Race relations in Britain change colour

By Hasan Suroor

LONDON, MARCH 27. * A white teacher refuses to send his own child to the school where he teaches because it has ``too many Asians''.

* The Church of England is found by an inquiry commission to be ''rife'' with ``bias'' against ethnic minority worshippers.

* A film-maker of Asian origin is pulled out of his car in London and beaten up for being a ``Paki''.

* Charges of racism continue to dog the investigations into the murder of Stephen Lawrence, a black youth.

* Top positions in British universities are virtually out of bounds for non-white academics.

Is racism raising its head again in Britain? Liberal opinion is clearly embarrassed by these developments but cautions against reading a pattern into them saying these are stray incidents - ``dying embers of racial prejudice'', as a journalist at The Times put it, rather than a return to full-blown racism. In fact, it is stated that race relations in Britain were never better than they are today, and that is perhaps one reason why even minor incidents attract a great deal of media attention.

With the economy doing well and the job market offering more elbow room, foreigners are no longer seen as a threat to domestic job-seekers. In the past, Britain's economic difficulties, plus the Thatcherite agenda which made no allowance for vulnerable groups, generated social tensions which in turn told on race relations with foreigners being looked down upon as predators, poaching on scarce domestic resources.

Another factor was the cultural divide which has been considerably bridged with the arrival of the ``X'' generation on both sides. An Asian or African teenager has a lot more in common with a white teenager today than their parents had. They speak the same language - often with the same accent; share similar tastes (or lack of it) in lifestyle (clothes, entertainment, loads of attitude) and are on a much more common wavelength than the previous generation.

Objectively, the general climate, it is pointed out, is now more conducive to better race relations even without anyone having to try too hard; and this is because the new generation on both sides is more cosmopolitan. The image of a non-English speaking and culturally ``alien'' immigrant community, condemned to live in the ghettos of its own creation and engage in menial jobs, has given way to greater convergence. There are more ethnic faces - and in more respectable positions - on newspapers, television, businesses and the academia than, say 20 years ago; and generally, the level of confidence among ethnic groups is high. They are less likely than their predecessors to turn the other cheek though the conventional wisdom still lies in keeping a low profile.

Yet, the problem remains, and racial prejudice at the individual level is fairly widespread. The case of the white teacher who refused to send his child to an ``Asian-dominated'' school is a case in point. Mr. Richard Smith, who has taught at a school in Luton for 21 years, says there is ``far too much of a bias towards the Asian community'' in the school for his son's good. Most of the children come from Urdu or Bengali-speaking families representing ``areas of considerable disadvantage''.

Mr. Smith who has been suspended for his ``racist'' decision has defended himself saying it was a matter of parental choice. Everyone has the right to send their children to a school of their choice, and he doesn't think the school where he teaches is good enough for his son. Denying he is racist, his wife said: ``He has taught at the school for 21 years. How could he be (racist)?''

The controversy has made media headlines here and there is a view that though Mr. Smith's decision is distasteful it is unfair to project it as racist. According to this view, so long as parents enjoy the right to send their children to a school of their choice, to question Mr. Smith's decision and turn it into a race issue smacks of an insidious sort of political correctness. After all, two years ago the Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, himself invoked the parental choice ``clause'' to send his children to a private school rather than the neighbourhood comprehensive.

Eventually what is significant, it is pointed out, is that the Luton Council moved so quickly to ``punish'' Mr. Smith confirming it is no longer possible to get away with even seemingly ``racist'' attitudes. That there has been no significant public support for him is another indication that people don't want to be seen endorsing racial prejudices. Even those who think he was within his rights to exercise his parental choice feel he should have acted more discretely.

The ``bias'' in the Church against ethnic worshippers is also sought to be explained away saying it is not institutional. (According to a report they have little say in running the affairs even where ``parishes and deaneries are made up mostly of ethnic minorities'' and the clergy is invariably all white. Worse: white worshippers tend to move to other parishes when a congregation in a particular area becomes predominantly black.) An inquiry said it found no evidence of ``intentional discrimination'' but that it did exist at an individual level. Following the report, ethnic worshippers have been asked to offer themselves for election to synod and other bodies.

Admittedly, the colour of the skin still matters but it has lost its xenophobic bite; and being black or brown in Britain is no longer a provocation for others to see red.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : India must not ignore S.E. Asia: Fernandes
Next     : LTTE steps up Jaffna offensive