6"/> but we also saw how <pause dur="0.4"/> the central importance of immigration didn't just lie in <pause dur="1.1"/> the need to control numbers <pause dur="0.2"/> entering the country per se <pause dur="0.8"/> but was <trunc>m</trunc> more specifically <pause dur="0.9"/> and <pause dur="0.2"/> centrally about <pause dur="0.9"/> establishing a coherent <pause dur="0.5"/> conception of British identity <pause dur="0.3"/> in the post-war context <pause dur="3.9"/> # we also saw how the discourse on immigration <pause dur="1.0"/> # and within that discourse on immigration race <pause dur="0.7"/> was perceived to be a problem <pause dur="0.8"/> from <pause dur="0.4"/> the very start <pause dur="11.0"/> so the importance of immigration <pause dur="0.4"/> is not simply about numbers <pause dur="0.7"/> it has a subsidiary <pause dur="0.4"/> possibly even a primary <pause dur="0.7"/> # purpose that goes beyond that which is in terms of defining <pause dur="0.3"/> the conception of Britishness <pause dur="4.8"/> where numbers does come into play <pause dur="0.4"/> the issue of how many black people <pause dur="0.3"/> live in Britain <pause dur="2.2"/> is with respect to <pause dur="0.3"/> the need to ensure good race relations <pause dur="6.3"/> because much of the

discourse around immigration was premised on the notion that if <pause dur="0.4"/> numbers <pause dur="0.2"/> were limited <pause dur="0.9"/> then one could ensure <pause dur="1.0"/> that race relations <trunc>m</trunc> would remain <pause dur="1.0"/> in some sense good <pause dur="1.3"/> or <pause dur="1.0"/> taking it from the other side <pause dur="0.7"/> if numbers were unlimited <pause dur="0.4"/> then there was a threat <pause dur="0.6"/> to good race relations and stable race relations <pause dur="3.8"/> and that whole notion was premised on the idea <pause dur="2.0"/> that allowing <pause dur="1.7"/> too many people into Britain <pause dur="0.5"/> from the new Commonwealth <pause dur="2.5"/> would cause problems in terms of <pause dur="0.3"/> the ability of British society to assimilate <pause dur="0.3"/> or integrate <pause dur="1.6"/> those numbers <pause dur="5.3"/> and what we see in the post-war period <pause dur="0.4"/> at a time when immigration <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> is <pause dur="0.3"/> the primary discourse <pause dur="0.4"/> is the emergence of a secondary subsidiary discourse <pause dur="0.3"/> around <pause dur="0.5"/> the notion of <pause dur="0.2"/> race relations very specifically <pause dur="2.8"/> and in particular <pause dur="2.3"/> articulated by the question of how <pause dur="0.5"/> to integrate <pause dur="1.6"/> specifically black minority groups <pause dur="0.9"/> into Britain <pause dur="0.6"/> and into a British way of life <pause dur="3.5"/> and as i mentioned last week there were already <pause dur="0.8"/> perceived problems <pause dur="0.4"/> emerging <trunc>betw</trunc> in relations

between blacks and whites in Britain <pause dur="0.3"/> from an early stage <pause dur="1.0"/> whilst they reached their pinnacle <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> in nineteen-fifty-eight <pause dur="0.2"/> in the <pause dur="0.4"/> social unrest in Notting Hill <pause dur="0.5"/> and in Nottingham <pause dur="1.9"/> one should also note that the first <pause dur="0.9"/> acknowledged racist murder in Britain in the post-war period <pause dur="0.7"/> # occurred in nineteen-forty-eight <pause dur="0.6"/> in Camden <pause dur="0.2"/> in London <pause dur="3.9"/> there was also a historical legacy <pause dur="0.6"/> of recognizing the problem of race relations <pause dur="0.5"/> as we saw <pause dur="0.3"/> in last week's lecture <pause dur="0.3"/> in terms of the <pause dur="0.9"/> antagonisms <pause dur="0.3"/> that had existed <pause dur="0.4"/> between <pause dur="0.5"/> earlier minority groups like <pause dur="0.5"/> the Irish <pause dur="0.4"/> and the Jewish <pause dur="0.4"/> communities <pause dur="1.0"/> and the indigenous white community in Britain <pause dur="5.1"/> but the specific issues <pause dur="1.7"/> # around which questions of race relations <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> focused in the post-war period <pause dur="1.9"/> were distributional issues <pause dur="4.2"/> and distributional issues <pause dur="0.4"/> in the context <pause dur="0.3"/> of post-war <pause dur="0.3"/> reconstruction <pause dur="3.1"/> and more specifically <pause dur="1.3"/> it hinged around <pause dur="0.4"/> the idea <pause dur="0.2"/> or the perception <pause dur="0.4"/> and a widespread perception <pause dur="2.2"/> that the arrival of black immigrants into Britain <pause dur="0.4"/> was

threatening the allocations <pause dur="0.6"/> of goods and services <pause dur="0.2"/> and jobs <pause dur="0.7"/> for the indigenous white population <pause dur="11.4"/> those goods and services included immediate welfare provisions <pause dur="2.5"/> but also housing <pause dur="9.6"/> and more directly <pause dur="1.3"/> issues of employment <pause dur="1.1"/> and from a very early stage in Britain and remember we're talking about a context within which there is no <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>legis</trunc> <trunc>l</trunc> legislative redress <pause dur="0.4"/> for <pause dur="1.2"/> ethnic minorities at this stage <pause dur="2.0"/> that from an early stage <pause dur="0.4"/> there were colour bars <pause dur="0.2"/> operating <pause dur="0.7"/> in <pause dur="1.0"/> almost every area of the provision of goods and services and jobs in Britain <pause dur="1.3"/> in every area in the public sector and the private sector <pause dur="0.4"/> they were <pause dur="0.2"/> colour bars that were <pause dur="1.0"/> often explicit <pause dur="4.1"/> and sometimes <pause dur="2.1"/> were more de facto <pause dur="1.4"/> in operation <pause dur="0.6"/> implicitly <pause dur="6.6"/> now unsurprisingly <pause dur="2.5"/> the <pause dur="3.0"/> realities of discrimination in Britain <pause dur="2.4"/> intensified the disaffection of black people <pause dur="0.6"/> who had arrived <pause dur="1.5"/> unsurprisingly <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> black people were not <pause dur="0.7"/> especially <pause dur="2.0"/> enamoured <pause dur="1.1"/> to a situation in which <pause dur="1.0"/> in <pause dur="0.2"/> often incredibly explicit terms they were <pause dur="0.5"/> denied access to

goods services and jobs <pause dur="5.2"/> more especially <pause dur="0.9"/> # there was growing concern within black communities from a very early stage <pause dur="0.6"/> that in the face of <pause dur="1.0"/> that sort of discrimination <pause dur="0.3"/> they were offered no <pause dur="0.5"/> protection under the law <pause dur="5.9"/> now in that context one has on the one side <pause dur="1.9"/> white antagonisms to the black community because of white fears over distributional <pause dur="0.4"/> concerns <pause dur="1.4"/> and on the other side <pause dur="0.3"/> one has <pause dur="0.2"/> disaffection in <pause dur="0.2"/> the black community <pause dur="0.3"/> because of the de facto realities of <pause dur="0.4"/> being discriminated against <pause dur="0.5"/> as a result almost of those concerns within the white community <pause dur="1.9"/> and in that context <pause dur="0.7"/> through the nineteen-fifties and early nineteen-sixties <pause dur="1.7"/> there was an increasingly clear <pause dur="1.0"/> view within <pause dur="0.5"/> the British state <pause dur="1.9"/> that there was <pause dur="0.7"/> an acute danger of social conflict arising out of <pause dur="1.4"/> the problems <pause dur="2.7"/> of black and white relations <pause dur="14.5"/> now <pause dur="0.2"/> even though <pause dur="0.2"/> the problem of <pause dur="0.3"/> race relations <pause dur="0.2"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="0.3"/> as we saw last week <pause dur="0.3"/> # can be traced back to the very <pause dur="0.3"/> earliest stages of post-war black immigration <pause dur="1.2"/> in general <pause dur="0.3"/> despite the acknowledgement <pause dur="0.3"/>

of the problem <pause dur="0.3"/> of race relations <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="1.3"/> the state's attitude in general <pause dur="2.0"/> was to hinge <pause dur="1.8"/> policy <pause dur="0.9"/> attempts at <pause dur="0.8"/> resolving those issues around the one <pause dur="3.9"/> basically hammer-like implementation of policy around immigration <pause dur="0.5"/> immigration control <pause dur="0.7"/> for fifteen-odd years <pause dur="2.8"/> was generally regarded as <pause dur="1.5"/> the only possible way <pause dur="0.3"/> of ensuring good <pause dur="0.2"/> race relations there was effectively no other <pause dur="0.3"/> policy input <pause dur="0.3"/> at the level of the state <pause dur="0.9"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="5.3"/> and it isn't until <pause dur="2.5"/> the mid to late nineteen-sixties <pause dur="0.4"/> that there's any attempt by the state in Britain <pause dur="0.6"/> to actively intervene <pause dur="0.6"/> in tackling <pause dur="0.4"/> discrimination <pause dur="0.4"/> against <pause dur="0.7"/> black <pause dur="0.3"/> British <pause dur="0.4"/> people <pause dur="0.8"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="12.2"/> now in lieu of the state's involvement <pause dur="0.9"/> what sort of protective mechanisms did <pause dur="0.5"/> the black community have <pause dur="2.1"/> well immediately after the Second World War <pause dur="2.2"/> there were various groups and movements <pause dur="1.3"/> that did begin to grow around <pause dur="0.7"/> the issue <pause dur="0.2"/> of immigrant <pause dur="0.3"/> welfare <pause dur="0.8"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="2.4"/> and as i suggested <pause dur="0.2"/> these emerged <pause dur="2.1"/> as a result of <pause dur="1.7"/> an absence of <trunc>s</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> any organized provision in law <pause dur="1.5"/> by the state <pause dur="2.5"/> now the majority of those <pause dur="2.7"/> voluntary

organizations <pause dur="1.0"/> were white led <pause dur="1.2"/> and were <pause dur="0.2"/> philanthropic in nature <pause dur="4.1"/> and their aim <pause dur="0.2"/> was most often <pause dur="1.2"/> to advance the effective integration <pause dur="1.1"/> of black people <pause dur="0.2"/> into <pause dur="0.3"/> the host society <pause dur="1.9"/> and on the whole <pause dur="0.7"/> those voluntary groups didn't receive state support <pause dur="0.4"/> until <pause dur="0.4"/> well into <pause dur="0.4"/> the nineteen-sixties <pause dur="7.5"/> so what causes or what is the impetus for <pause dur="0.8"/> state intervention <pause dur="0.7"/> during the nineteen-sixties <pause dur="4.0"/> well most obviously <pause dur="0.2"/> by the mid-nineteen-sixties there are strict immigration controls <pause dur="0.3"/> in Britain <pause dur="7.1"/> however <pause dur="1.1"/> the problem remains <pause dur="1.2"/> that there are still black people in Britain <pause dur="2.8"/> and the problem remains that those black people are now <pause dur="2.1"/> unless repatriated <pause dur="1.6"/> going to be a permanent feature <pause dur="0.5"/> of British life <pause dur="8.8"/> and in that context <pause dur="0.6"/> and the recognition of the permanent presence <pause dur="0.5"/> in the context of <pause dur="0.2"/> endemic discrimination <pause dur="3.6"/> and in the context of widespread hostility towards <pause dur="0.3"/> that permanent black presence <pause dur="0.4"/> there was increasingly perceived to be a need <pause dur="0.3"/> to actively intervene <pause dur="0.2"/> at this stage <pause dur="8.0"/> there was increasingly a

perception of the need <pause dur="0.6"/> for the state to actively intervene <pause dur="0.5"/> in the relations between blacks and whites in Britain in order to <pause dur="0.5"/> allow for the effective integration <pause dur="1.7"/> of black people <pause dur="0.3"/> into <pause dur="1.0"/> the host society <pause dur="5.2"/> and moreover <pause dur="1.0"/> external <pause dur="2.3"/> events <pause dur="2.9"/> held a double <pause dur="0.2"/> emphasis <pause dur="1.8"/> 'cause of course during the nineteen-sixties and the mid-nineteen-sixties <pause dur="3.0"/> the British public is witnessing <pause dur="1.8"/> some of the most tumultuous events in American society <pause dur="1.5"/> namely the height of <pause dur="0.5"/> the radical <pause dur="0.2"/> end of the civil rights movement <pause dur="8.6"/> it isn't just the laudable claims of Martin Luther King <pause dur="2.1"/> to end discrimination in the South <pause dur="0.8"/> that is being witnessed at this moment <pause dur="1.4"/> but is also <pause dur="1.3"/> a recognition <pause dur="0.7"/> of massive <pause dur="1.0"/> violence and upheaval across the north <pause dur="0.3"/> of <trunc>at</trunc> the United States <pause dur="2.7"/> from around nineteen-sixty-four to sixty-eight <pause dur="2.3"/> the every summer of <pause dur="0.3"/> in the United States there is massive <pause dur="0.3"/> urban unrest <pause dur="1.0"/> massive urban unrest centred around the issue of race <pause dur="6.3"/> that focuses <pause dur="0.4"/> attention <pause dur="1.0"/> and fears and concerns <pause dur="0.6"/> of the British public <pause dur="1.3"/> as for the

possibility of such tensions emerging here <pause dur="0.8"/> and of the necessity to avoid those tensions <pause dur="19.0"/> now in the earliest periods <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> where the state is concerned to intervene in race relations <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> its main <pause dur="0.2"/> concern <pause dur="0.5"/> is to find ways of overcoming <pause dur="0.3"/> differences <pause dur="0.3"/> between immigrant <pause dur="0.4"/> and indigenous populations <pause dur="4.0"/> differences it regards <pause dur="0.3"/> as primarily those of <pause dur="0.4"/> culture <pause dur="0.2"/> and identity <pause dur="1.3"/> and again we can see how that ties in <pause dur="0.4"/> quite centrally <pause dur="0.5"/> to questions of <pause dur="2.3"/> Britishness <pause dur="0.9"/> of what is to be British <pause dur="4.1"/> during this earliest period <pause dur="1.3"/> there is a perception <pause dur="0.6"/> that the only way in which to ensure good <trunc>rel</trunc> race relations <pause dur="0.4"/> is to integrate <pause dur="1.5"/> actively <pause dur="0.5"/> that immigrant population <pause dur="0.5"/> into broader conceptions <pause dur="0.4"/> dominant conceptions <pause dur="0.5"/> of British <pause dur="0.3"/> national <pause dur="0.3"/> life <pause dur="0.3"/> and British <pause dur="0.2"/> national identity <pause dur="9.7"/> now one <pause dur="0.2"/> needs to think through what underlies <pause dur="0.5"/> that sort of <pause dur="0.2"/> conception <pause dur="2.6"/> it is a conception which requires one to think <pause dur="0.4"/> of ways in which black people <pause dur="0.3"/> can be made <pause dur="0.6"/> to fit <pause dur="0.3"/> the model <pause dur="0.7"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> Britishness <pause dur="6.8"/> and as soon as the problem is identified to be one of

difference <pause dur="0.2"/> in culture <pause dur="0.3"/> and identity <pause dur="2.5"/> then the solution to that problem is to find ways of <pause dur="5.8"/> is to find ways of <pause dur="2.3"/> undermining those differences of culture and identity or lessening <pause dur="0.3"/> their problematic nature <pause dur="0.5"/> the view <pause dur="0.5"/> at the time the view <trunc>f</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> <trunc>w</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> during the nineteen-sixties was <pause dur="0.3"/> that those differences of culture and identity were only temporary differences <pause dur="4.5"/> they were temporary differences that could be ironed out <pause dur="0.4"/> of the immigrant population <pause dur="9.6"/> cultural differences <pause dur="2.9"/> could be flattened <pause dur="0.9"/> in a way that would allow for the effective integration of black <pause dur="0.3"/> people into white society <pause dur="0.4"/> linguistic differences <pause dur="0.4"/> were regarded linguistic differences were regarded as a central feature of that <pause dur="0.8"/> one of the major problems between black and white societies was <pause dur="0.5"/> one of language <pause dur="2.9"/> ironing out those sorts of differences would allow for effective integration <pause dur="0.4"/> now <pause dur="0.4"/> it follows pretty obviously if you take that view <pause dur="7.9"/> that the easiest way to pursue integration <pause dur="1.8"/> is to get the black

population to be <pause dur="0.4"/> like the white population <pause dur="2.7"/> to make the cultural significance <pause dur="0.2"/> of the black population <pause dur="0.7"/> less significant <pause dur="10.0"/> and during the nineteen-sixties there were very deliberate attempts to pursue exactly <pause dur="0.8"/> that concern <pause dur="7.7"/> cultural <pause dur="0.6"/> cohesiveness <pause dur="0.2"/> amongst the black population <pause dur="0.9"/> was regarded to be <pause dur="0.4"/> a feature of its concentration in particular areas <pause dur="1.0"/> the fact that the black population was <pause dur="0.2"/> concentrated in certain large cities <pause dur="0.4"/> meant that <pause dur="0.9"/> it was always going to be able to protect a culture that was regarded as <pause dur="0.3"/> problematic <pause dur="4.4"/> therefore <pause dur="0.8"/> a way of overcoming that problem <pause dur="0.2"/> was to distribute <pause dur="0.3"/> the black population <pause dur="1.9"/> deconcentrate <pause dur="1.5"/> the black population <pause dur="1.0"/> in a way in which its cultural identities <pause dur="0.4"/> and cultural bonds <pause dur="0.7"/> would not be able to be maintained <pause dur="10.9"/> the most notorious example of this <pause dur="0.3"/> was a policy pursued by most <pause dur="0.6"/> major <pause dur="0.6"/> metropolitan local authorities <pause dur="0.4"/> throughout this period <pause dur="1.9"/> and it was the active intervention of local authorities to distribute an ethnic minority population <pause dur="3.1"/>

into white society so one got for example in terms of public housing <pause dur="0.6"/> in <pause dur="0.4"/> cities like Manchester and Birmingham <pause dur="0.6"/> the attempt <pause dur="3.3"/> to establish housing ratios <pause dur="0.4"/> of ethnic minorities <pause dur="3.1"/> to deconcentrate ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.4"/> councils would <pause dur="0.8"/> establish a particular ratio that they it regarded as <pause dur="0.3"/> an optimum one <pause dur="1.0"/> for <pause dur="2.7"/> the concentration of black people <pause dur="0.2"/> within white society <pause dur="0.2"/> so in Birmingham for example <pause dur="0.3"/> every <pause dur="1.3"/> every <pause dur="0.3"/> housing estate <pause dur="0.8"/> had a particular ratio inputted on it <pause dur="1.7"/> there would be thirteen white families for every one black family <pause dur="2.8"/> in Manchester the figure was one in i think nine <pause dur="9.0"/> in the education sector <pause dur="0.7"/> ethnic <trunc>ni</trunc> minority <pause dur="0.2"/> children <pause dur="2.5"/> were required <pause dur="5.7"/> to be taught <pause dur="0.3"/> only in English <pause dur="2.8"/> with no move <pause dur="0.4"/> to integrate them slowly into that process <pause dur="0.6"/> the idea was if they were made to speak English they would just be forced to speak English <pause dur="0.5"/> whether they could or not they'd have to learn <pause dur="8.3"/> but these were generally ad hoc measures during this period <pause dur="13.0"/> but they are ad hoc measures <pause dur="1.0"/> that are perceived to be the right

way forward in terms of integrating ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.3"/> and they are a stimulus and a pressure <pause dur="0.3"/> for the state <pause dur="0.4"/> to advance <pause dur="0.2"/> a more coherent <pause dur="0.3"/> and deliberate response <pause dur="1.1"/> in the form <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> race relations <pause dur="0.3"/> protection <pause dur="0.6"/> for ethnic minorities <pause dur="2.7"/> because what is clear <pause dur="2.0"/> is that despite attempts to integrate <pause dur="0.3"/> the black community <pause dur="0.3"/> there is still hostility <pause dur="0.3"/> from the indigenous white population <pause dur="0.3"/> and there is no guarantee <pause dur="0.7"/> of how long it will take <pause dur="0.8"/> <trunc>purs</trunc> pursuing policies like <pause dur="0.2"/> distributing black populations et cetera for them to be <pause dur="1.3"/> integrated effectively into British society <pause dur="0.4"/> there is a recognition that without protection in law <pause dur="0.7"/> the black community in Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> is <pause dur="0.9"/> utterly vulnerable <pause dur="3.3"/> to the prejudices of white society <pause dur="3.5"/> and the attempt by the state <pause dur="0.3"/> to offer black people protection in the law <pause dur="1.6"/> come to fruition <pause dur="0.4"/> in the mid to late nineteen-sixties <pause dur="0.2"/> in the form of the nineteen-sixty-five <pause dur="0.4"/> and nineteen-sixty-eight <pause dur="0.4"/> Race Relations Acts <pause dur="14.9"/> now the nineteen-sixty-five Race Relations Act <pause dur="1.7"/> was to say the least <pause dur="0.6"/>

limited <pause dur="0.5"/> in its effects <pause dur="1.1"/> and even the potential <pause dur="0.3"/> of its effects <pause dur="3.2"/> the nineteen-sixty-five act established no criminal sanction <pause dur="0.7"/> for those guilty of racial discrimination <pause dur="0.9"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="1.3"/> and the Race Relations Board <pause dur="1.8"/> was set up as part of the act <pause dur="0.6"/> to deal with cases <pause dur="1.3"/> of racial discrimination <pause dur="1.2"/> but the Race Relations Board <pause dur="0.3"/> had a very narrow remit <pause dur="2.9"/> and in practice was unable to deal with <pause dur="1.3"/> the vast majority of complaints it initially received <pause dur="0.4"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="2.8"/> the nineteen-sixty-eight act was tougher <pause dur="7.3"/> before detailing some of the aspects of that let's just remember what's going on in nineteen-sixty-eight <pause dur="0.6"/> and this is part of the state's dual strategy <pause dur="0.3"/> with respect to race relations <pause dur="0.3"/> because it isn't just about protecting ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.3"/> it's also still about <pause dur="0.5"/> maintaining <pause dur="0.4"/> that need to be tough on immigration <pause dur="0.4"/> it's about maintaining the need to define <pause dur="0.2"/> absolutely <pause dur="1.2"/> what <pause dur="0.3"/> being British is about <pause dur="1.0"/> because remember in nineteen-sixty-eight <pause dur="1.3"/> there is the perceived flood <pause dur="0.2"/> of Kenyan Asians into

Britain <pause dur="1.4"/> escaping persecution in Kenya <pause dur="4.1"/> nineteen-sixty-eight <pause dur="0.3"/> is <pause dur="0.9"/> the pinnacle moment <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.6"/> Powellism <pause dur="2.2"/> and of the concerns expressed about the presence of ethnic minorities in Britain <pause dur="6.9"/> so the state's response to ethnic <trunc>ni</trunc> minorities is not simply a protective one <pause dur="0.5"/> it's a protective one on one side <pause dur="0.8"/> and a <pause dur="0.5"/> tough <pause dur="1.4"/> uncompromising one on the other <pause dur="3.0"/> the nineteen-sixty-eight Act <pause dur="1.7"/> made it unlawful in explicit terms <pause dur="0.3"/> made it unlawful to discriminate <pause dur="0.2"/> on the grounds of race <pause dur="0.3"/> colour <pause dur="0.2"/> or ethnic <pause dur="0.3"/> or national <pause dur="0.2"/> origin <pause dur="7.6"/> and it specifically highlighted <pause dur="0.6"/> discrimination in the areas of employment <pause dur="0.6"/> and of housing <pause dur="0.6"/> and of the provision <pause dur="0.2"/> of goods <pause dur="0.2"/> and services <pause dur="0.5"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="1.4"/> and the nineteen-sixty-eight act banned <pause dur="0.5"/> discriminatory notices <pause dur="0.3"/> and adverts <pause dur="2.8"/> and it also expanded <pause dur="1.0"/> the remit of the original Race Relations Board <pause dur="0.6"/> offering it firmer <pause dur="0.2"/> legal sanctions <pause dur="5.8"/> so far so good <pause dur="2.9"/> but the problem with both of those acts in nineteen-sixty-five and nineteen-sixty-eight <pause dur="2.1"/> was that <pause dur="0.4"/> they represented <pause dur="0.6"/> a very <pause dur="0.6"/> specific <pause dur="2.2"/> way of

understanding <pause dur="0.8"/> what racial discrimination amounted to <pause dur="5.5"/> in both of those acts <pause dur="1.3"/> racial discrimination <pause dur="0.3"/> was primarily understood <pause dur="0.2"/> in fact <pause dur="0.6"/> that's wrong <trunc>i</trunc> they were exclusively <pause dur="0.7"/> both acts understood racial discrimination <pause dur="0.3"/> to be a matter of active <pause dur="0.8"/> and purposeful <pause dur="0.5"/> discrimination <pause dur="5.4"/> that is to say <pause dur="0.8"/> any attempt to establish that racial discrimination had occurred <pause dur="0.5"/> required one to prove <pause dur="0.3"/> that there had been explicit <pause dur="0.3"/> intention <pause dur="0.2"/> to discriminate <pause dur="0.4"/> against <pause dur="0.3"/> ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.3"/> in some way <pause dur="4.2"/> unsurprisingly <pause dur="3.2"/> under <trunc>n</trunc> <pause dur="1.6"/> either of these acts very few people <pause dur="0.8"/> were successful <pause dur="0.6"/> in making claims <pause dur="2.6"/> and indeed even fewer <pause dur="0.6"/> were particularly successful <pause dur="0.6"/> at prosecuting successfully <pause dur="0.4"/> those initial claims <pause dur="5.5"/> and it's here we can see quite centrally <pause dur="0.3"/> why it's important we understand the nature of race and racism <pause dur="6.1"/> 'cause if we <trunc>u</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> if we understand racism for example <pause dur="0.2"/> in terms of individual activity <pause dur="4.3"/> if we understand racism as identifiable within <pause dur="0.4"/> the locus or the origin of <pause dur="0.4"/> a particular intended activity <pause dur="2.9"/> then of course we

have the advantage <pause dur="1.4"/> of knowing what we're looking at when we're trying to put legal sanction against it <pause dur="0.4"/> if somebody's explicitly saying no i'm a racist i think black people are not as good as white people i'm not going to employ them <pause dur="0.3"/> you know what you're looking at <pause dur="1.0"/> you know that you can say that's against the law you're not allowed to do that <pause dur="2.6"/> the problem though <pause dur="1.0"/> is how much racism is like that <pause dur="15.9"/> because as we discussed earlier <pause dur="0.5"/> in the course <pause dur="1.5"/> if you <pause dur="0.8"/> understand racism in a different way if you understand it in some institutional sense <pause dur="0.4"/> or if you understand it as something <pause dur="0.3"/> systemic rather than <pause dur="0.2"/> something that just <pause dur="0.4"/> happens to be what people believe <pause dur="3.2"/> if you believe that racism is reproduced <pause dur="0.9"/> through operations in the economy <pause dur="0.2"/> and in society <pause dur="0.3"/> and in culture <pause dur="3.8"/> then does it have to be intentional <pause dur="4.7"/> does it have to be about the deliberate <pause dur="0.3"/> actions <pause dur="0.2"/> of a set of individuals <pause dur="0.2"/> who make <pause dur="0.3"/> their <pause dur="0.3"/> deliberate intentions explicit <pause dur="9.7"/> so racism may in fact be something <pause dur="1.3"/> more general <pause dur="5.5"/> and less <pause dur="2.1"/>

deliberate in those ways <pause dur="0.5"/> but then the problem immediately arises <pause dur="0.3"/> as that if that's the case <pause dur="0.5"/> then how do you begin to legislate against it <pause dur="0.9"/> 'cause what are you identifying <pause dur="1.0"/> if you can't find people who are saying i'm being a racist and i'm not going to employ you <pause dur="0.2"/> then what are you looking at <pause dur="7.7"/> moreover how do you begin <pause dur="0.4"/> to conceive of how <pause dur="1.0"/> whatever that racism amounts to at an institutional level how do you begin <pause dur="0.4"/> to understand its relationships with other forms of discrimination <pause dur="0.8"/> gender discrimination <pause dur="2.2"/> discrimination <pause dur="2.3"/> with respect to sexuality <pause dur="7.5"/> at this point are we not moving into the realms <pause dur="0.4"/> of some vague notion <pause dur="0.5"/> that people are just not treated very fairly <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>h</trunc> <trunc>m</trunc> and at that point if we are <pause dur="1.1"/> how do you get any sense of precise legal definition <pause dur="0.4"/> over that <pause dur="1.6"/> that is a core concern for the state <pause dur="1.2"/> during this period <pause dur="7.3"/> but it's the recognition that <pause dur="0.3"/> by focusing on individual explicit intentions <pause dur="1.7"/> it's the recognition that by <pause dur="0.2"/> focusing on that <pause dur="1.9"/> <trunc>th</trunc> <pause dur="0.9"/> there is no effective <pause dur="0.5"/> or <pause dur="0.8"/> particular

legislation aimed at that is not effective in overturning discrimination <pause dur="0.3"/> it's the recognition of that <pause dur="0.2"/> that leads to the state <pause dur="0.5"/> during the nineteen-seventies <pause dur="1.1"/> leads to the state's rethinking <pause dur="0.3"/> of its approaches <pause dur="0.4"/> to race relations <pause dur="1.5"/> which comes together <pause dur="0.4"/> in <pause dur="1.8"/> the codified <pause dur="0.9"/> Race Relations Act of nineteen-<pause dur="0.2"/>seventy-six <pause dur="1.2"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="3.3"/> the Race Relations Act of nineteen-seventy-six follows close on the heels of the Sex Discrimination Act <pause dur="0.3"/> of nineteen-seventy-five <pause dur="1.5"/> and in both cases <pause dur="0.6"/> these were legislation <pause dur="0.5"/> that emphasized <pause dur="0.5"/> not only <pause dur="1.1"/> the illegality of intentional acts of racism <pause dur="1.0"/> but also <pause dur="0.4"/> made illegal <pause dur="2.1"/> those <pause dur="0.8"/> procedures <pause dur="0.2"/> and activities <pause dur="0.3"/> that systemically <pause dur="0.3"/> produced <pause dur="0.6"/> or reproduced <pause dur="0.2"/> discrimination <pause dur="2.3"/> what we otherwise refer to as indirect discrimination <pause dur="3.0"/> and it's in the nineteen-seventy-six Race Relations Act <pause dur="0.5"/> where the emphasis shifts from <pause dur="0.3"/> intentional acts <pause dur="0.6"/> that discriminate <pause dur="0.3"/> in explicit ways <pause dur="2.3"/> to <pause dur="1.5"/> a focus instead on the outcomes <pause dur="0.8"/> of procedures <pause dur="0.4"/> that in practice <pause dur="0.3"/> discriminate <pause dur="0.2"/> whether they <pause dur="0.3"/> explicitly intend

to or not <pause dur="1.6"/> so the focus goes to outcome <pause dur="2.1"/> rather than <pause dur="1.1"/> focusing on <pause dur="0.2"/> intention <pause dur="6.2"/> what that allowed for <pause dur="0.2"/> therefore <pause dur="0.7"/> was that even where policies and procedures <pause dur="0.3"/> were equal in a formal sense <pause dur="5.2"/> what mattered was whether the outcome <pause dur="0.6"/> of those procedures <pause dur="0.8"/> was to discriminate against certain <pause dur="0.3"/> racially designated groups <pause dur="0.6"/> and if they could be shown <pause dur="0.4"/> in their outcomes <pause dur="0.3"/> to discriminate <pause dur="0.2"/> whether they meant to or not <pause dur="0.2"/> whether they explicitly denied that that was the case or not <pause dur="0.8"/> then they were deemed to be illegal <pause dur="5.9"/> that came under the remit <pause dur="0.7"/> of the Commission for Racial Equality <pause dur="2.2"/> which was set up <pause dur="0.4"/> specifically <pause dur="0.3"/> to streamline <pause dur="0.4"/> the administration <pause dur="0.7"/> of <pause dur="0.2"/> this particular area of the law <pause dur="3.8"/> now you can read about <pause dur="2.0"/> the Commission for Racial Equality in your reading i would make a few comments however <pause dur="0.6"/> these are that <pause dur="0.2"/> despite what i think is an enormous shift <pause dur="0.3"/> in emphasis <pause dur="0.3"/> in the race relations <pause dur="1.0"/> perspective <pause dur="1.2"/> on behalf of the state despite <pause dur="0.3"/> that enormous shift in emphasis <pause dur="0.3"/> from <pause dur="0.2"/> intention <pause dur="0.2"/> to outcome <pause dur="1.4"/> the

Commission for Racial Equality in practice <pause dur="2.9"/> has not been <trunc>effec</trunc> as effective as i suspect <pause dur="0.4"/> was once hoped <pause dur="1.4"/> because even today twenty years later <pause dur="0.4"/> what is clear is <pause dur="0.3"/> that its definitions of discrimination <pause dur="0.9"/> and its <pause dur="0.6"/> attempts to impose those definitions in judgements of <pause dur="0.3"/> discrimination claims <pause dur="0.3"/> are still incredibly vague <pause dur="3.0"/> it isn't clear how <pause dur="0.2"/> general definitions of <pause dur="0.8"/> racist outcomes <pause dur="0.2"/> still <pause dur="0.3"/> get <pause dur="0.2"/> put into practice <pause dur="0.3"/> as <pause dur="0.4"/> the criteria for judgement <pause dur="0.7"/> of discrimination cases <pause dur="1.7"/> moreover <pause dur="0.2"/> the Commission for Racial Equality <pause dur="0.7"/> is administratively cumbersome <pause dur="1.5"/> and incredibly time-consuming <pause dur="0.7"/> for those engaged <pause dur="0.3"/> in trying to make claims <pause dur="1.9"/> and further <pause dur="0.5"/> the Commission for Racial Equality <pause dur="0.6"/> does not have <pause dur="0.4"/> a particularly harsh set <pause dur="0.2"/> of sanctions <pause dur="0.3"/> in practice <pause dur="0.2"/> for those it finds guilty of discrimination <pause dur="9.4"/> and the one thing <pause dur="0.6"/> that the Commission for Racial Equality doesn't have <pause dur="0.2"/> in any way at all <pause dur="2.9"/> is any form of <pause dur="0.2"/> positive sanction <pause dur="0.4"/> to reverse <pause dur="0.2"/> what it regards as discrimination <pause dur="0.2"/> it does not have the ability to positively <pause dur="0.3"/>

discriminate <pause dur="0.5"/> to reverse what it regards <pause dur="0.2"/> as discriminatory practices <pause dur="0.3"/> it has the ability <pause dur="0.4"/> to stop <pause dur="0.7"/> discrimination <pause dur="0.5"/> at the moment it finds it <pause dur="0.3"/> but it does not have the sanction <pause dur="0.2"/> of <pause dur="0.3"/> of requiring <pause dur="0.2"/> an employer <pause dur="0.2"/> or the provider of goods and services <pause dur="0.3"/> to actively redress that balance <pause dur="12.4"/> but the nineteen-seventy-six act <pause dur="0.3"/> <trunc>a</trunc> also represented something much <pause dur="0.7"/> more <pause dur="2.9"/> well much less tangible but perhaps more important nevertheless <pause dur="0.4"/> than <pause dur="0.6"/> simply the view <pause dur="1.9"/> of a way in which race relations could be thought of <pause dur="0.6"/> in terms of integrating and assimilating black people <pause dur="0.3"/> about helping black people overcome their problems <pause dur="0.3"/> the nineteen-seventy-six act reflected something <pause dur="0.2"/> very different <pause dur="0.5"/> again in the thinking <pause dur="0.2"/> about race relations more generally <pause dur="0.9"/> because the seventy-six act <pause dur="0.3"/> recognized even in a half-hearted way <pause dur="0.7"/> it nevertheless recognized <pause dur="0.4"/> that conceptions of good race relations <pause dur="0.3"/> could not be premised on the idea of simply <pause dur="0.2"/> needing <pause dur="0.2"/> to assimilate black people into dominant white society <pause dur="3.4"/> it recognized <pause dur="4.0"/> in

very explicit ways in terms of what it regarded as a remit of the Commission for Racial Equality <pause dur="0.6"/> what it regarded as <pause dur="0.2"/> the context within which <pause dur="0.2"/> the nineteen-seventy-six act would take its course <pause dur="3.6"/> it recognized <pause dur="1.7"/> that Britain was <pause dur="0.2"/> explicitly and permanently <pause dur="0.3"/> a multicultural society <pause dur="1.7"/> a pluralistic <pause dur="0.2"/> society <pause dur="7.5"/> and it presupposed that in the context of being a multicultural <pause dur="0.3"/> and pluralistic society <pause dur="3.2"/> Britain <pause dur="3.1"/> would <trunc>r</trunc> <pause dur="0.6"/> or British society <pause dur="0.3"/> would need to include <pause dur="0.3"/> and encourage <pause dur="0.4"/> those people <pause dur="0.2"/> it had previously <pause dur="0.5"/> designated as different <pause dur="1.1"/> in their difference <pause dur="0.7"/> the aim was not now to iron out differences <pause dur="1.1"/> it was about encouraging <pause dur="0.3"/> the positive articulation of those differences <pause dur="1.9"/> in helping to shape in an active way <pause dur="5.2"/> the nature of <pause dur="3.2"/> British public life <pause dur="1.2"/> and British social life <pause dur="10.9"/> now of course the reality <pause dur="0.3"/> despite that rhetoric and despite that recognition <pause dur="0.3"/> the reality was actually quite different <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> in many ways or the reality was <trunc>w</trunc> at least more begrudging <pause dur="1.4"/> than <pause dur="0.2"/> that rhetoric would presuppose <pause dur="3.7"/> because

of course during the nineteen-seventies there were further restrictions <pause dur="0.4"/> placed on <pause dur="1.5"/> black immigration into Britain <pause dur="1.1"/> again sending out a rather different message about <pause dur="0.9"/> the nature of that pluralism <pause dur="0.2"/> the nature of that multiculturalism <pause dur="0.3"/> the nature of the boundaries that were being drawn around British identity <pause dur="4.9"/> nevertheless there was something pragmatic <pause dur="0.3"/> in this approach <pause dur="0.5"/> in regarding Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> as multicultural <pause dur="0.4"/> in regarding Britain <pause dur="0.2"/> as pluralistic <pause dur="0.7"/> the pragmatics of this were <pause dur="0.2"/> that it simply was not possible <pause dur="0.4"/> to look at British society and pretend there weren't black people there <pause dur="1.2"/> and to pretend that those black people suddenly become white <pause dur="0.5"/> culturally <pause dur="1.2"/> or become white in their identifications <pause dur="3.4"/> politically and socially <pause dur="2.4"/> there was a recognition that there was <pause dur="0.3"/> there were differences <pause dur="0.8"/> that were important differences <pause dur="0.2"/> that couldn't be <pause dur="0.3"/> whitewashed <pause dur="10.6"/> and that black <pause dur="0.5"/> communities in Britain would not <pause dur="0.6"/> take an active participatory role in British life <pause dur="0.4"/> unless <pause dur="1.0"/> those

differences were acknowledged in some sort of positive way <pause dur="1.4"/> now the nineteen-seventy-six act was <pause dur="0.7"/> the last major <pause dur="0.5"/> state inspired <pause dur="0.4"/> initiative <pause dur="0.3"/> in this area <pause dur="0.4"/> twenty years later <pause dur="0.9"/> more than twenty years later <pause dur="2.0"/> there has been no <pause dur="0.4"/> state <pause dur="0.5"/> legislation <pause dur="0.9"/> at the national level <pause dur="0.9"/> in the area of race <pause dur="0.3"/> relations <pause dur="5.3"/> for the most part therefore for the last twenty years <pause dur="0.3"/> it hasn't been at the national level <pause dur="0.3"/> where the issue of race relations has for the most part played itself out <pause dur="2.1"/> over the last twenty years the main focus for <pause dur="0.2"/> debate <pause dur="0.3"/> and <pause dur="2.5"/> moves forwards and <trunc>r</trunc> regressive moves backwards in this area <pause dur="0.2"/> have almost entirely been <pause dur="0.2"/> played out at the local level <pause dur="2.0"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/> now of course the local level is important because the local level is exactly <pause dur="0.3"/> where the politics of race and racism get played out <pause dur="1.7"/> it's exactly at the local level <pause dur="0.2"/> that we see notions of community coming together <pause dur="0.5"/> it's exactly at the <trunc>losh</trunc> local level <pause dur="0.2"/> that we see <pause dur="0.2"/> the importance of the identities those communities <pause dur="0.2"/> assume <pause dur="1.1"/> <unclear>i mean</unclear>

you're thinking of <unclear>it in</unclear> thinking of it in the most simple terms <pause dur="0.3"/> it's at the local level that we think about <pause dur="0.2"/> what <pause dur="0.8"/> our neighbourhoods are like <pause dur="0.2"/> it's at the local level <pause dur="0.4"/> we think <pause dur="0.2"/> in the most explicit terms <pause dur="0.2"/> about who our neighbours are <pause dur="2.7"/> and it's at the local level <pause dur="0.9"/> that we will <pause dur="0.4"/> # or we have seen <pause dur="0.3"/> that those tensions operate <pause dur="0.5"/> those tensions operated in Notting Hill <pause dur="0.2"/> because Notting Hill was a local area where there were black people <pause dur="0.2"/> living in antagonistic relationship to white people on the ground <pause dur="1.9"/> it was at the local level <pause dur="1.4"/> that Peter Griffiths in Smethwick <pause dur="0.5"/> in the <trunc>mi</trunc> mid-nineteen-sixties <pause dur="0.2"/> could make his appeal <pause dur="0.6"/> about <pause dur="1.4"/> <trunc>h</trunc> if you want a nigger neighbour vote Labour <pause dur="0.4"/> because it was at the local level <pause dur="0.9"/> that the politics of race <pause dur="0.6"/> was articulated in such a frenzy <pause dur="0.4"/> and such <pause dur="0.6"/> intensity <pause dur="1.2"/> during the sixties and seventies <pause dur="6.8"/> local authorities <pause dur="1.5"/> became actively involved in the process <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.7"/> intervening in race relations at the local level <pause dur="2.9"/> after <pause dur="0.4"/> and very much <pause dur="0.6"/> as a direct

consequence <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="0.6"/> the urban unrest in the nineteen-eighties <pause dur="2.5"/> the most violent and frightening <pause dur="0.4"/> manifestation <pause dur="0.2"/> of local antagonisms <pause dur="0.3"/> between blacks and whites <pause dur="6.5"/> it's in this context <pause dur="0.4"/> the first <pause dur="0.7"/> deliberate <pause dur="1.3"/> and actively empowering moment <pause dur="0.4"/> in black political life as i will argue later in the course <pause dur="1.1"/> it's at this very moment that the black community begins to exert pressure <pause dur="0.3"/> on <pause dur="0.4"/> local authorities <pause dur="1.2"/> to address problems <pause dur="0.6"/> that are not being addressed effectively at the national level <pause dur="0.4"/> of <pause dur="1.0"/> discrimination in employment in housing in service provisions <pause dur="0.3"/> in education <pause dur="0.2"/> in the social services et cetera et cetera <pause dur="2.5"/> and it's here we see the shift <pause dur="3.2"/> from a national level recognition of the multicultural society <pause dur="0.6"/> to a a rather different emphasis at the local level <pause dur="0.3"/> towards anti-racism <pause dur="2.3"/> here it's not simply about <pause dur="0.3"/> Britain's a multicultural society <pause dur="0.2"/> lots of different groups <pause dur="0.6"/> live together in we're going to try and make it harmonious this is about addressing <pause dur="0.3"/> the specific problem of racism <pause dur="13.2"/>

and as a consequence of the idea <pause dur="0.2"/> that what needed to be addressed here was not <pause dur="0.2"/> simply how to make <pause dur="0.3"/> life for black people in Britain harmonious how to make race relations harmonious <pause dur="0.3"/> but was actually about actively intervening <pause dur="2.0"/> to address the problem of racism <pause dur="3.3"/> the consequence of that realization <pause dur="0.6"/> was the <pause dur="0.5"/> emergence of a number of initiatives that were <pause dur="0.4"/> pursued by local authorities across the country <pause dur="1.4"/> these included <pause dur="0.4"/> the active monitoring of outcomes <pause dur="0.7"/> of service provisions <pause dur="0.7"/> in order to identify <pause dur="0.3"/> discrimination <pause dur="1.3"/> councils would increasingly monitor <pause dur="0.6"/> their services <pause dur="0.3"/> to see whether there were differential benefits going to one group or another <pause dur="1.9"/> there was also an <pause dur="0.3"/> active <pause dur="0.7"/> pursuit <pause dur="1.0"/> of more ethnic minority recruitment <pause dur="0.5"/> within local authorities <pause dur="0.3"/> whether they be teachers <pause dur="0.3"/> or local authority council workers <pause dur="0.4"/> of whatever sort <pause dur="0.7"/> or council officials themselves <pause dur="1.1"/> and moreover <pause dur="0.2"/> large numbers of authorities <pause dur="0.2"/> took the initiative <pause dur="0.2"/> in trying <pause dur="0.3"/> to consult <pause dur="0.5"/> in a much more <pause dur="1.1"/> friendly manner <pause dur="0.2"/> with the

ethnic minority communities <pause dur="0.7"/> and these ranged with all sorts of # <pause dur="0.9"/> initiatives but the most obvious one now is that almost every local authority in Britain now <pause dur="0.4"/> has translation services for all of its <pause dur="0.9"/> information <pause dur="0.2"/> i mean just a little example <pause dur="0.6"/> that's now <pause dur="2.0"/> a standard practice <pause dur="0.3"/> now all of that those sorts of policies were initiated by <pause dur="0.2"/> and were led <pause dur="0.7"/> by <pause dur="0.4"/> radical left <pause dur="0.2"/> local authorities during the nineteen-eighties <pause dur="0.6"/> authorities like Haringay <pause dur="1.7"/> in London Brent in London <pause dur="1.1"/> Manchester City Council Liverpool City Council <pause dur="2.7"/> now we all of course know <pause dur="0.2"/> that it was exactly those same authorities during the nineteen-eighties <pause dur="0.3"/> that were vilified at the national level <pause dur="0.3"/> in the press <pause dur="0.2"/> and by political parties <pause dur="0.2"/> as being <pause dur="0.3"/> the loony left <pause dur="8.8"/> the intense media focus <pause dur="0.3"/> on this these groups <pause dur="0.2"/> of local authorities <pause dur="0.2"/> focused absolutely centrally <pause dur="0.4"/> on the question of what they were doing for our ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.4"/> the whole discourse was pitched in terms of special treatment <pause dur="0.3"/> for ethnic minorities <pause dur="0.2"/> some of you may

recall or will have read about <pause dur="0.8"/> the apparent bans on things like golliwogs in <pause dur="0.2"/> nursery schools <pause dur="7.1"/> all of this stuff became equally pitched in terms of <pause dur="0.6"/> the overt <pause dur="0.2"/> and unnecessary and debilitating consequences of political correctness <pause dur="4.9"/> where in education <pause dur="0.8"/> authorities like the London <pause dur="0.2"/> Inner London Education Authority <pause dur="0.3"/> began to promote <pause dur="0.7"/> explicitly anti-racist curricula <pause dur="1.6"/> they were accused of brainwashing children <pause dur="5.7"/> we will remember that there were active pursuits of policies around <pause dur="0.2"/> adoption <pause dur="1.3"/> where local authorities would try and encourage <pause dur="0.2"/> same race adoptions <pause dur="2.1"/> this again was regarded <pause dur="0.7"/> not only <pause dur="0.2"/> as political correctness gone too far <pause dur="0.4"/> but actually reverse discrimination <pause dur="1.1"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="4.1"/> a central focus of <pause dur="0.2"/> local authority work <pause dur="0.7"/> in this area became <pause dur="1.0"/> contract compliance <pause dur="0.7"/> local authorities would put their contracts out to tender <pause dur="0.5"/> but would require <pause dur="0.6"/> that <pause dur="0.6"/> any company <pause dur="0.2"/> employed by the council <pause dur="0.2"/> would have to meet certain requirements with regards <pause dur="0.3"/> to ethnic minority representation and treatment <pause dur="2.3"/> that <pause dur="0.2"/>

measure <pause dur="1.0"/> was attacked <pause dur="0.4"/> by <pause dur="0.6"/> the Conservative government at the time <pause dur="0.2"/> Margaret Thatcher explicitly accused these councils <pause dur="0.4"/> of interfering with the market mechanism <pause dur="1.6"/> imposing unreasonable demands on what would otherwise be a free market <pause dur="2.2"/> and perhaps <pause dur="0.5"/> the most controversial of all <pause dur="0.5"/> of those local authority initiatives <pause dur="0.4"/> was what was regarded <pause dur="0.2"/> or was # <pause dur="0.2"/> commonly <pause dur="0.7"/> # called <pause dur="0.3"/> race awareness training <pause dur="0.7"/><vocal desc="sniff" iterated="n"/><pause dur="2.3"/> race awareness training <pause dur="0.4"/> initiatives <pause dur="0.4"/> were essentially <pause dur="1.9"/> promoting <pause dur="0.5"/> the idea that <pause dur="0.5"/> if one could change people's views on race <pause dur="1.4"/> at the local level <pause dur="0.2"/> if one could <pause dur="0.2"/> challenge existing prejudices <pause dur="3.3"/> then perhaps one could get some institutional <pause dur="0.4"/> cultural change <pause dur="0.5"/> in <pause dur="0.5"/> prevailing racist ideas <pause dur="0.7"/> at the local level <pause dur="2.5"/> now again race awareness training <pause dur="0.2"/> was regarded <pause dur="0.4"/> by the right as brainwashing <pause dur="2.9"/> again <pause dur="1.2"/> not again <pause dur="2.1"/> ironically <pause dur="0.5"/> race awareness training was attacked from the left <pause dur="1.0"/> as <pause dur="0.5"/> emphasizing <pause dur="2.4"/> or misemphasizing <pause dur="1.5"/> individual activity <pause dur="0.6"/> when you should have been emphasizing <pause dur="0.2"/> institutional <pause dur="0.8"/> results <pause dur="5.3"/> and race awareness training

really was the pinnacle moment <pause dur="0.4"/> of this whole process <pause dur="0.4"/> it was the point where local authorities <pause dur="0.2"/> actively got involved <pause dur="0.3"/> to try and change people's minds about race <pause dur="4.6"/> and there's nothing obviously good about that <pause dur="1.6"/> and in the practice of race awareness training some of you may even have gone through it <pause dur="2.4"/> the realities of race awareness training are <pause dur="0.5"/> that it is <pause dur="0.4"/> in effect in its practice <pause dur="0.2"/> was bullying <pause dur="1.3"/> in effect local authorities did not reach a moment where they could genuinely say <pause dur="0.5"/> that they were introducing some cultural change <pause dur="0.3"/> into the organized institutions of local <pause dur="0.3"/> politics in Britain <pause dur="10.8"/> that is the management of race in Britain <pause dur="1.4"/> in its most significant forms <pause dur="1.6"/> what we see today in terms of the sensitivities <pause dur="0.2"/> that we may acknowledge that councils have <pause dur="0.5"/> that we may acknowledge in terms of employers' <pause dur="0.8"/> commitments to <pause dur="0.2"/> some level of equal opportunities <pause dur="0.3"/> have come through that history <pause dur="0.6"/> we'll explore the <pause dur="0.4"/> more recent developments of that in the next lecture

</u></body>

</text></TEI.2>