Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Why Labour struggles to find its voice on race

Party faces challenges to drive its equalities agenda

Why Labour struggles to find its voice on race

HOW ambitious would a Labour government be in office? The party’s scaling back of its flagship green economy investment plan dominated the past week in Westminster. But this was also a week in which it sought to illuminate its plans on racial equality.

Keir Starmer did two things to respond to the Black Lives Matter anti-racism protests in the summer of 2020. He posed with his deputy Angela Rayner, both taking the knee and tweeting out the picture. He also proposed that Labour would introduce a Race Equality Act. The photograph, in his Westminster office, comes over as awkward and clunky. It is now much more likely to be referenced by Starmer’s political opponents than his allies. Rishi Sunak used it as a jibe at Prime Minister’s questions. Yet attacking Starmer for taking the knee contains as much risk as reward for the Conservatives.


Labour’s plan was to unveil the substance of its policy. The commitment was made mainly because a flagship race relations act sounds like the sort of good thing that Labour governments should do.

Governments legislate for many reasons. The King’s Speech can signal that issues matter – hence the proliferation of criminal justice and immigration bills, often banning things that are already illegal.  Anneliese Dodds, the thoughtful shadow equalities secretary, says legislative change will help. Just because it is illegal to discriminate does not mean it is not happening. There are different rules for anti-discrimination claims on the basis of gender, race and disability: the party will consult over competing views of which are most effective.

The jury will remain out on how far the Race Equality Act is intended as a primarily symbolic measure, tidying up and tweaking the legislative framework, or a more substantive change.

LEAD Comment INSET Labour Keir Starmer Angela Rayner CREDIT X Sir Keir Starmer taking the knee with Angela Rayner (Pic credit: Twitter)

Labour’s policy challenge is this. The UK has a strong legislative framework for equality, and the most comprehensive framework for data collection, even if it could be improved further. But significant ethnic disparities remain. Black women have much higher levels of mortality giving birth. Levels of trust and confidence in policing and criminal justice reflect the perception and reality of unequal experiences of key public services.

Labour would make ethnic pay gap reporting mandatory for companies of over 250 people. There are many practical reasons why it will be more complex and challenging than on gender reporting. Gender remains a primarily binary category in aggregate data. Ethnic minorities are a smaller aggregate group, with complex outcomes across different minority groups, further complicated by the demographics of diversity across generations. This is a deliverable reform, but Labour is probably over-invested in how far that might deliver significant changes. Large firms will be able to crunch the data as part of their Equality and Diversity offerings. There is a much bigger gap for medium-sized and smaller companies and charities in how to adopt good practice for recruitment, retention and progression without that type of human resources capacity.

Sunder Katwala Sunder Katwala

The most compelling evidence that there is more to do to achieve race equality in Britain is that the name on your CV still affects how likely you are to get an interview. The Reframing Race initiative found this argument has the strongest public cut through across minority and majority groups. A race equality strategy should put front and centre the constructive solutions to tracking and eliminating this disparity. The EHRC could be given powers to apply the insights from academic ‘mystery shopping’ studies in real time, piloting models – from the civil service and law firms, to construction and supermarkets – for how to track and eliminate this disparity, across the parliament.

Labour did not publish any outline of its plan, beyond briefing some media outlets on some of its proposals. The cancellation of a launch event, later held online, risked further fracturing tense relationships between the party and civic society voices working on race equality within and beyond the party. The abiding impression given by an on-off launch was of race as an issue on which Labour is nervous about its ability to engage with constructive and critical challenges.

There are many reasons why Labour struggles to find its voice on race.  The pattern of outcomes and opportunities has never been more complex, across groups and generations. In an increasingly diverse Britain, Labour faces different challenges within and across different minority groups. The implosion of Labour’s by-election campaign in Rochdale has called into question the depth of Labour’s cultural change on antisemitism, at the same time as it is struggling to maintain fractured trust with British Muslims.

Minority or majority disadvantages are often set up as causes we must choose between, making a social democratic mission of building broad coalitions for mutual solidarity more difficult. There is much more work to do on how a Labour government would integrate a vision of race equality into its national mission to break down barriers to opportunity for all.

More For You

Will government inaction on science, trade & innovation cost the UK its economic future?

The life sciences and science tech sectors more widely continue to see out migration of companies

iStock

Will government inaction on science, trade & innovation cost the UK its economic future?

Dr Nik Kotecha OBE

As the government wrestles with market backlash and deep business concern from early economic decisions, the layers of economic complexity are building.

The Independent reported earlier in January on the government watchdog’s own assessment of the cost of Brexit - something which is still being fully weighed up, but their estimates show that “the economy will take a 15 per cent hit to trade in the long term”. Bloomberg Economics valued the impact to date (in 2023) at £100bn in lost output each year - values and impact which must be read alongside the now over-reported and repetitively stated “black hole” in government finances, being used to rationalise decisions which are already proving damaging.

Keep ReadingShow less
Deep love for laughter

Pooja K

Deep love for laughter

Pooja K

MY JOURNEY with comedy has been deeply intertwined with personal growth, grief, and selfdiscovery. It stems from learning acceptance and gradually rebuilding the self-confidence I had completely lost over the last few years.

After the sudden and tragic loss of my father to Covid, I was overwhelmed with grief and depression. I had just finished recording a video for my YouTube channel when I received the devastating news. That video was part of a comedy series about how people were coping with lockdown in different ways.

Keep ReadingShow less
UK riots

Last summer’s riots demonstrated how misinformation and inflammatory rhetoric, ignited by a tiny minority of extremists, can lead to violence on our streets

Getty Images

‘Events in 2024 have shown that social cohesion cannot be an afterthought’

THE past year was marked by significant global events, and the death and devastation in Ukraine, the Middle East and Sudan – with diplomatic efforts failing to achieve peace – have tested our values.

The involvement of major powers in proxy wars and rising social and economic inequalities have deepened divisions and prolonged suffering, with many losing belief in humanity. The rapid social and political shifts – home and abroad – will continue to challenge our values and resilience in 2025 and beyond.

Keep ReadingShow less
Values, inner apartheid, and diet

The author at Mandela-Gandhi Exhibition, Constitution Hill, Johannesburg, South Africa (December 2024)

Values, inner apartheid, and diet

Dr. Prabodh Mistry

In the UK, local governments have declared a Climate Emergency, but I struggle to see any tangible changes made to address it. Our daily routines remain unchanged, with roads and shops as crowded as ever, and life carrying on as normal with running water and continuous power in our homes. All comforts remain at our fingertips, and more are continually added. If anything, the increasing abundance of comfort is dulling our lives by disconnecting us from nature and meaningful living.

I have just spent a month in South Africa, visiting places where Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela lived, including the jails. They both fought against the Apartheid laws imposed by the white ruling community. However, no oppressor ever grants freedom to the oppressed unless the latter rises to challenge the status quo. This was true in South Africa, just as it was in India. Mahatma Gandhi united the people of India to resist British rule for many years, but it was the threat posed by the Indian army, returning from the Second World War and inspired by the leadership of Subhas Chandra Bose, that ultimately won independence. In South Africa, the threat of violence led by Nelson Mandela officially ended Apartheid in April 1994, when Mandela was sworn in as the country’s first Black president.

Keep ReadingShow less
Singh and Carter were empathic
leaders as well as great humanists’

File photograph of former US president Jimmy Carter with Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh in New Delhi, on October 27, 2006

Singh and Carter were empathic leaders as well as great humanists’

Dinesh Sharma

THE world lost two remarkable leaders last month – the 13th prime minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh, (September 26, 1932-December 26, 2024).and the 39th president of the US, Jimmy Carter (October 1, 1924-December 29, 2024).

We are all mourning their loss in our hearts and minds. Certainly, those of us who still see the world through John Lennon’s rose-coloured glasses will know this marks the end of an era in global politics. Imagine all the people; /Livin’ life in peace; /You may say I’m a dreamer; / But I’m not the only one; /I hope someday you’ll join us;/ And the world will be as one (Imagine, John Lennon, 1971) Both Singh and Carter were authentic leaders and great humanists. While Carter was left of Singh in policy, they were both liberals – Singh was a centrist technocrat with policies that uplifted the poor. They were good and decent human beings, because they upheld a view of human nature that is essentially good, civil, and always thinking of others even in the middle of bitter political rivalries, qualities we need in leaders today as our world seems increasingly fractious, self-absorbed and devolving. Experts claim authentic leadership is driven by:

Keep ReadingShow less