Simon Darby, the BNP’s media spokesman, spoke to The University Times about his party’s connections with Ireland ahead of Nick Griffin MEP’s visit to the College in October.
Mr. Darby highlighted the “great deal of concern” he felt existed in Ireland at the moment over the issue of immigration. The number of recent radio interviews Nick Griffin had done with Irish broadcasters, he said, evidenced “the interest the Irish people have in the issue”.
He was also keen to point out the “considerable amount of people of Irish extraction” who had voted for Nick Griffin in the recent European elections. Mr. Griffin MEP represents the North-West England constituency, which includes Manchester and Liverpool, two towns with long-standing connections to Ireland. Mr. Griffin finished fifth in 2009’s election, behind Britain’s three largest parties and a UKIP candidate, polling 8% of the vote.
The BNP have traditionally included the Irish among their classification of the “indigenous British”. In an interview with the BBC in May of 2010 Mr. Griffin said, “We are certainly not going to shut the doors to the Irish, because the Irish, as far as we are concerned, are part of Britain and fully entitled to come here.”
This drew a rebuke from Jennie McShannon, chief executive of the Federation of Irish Societies in Britain. “We do not recognise the portrait of ‘White Britain’ painted by the British National Party,” she said. “When the Irish arrived in Britain in the 1950s alongside immigrants from the West Indies, we were met by boarding house signs reading ‘No Irish, No Blacks, No dogs’. The racism stirred up by Nick Griffin’s predecessors created a climate of fear with lasting damage to the physical and mental health of both communities. In today’s Britain, we recognise the contribution of generations of migrants to the diversity of our shared culture. As Irish people we wish to be included and our Irishness celebrated, and so, too, we extend this support to other communities.”
Mr. Darby was keen to clarify the BNP’s position on the ethnicity of the Irish, saying that they “did not regard them as British as such.” He also sought to tackle the “quasi-imperialist” impression he felt had been given by the reporting of the BNP’s suggestion that Ireland be re-incorporated into a union with Britain.
“We don’t want British rule in Ireland. What we mean is a loose federation, a loose collection. It would be rather like an emasculated version of the European Union, but just for the British Isles.”
Speaking about the possibility of the BNP hosting a rally in Ireland or seeking to make contact with similarly minded Irish political groups Mr. Darby said that this was “another matter” that was best “not confused” with the debate.
“We are aware of the existence of a number of groups. But there simply isn’t anything tangible there at the moment. There is nothing I would like to see more than an Irish National Party representing the interests of the Irish people.”
The University Times
Showing posts with label diversity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label diversity. Show all posts
September 21, 2011
June 28, 2011
A proudly diverse nation
This article was submitted by one of our readers, Daniel Pitt. We welcome any contributions from our supporters (as long as those contributions conform to the law and are in reasonably good taste). Please send your articles to us via email.
Britain is a land built by migrants. After all, there was no one inhabiting these islands 50,000 years ago, and for most of human history there were no international borders. The emergence of the modern British nation state and the advent of a global economy brought with it the movement of capital in search of profit and the movement of people in search of work. Britain, home of the industrial revolution, saw successive waves of immigration from the 19th century onwards. It was driven by the needs of capitalists to find an adequate supply of workers. However, from the beginning, the capitalist class also grasped that the migration of cheap labour into the country provided them with a ready mechanism for dividing working people.. This was not automatic; it depended on an invented common identity of Britishness, which offered a false sense of solidarity between workers and bosses, while dividing native born from “foreign workers”. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the treatment of Irish workers who came to Britain in the 19th century to work on the canals and railways. They were forced to leave their homes—much like Roma people in Slovakia today—because of impoverishment or oppression, and usually both.
Our rulers have always tried to sow divisions among workers but there is a powerful history of class solidarity.The next time you walk down a canal towpath or ride a train think of the thousands of Irish labourers—the navvies—who died building the infrastructure of the industrial revolution, housed in the most squalid living conditions imaginable. Textile mill bosses also imported Irish workers. Initially this was often to use them as strikebreakers. In situations of sharpened competition in the labour market among low-skilled workers, it is not difficult to see how tensions arose. Karl Marx observed the process and got straight to the heart of the matter: “Every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps… The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standards of life. In relation to the Irish worker he feels himself a member of the ruling nation and so turns himself into a tool of the aristocrats and capitalists of his own country against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself.” Marx went on to explain how this antagonism was kept alive by “the press, the pulpit and the comic papers” in much the same way that the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express do today, with their relentless attacks on migrants and Muslims. But there was another process cutting aganist the divisions between workers. The bringing together of workers in the factory system created a need for unity against the common enemy exploiting their labour. Despite the best efforts of the capitalists to stoke racism, the impulse to class solidarity was often stronger. Many leading members of the Chartists, Britain’s first mass workers’ movement in the mid 19th century, came from the ranks of Irish labourers. Class fighters such as Feargus O’Connor and James Bronterre O’Brien led British workers into struggle, as did other “foreign” workers like the black Chartist organiser William Cuffay. Unfortunately the Chartists were defeated, and racist ideas were able to fester.
The New Unionism of the 1880s brought a new wave of Irish activists into politics. Ireland was officially part of Britain at this time so there was no issue of immigration controls—it was the availability of work not controls that adjusted the flow. At the end of the 19th century millions of Jews from the economically undeveloped parts of eastern Europe fled poverty and persecution. State-sponsored anti-semitic pogroms killed thousands of Jews in Russia and Poland. Three million largely poor Jews migrated to the US and perhaps a quarter of a million to Britain. Ruling class figures responded with racism. Tory MP William Evans Gordon said in parliament in 1902, “Not a day passes but English families are ruthlessly turned out to make room for foreign invaders.” This racism paved the way for the Aliens Act of 1905, the first to limit immigration and which defined some groups of migrants as “undesirable”. It made it easier for racists to argue that Jewish people were a problem in British society - however, Jewish workers came together with other sections of the working class. In the 1930s fascist attempts to turn “native” Britons against Jews were defeated on the streets. The long economic boom after the Second World War saw capitalists respond to increasing demand for labour by again looking to workers from overseas.
This time they looked further afield in the British Empire—to the Caribbean and the Indian subcontinent—for workers to plug the shortages in areas such as public transport and the hospitals. Black people soon found that the land of opportunity was also a land of racism. Some landlords and pubs in places like London and Birmingham put up signs saying, “No blacks, no Irish, no dogs”. But socialists and trade unionists organised reception committees to welcome the new workers and to help them settle in. However there was no automatic unity among the oppressed. Some established migrants, who had become assimilated into British society, came to view more recent immigrants as outsiders, and at times as a threat.
Some British people of Irish backgrounds could be among the most antagonistic towards Black people, seeing their own “whiteness” as making them superior to African-Caribbeans. Post-war Britain’s open door policy wasn’t to last as the boom ebbed and turn into crisis towards the end 1960s. The Tory politician Enoch Powell who had once implored Jamaicans and others to come to find work in the “mother country”, now scapegoated black and Asian immigrants for the mounting problems faced by a British economy in decline. This was even though many so-called immigrants were in fact born in the country. The 1971 Immigration Act brought a shuddering halt to “primary” immigration to Britain. Future migrants would be the dependants of those already here and not new workers. But the rising racism, especially in the mid 1970s, led to a powerful anti-racist response that reached a crescendo with the formation of the Anti Nazi League (ANL). The ANL drove the predecessors of the Nazi British National Party (BNP), the National Front, off our streets. Today asylum seekers, living in forced destitution, are blamed for “ruining areas” and bringing crime. Or in the case of “economic migrants”, like those from new European Union countries in eastern Europe like the Irish before them, lowering wages.
It can sometimes appear easier to kick the “foreign” worker next to you, especially during times of low class struggle, such as after the defeat of the Chartists in the 19th century. Equally however, during times of rising struggle, divisions are overcome time and time again. A key task of socialists today is to harness that class solidarity to fight both against the bosses and in defence of the rights of all working people, regardless of spurious notions of nation and race. Socialists must act as “tribunes of the oppressed”, as the Russian revolutionary Lenin put it. We must oppose all racism and bigotry. Today that means standing up against Islamophobia and racism, and breaking the back of the organisations these twin poisons are breeding, the Nazi BNP and the English Defence League.
Britain is a land built by migrants. After all, there was no one inhabiting these islands 50,000 years ago, and for most of human history there were no international borders. The emergence of the modern British nation state and the advent of a global economy brought with it the movement of capital in search of profit and the movement of people in search of work. Britain, home of the industrial revolution, saw successive waves of immigration from the 19th century onwards. It was driven by the needs of capitalists to find an adequate supply of workers. However, from the beginning, the capitalist class also grasped that the migration of cheap labour into the country provided them with a ready mechanism for dividing working people.. This was not automatic; it depended on an invented common identity of Britishness, which offered a false sense of solidarity between workers and bosses, while dividing native born from “foreign workers”. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the treatment of Irish workers who came to Britain in the 19th century to work on the canals and railways. They were forced to leave their homes—much like Roma people in Slovakia today—because of impoverishment or oppression, and usually both.
Our rulers have always tried to sow divisions among workers but there is a powerful history of class solidarity.The next time you walk down a canal towpath or ride a train think of the thousands of Irish labourers—the navvies—who died building the infrastructure of the industrial revolution, housed in the most squalid living conditions imaginable. Textile mill bosses also imported Irish workers. Initially this was often to use them as strikebreakers. In situations of sharpened competition in the labour market among low-skilled workers, it is not difficult to see how tensions arose. Karl Marx observed the process and got straight to the heart of the matter: “Every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps… The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standards of life. In relation to the Irish worker he feels himself a member of the ruling nation and so turns himself into a tool of the aristocrats and capitalists of his own country against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself.” Marx went on to explain how this antagonism was kept alive by “the press, the pulpit and the comic papers” in much the same way that the Sun, the Daily Mail and the Daily Express do today, with their relentless attacks on migrants and Muslims. But there was another process cutting aganist the divisions between workers. The bringing together of workers in the factory system created a need for unity against the common enemy exploiting their labour. Despite the best efforts of the capitalists to stoke racism, the impulse to class solidarity was often stronger. Many leading members of the Chartists, Britain’s first mass workers’ movement in the mid 19th century, came from the ranks of Irish labourers. Class fighters such as Feargus O’Connor and James Bronterre O’Brien led British workers into struggle, as did other “foreign” workers like the black Chartist organiser William Cuffay. Unfortunately the Chartists were defeated, and racist ideas were able to fester.
The New Unionism of the 1880s brought a new wave of Irish activists into politics. Ireland was officially part of Britain at this time so there was no issue of immigration controls—it was the availability of work not controls that adjusted the flow. At the end of the 19th century millions of Jews from the economically undeveloped parts of eastern Europe fled poverty and persecution. State-sponsored anti-semitic pogroms killed thousands of Jews in Russia and Poland. Three million largely poor Jews migrated to the US and perhaps a quarter of a million to Britain. Ruling class figures responded with racism. Tory MP William Evans Gordon said in parliament in 1902, “Not a day passes but English families are ruthlessly turned out to make room for foreign invaders.” This racism paved the way for the Aliens Act of 1905, the first to limit immigration and which defined some groups of migrants as “undesirable”. It made it easier for racists to argue that Jewish people were a problem in British society - however, Jewish workers came together with other sections of the working class. In the 1930s fascist attempts to turn “native” Britons against Jews were defeated on the streets. The long economic boom after the Second World War saw capitalists respond to increasing demand for labour by again looking to workers from overseas.
This time they looked further afield in the British Empire—to the Caribbean and the Indian subcontinent—for workers to plug the shortages in areas such as public transport and the hospitals. Black people soon found that the land of opportunity was also a land of racism. Some landlords and pubs in places like London and Birmingham put up signs saying, “No blacks, no Irish, no dogs”. But socialists and trade unionists organised reception committees to welcome the new workers and to help them settle in. However there was no automatic unity among the oppressed. Some established migrants, who had become assimilated into British society, came to view more recent immigrants as outsiders, and at times as a threat.
Some British people of Irish backgrounds could be among the most antagonistic towards Black people, seeing their own “whiteness” as making them superior to African-Caribbeans. Post-war Britain’s open door policy wasn’t to last as the boom ebbed and turn into crisis towards the end 1960s. The Tory politician Enoch Powell who had once implored Jamaicans and others to come to find work in the “mother country”, now scapegoated black and Asian immigrants for the mounting problems faced by a British economy in decline. This was even though many so-called immigrants were in fact born in the country. The 1971 Immigration Act brought a shuddering halt to “primary” immigration to Britain. Future migrants would be the dependants of those already here and not new workers. But the rising racism, especially in the mid 1970s, led to a powerful anti-racist response that reached a crescendo with the formation of the Anti Nazi League (ANL). The ANL drove the predecessors of the Nazi British National Party (BNP), the National Front, off our streets. Today asylum seekers, living in forced destitution, are blamed for “ruining areas” and bringing crime. Or in the case of “economic migrants”, like those from new European Union countries in eastern Europe like the Irish before them, lowering wages.
It can sometimes appear easier to kick the “foreign” worker next to you, especially during times of low class struggle, such as after the defeat of the Chartists in the 19th century. Equally however, during times of rising struggle, divisions are overcome time and time again. A key task of socialists today is to harness that class solidarity to fight both against the bosses and in defence of the rights of all working people, regardless of spurious notions of nation and race. Socialists must act as “tribunes of the oppressed”, as the Russian revolutionary Lenin put it. We must oppose all racism and bigotry. Today that means standing up against Islamophobia and racism, and breaking the back of the organisations these twin poisons are breeding, the Nazi BNP and the English Defence League.
February 13, 2011
EDL humiliated in Exeter
Massive EDL demo threatens to overwhelm Exeter city centre
Exeter folk respond to the EDL's presence in their cityIn contrast to the EDL’s shambles of a protest there was a well organised and well attended Celebration of Diversity which had a very positive atmosphere. Organisers estimate that a total of 300 people attended the Celebration over the course of three hours, with over 200 people being on the event at it’s height.
The Celebration of Diversity brought together people from all different beliefs and backgrounds – there were Christian Ministers, people from the Mosque and also from the Synagogue. There was a message of support from the Lord Mayor Marcel Choules. Members of Exeter Labour Party, the Green Party and the Liberal Democrats attended. The Celebration was supported by the Devon branch of the National Union of Teachers and by the Exeter Anti Cuts Alliance. There was a "Feminists against the Burqua Ban" banner along with many others.
Children’s activities were organised by the Woodcraft Folk – a poster where children drew Flags of the World was very popular, along with making friendship bracelets and a “We Love Exeter” poster.
Speakers addressed the event from Unite Against Fascism, the Woodcraft Folk and the Exeter Anti Cuts Alliance. A student from Egypt spoke about the victory of the Egyptian people and about how Muslim and Christian protesters had stood side by side in Tahrir Square.
The well organised, peaceful and uplifting Celebration of Diversity was very different from the EDL’s protest. The EDL failed to properly liase with the police and 10 of them turned up unannounced at the start of our event seeking a confrontation. They seemed to be taken aback by the number of people who had turned out to oppose them. They were led away by police and then stood for an hour in the High Street where they were barracked by members of the general public before retreating to a pub.
Mike Gurney from Exeter Unite Against Fascism says
“Today was a great day for Exeter, for anti-racism and for all those who oppose prejudice. The EDL were humiliated – they claimed on their Facebook page that over 100 would attend their event – they only managed 15. It was great to see Christians, Jews and Muslims standing together side by side to oppose the EDL. The EDL’s claims that Muslims are going to impose Sharia Law on Britiain is laughable – Muslims make up only 2.7% of the population. Today the people of Exeter showed that the EDL’s politics of hate are not welcome here and will be challenged whenever it arises.”
NB There is a video of Exeter EDL on YouTube.
Cheers to Mike for sending in the report.
January 12, 2010
Children create cross-cultural harmony
Where's the best place to fight the attitudes of the BNP? Why, in primary schools, of course
The children of Shirley Manor, a primary school in a run-down part of Bradford, an area far-right activists call a powerbase, are stunned. They have just returned from a visit to a school in another part of Bradford, where almost every pupil is Asian. "But actually, they like pizza," the children report. "And they watch television. And one has an Xbox!"
Almost all these children are white British; some of their parents have played a part in the British National party's electoral successes in Bradford. For most of them, it has been their first social interaction with British Muslims. Barriers came tumbling down as representatives of the two schools began to list the things they had in common. Friendships were formed. "When are we meeting them again?" is the question ringing in teachers' ears.
Shirley Manor is one of a host of primary schools across Britain emerging as an unexpected frontline in the fight to stem rising support for the BNP. As battle lines are drawn for local and national elections, schools in areas with BNP councillors, or where BNP candidates are finding support, are taking radical steps to change the hearts and minds of future generations of voters – and their parents.
Predominantly white schools in deprived areas as far apart as Bradford, Solihull and Essex – all regions where the BNP has gained a presence on local councils over the last decade – are initiating programmes of exchange visits with inner-city schools that are predominantly non-white. The visits provide stimulus for public art projects and performances, to which parents are invited, celebrating diversity in Britain and condemning racism.
The action is not nationally co-ordinated. A series of independent schemes have come to life during the current academic term, most aiming for completion before the mooted May elections.
For example, this job advert was found in November on the internet noticeboard artsjobs, for a creative practitioner to work on a project with pupils at a primary school in Solihull, West Midlands: "The school is in an extremely mono-cultural area of high deprivation ... The area has a BNP councillor." The project? To oversee a series of exchange visits with a Birmingham school that is "100% Muslim", then help pupils to create a piece of "outdoor/environmental art or sculpture", to go on public display by May 2010.
The school is located at the centre of a large estate in an area of Solihull called Chelmsley Wood. The ward's BNP councillor won his seat in 2006 and is due for re-election in May.
This year's school development plan at a primary school in Epping Forest, Essex, where seven BNP members now sit on the district council and where around 90% of the school's population is white British, stated: "[In] 2008/2009 there was a rise in the number of recorded racial incidents. We need to raise levels of tolerance for all children…". The school is forging links with a primary school in Enfield described as "mainly Turkish".
Both the Solihull and the Epping Forest schemes are new; the content is still being negotiated and organisers are treading softly – as one commented, "wary of upsetting the parents", in other words, the parents whose support enabled the BNP to gain a foothold in the first place.
In Bradford, Shirley Manor was running exchange programmes as long ago as 2004 – the year a BNP councillor won a seat in the ward of Wyke, where the school is located. "Our pupils never really mixed with Asian children," says Hannah Brown, a year 4 and 5 teacher who has overseen the exchange programme. "They think they're from another planet." She says some pupils arrive at her school with "some" racism entrenched, but also considerable confusion: "They hear words bandied about and aren't sure what they mean."
Shirley Manor is at the beginning of a new relationship with Thornbury primary, a considerably larger school nearer the city where most pupils are of Pakistani heritage and nearly all are learning English as an additional language. The schools have been brought together by the Schools Linking Network, an organisation based in Bradford that is now rolling out its services across Britain. With funding from the Department for Children, Schools and Families the SLN is underwriting the cost to both schools of managing an exchange programme, paying for additional staff and coaches.
The two schools will first come together in a community centre for a day of games and activities. Everything is designed to let the children discover parallels in their lives, such as a game where you have to perform a certain action if, say, you have two brothers. "By lunchtime you see groups forming," says Brown. "Like boys who support a certain football team. It's never forced."
She makes a point of discussing discriminatory language with the children before the trip, and will encourage them to ask the Thornbury pupils: "Is this word offensive to you?"
The pupils will meet again in subsequent weeks when they visit each other's schools. In previous years, deep connections have formed. Brown tells the story of two girls crying at the end of the final visit; they later met up outside school. Many continue to correspond by email. One legacy of these exchanges is wall displays that line the corridors of both schools. Pupils create cut-out paper dolls of each other. The multiracial dolls will be mounted side-by-side, their hands touching.
Previous exchange visits have changed children's outlook, says Brown, citing an activity in which pupils define what makes someone British. When first asked, the children of Shirley Manor tend to say you are British if you are born in Britain and speak English. Following the exchange visits last year, year 5 worked together to word a new conclusion: "If you are prepared to follow rules and be a good citizen, you deserve to be British."
Angus King, headteacher at Thornbury, says his predominantly Asian population can be as monocultural pupils as in Wyke. The implicit danger is militant Islam. "Extremism can exist in any group," he points out. "It comes from a lack of knowledge and understanding. The children at my school don't normally meet white British kids en masse. I think the big thing is to give children the opportunity to meet other children."
Brown says it is essential that this work is conducted at primary level. "If it's left too late, the views of those around them are imposed," she says.
But politics is never mentioned. "The project gives the children information and encourages them to make decisions," says Brown. "We would never say, 'You mustn't vote BNP'."
She is now making plans to hold an adult "linking night" next year, in which the parents of children at the two schools will meet each other for the first time.
Guardian
The children of Shirley Manor, a primary school in a run-down part of Bradford, an area far-right activists call a powerbase, are stunned. They have just returned from a visit to a school in another part of Bradford, where almost every pupil is Asian. "But actually, they like pizza," the children report. "And they watch television. And one has an Xbox!"
Almost all these children are white British; some of their parents have played a part in the British National party's electoral successes in Bradford. For most of them, it has been their first social interaction with British Muslims. Barriers came tumbling down as representatives of the two schools began to list the things they had in common. Friendships were formed. "When are we meeting them again?" is the question ringing in teachers' ears.
Shirley Manor is one of a host of primary schools across Britain emerging as an unexpected frontline in the fight to stem rising support for the BNP. As battle lines are drawn for local and national elections, schools in areas with BNP councillors, or where BNP candidates are finding support, are taking radical steps to change the hearts and minds of future generations of voters – and their parents.
Predominantly white schools in deprived areas as far apart as Bradford, Solihull and Essex – all regions where the BNP has gained a presence on local councils over the last decade – are initiating programmes of exchange visits with inner-city schools that are predominantly non-white. The visits provide stimulus for public art projects and performances, to which parents are invited, celebrating diversity in Britain and condemning racism.
The action is not nationally co-ordinated. A series of independent schemes have come to life during the current academic term, most aiming for completion before the mooted May elections.
For example, this job advert was found in November on the internet noticeboard artsjobs, for a creative practitioner to work on a project with pupils at a primary school in Solihull, West Midlands: "The school is in an extremely mono-cultural area of high deprivation ... The area has a BNP councillor." The project? To oversee a series of exchange visits with a Birmingham school that is "100% Muslim", then help pupils to create a piece of "outdoor/environmental art or sculpture", to go on public display by May 2010.
The school is located at the centre of a large estate in an area of Solihull called Chelmsley Wood. The ward's BNP councillor won his seat in 2006 and is due for re-election in May.
This year's school development plan at a primary school in Epping Forest, Essex, where seven BNP members now sit on the district council and where around 90% of the school's population is white British, stated: "[In] 2008/2009 there was a rise in the number of recorded racial incidents. We need to raise levels of tolerance for all children…". The school is forging links with a primary school in Enfield described as "mainly Turkish".
Both the Solihull and the Epping Forest schemes are new; the content is still being negotiated and organisers are treading softly – as one commented, "wary of upsetting the parents", in other words, the parents whose support enabled the BNP to gain a foothold in the first place.
In Bradford, Shirley Manor was running exchange programmes as long ago as 2004 – the year a BNP councillor won a seat in the ward of Wyke, where the school is located. "Our pupils never really mixed with Asian children," says Hannah Brown, a year 4 and 5 teacher who has overseen the exchange programme. "They think they're from another planet." She says some pupils arrive at her school with "some" racism entrenched, but also considerable confusion: "They hear words bandied about and aren't sure what they mean."
Shirley Manor is at the beginning of a new relationship with Thornbury primary, a considerably larger school nearer the city where most pupils are of Pakistani heritage and nearly all are learning English as an additional language. The schools have been brought together by the Schools Linking Network, an organisation based in Bradford that is now rolling out its services across Britain. With funding from the Department for Children, Schools and Families the SLN is underwriting the cost to both schools of managing an exchange programme, paying for additional staff and coaches.
The two schools will first come together in a community centre for a day of games and activities. Everything is designed to let the children discover parallels in their lives, such as a game where you have to perform a certain action if, say, you have two brothers. "By lunchtime you see groups forming," says Brown. "Like boys who support a certain football team. It's never forced."
She makes a point of discussing discriminatory language with the children before the trip, and will encourage them to ask the Thornbury pupils: "Is this word offensive to you?"
The pupils will meet again in subsequent weeks when they visit each other's schools. In previous years, deep connections have formed. Brown tells the story of two girls crying at the end of the final visit; they later met up outside school. Many continue to correspond by email. One legacy of these exchanges is wall displays that line the corridors of both schools. Pupils create cut-out paper dolls of each other. The multiracial dolls will be mounted side-by-side, their hands touching.
Previous exchange visits have changed children's outlook, says Brown, citing an activity in which pupils define what makes someone British. When first asked, the children of Shirley Manor tend to say you are British if you are born in Britain and speak English. Following the exchange visits last year, year 5 worked together to word a new conclusion: "If you are prepared to follow rules and be a good citizen, you deserve to be British."
Angus King, headteacher at Thornbury, says his predominantly Asian population can be as monocultural pupils as in Wyke. The implicit danger is militant Islam. "Extremism can exist in any group," he points out. "It comes from a lack of knowledge and understanding. The children at my school don't normally meet white British kids en masse. I think the big thing is to give children the opportunity to meet other children."
Brown says it is essential that this work is conducted at primary level. "If it's left too late, the views of those around them are imposed," she says.
But politics is never mentioned. "The project gives the children information and encourages them to make decisions," says Brown. "We would never say, 'You mustn't vote BNP'."
She is now making plans to hold an adult "linking night" next year, in which the parents of children at the two schools will meet each other for the first time.
Guardian
April 27, 2008
Poor white boys are victims too
It was the tight suits that first alerted me. Or maybe the fact that they abruptly fell silent as we passed.
I had just given a speech – on the future of immigration, diversity and good relations in Britain – at the Birmingham hotel where 40 years earlier Enoch Powell had chosen to talk of the River Tiber “foaming with much blood”. As I made my way out of the hotel, one of my colleagues nudged my elbow and mouthed silently: “BNP.”
Hearing that we were in town, the British National party had arrived at the hotel, complete with an Enoch Powell lookalike, to deliver the same speech as Powell had made decades earlier.
In the flesh the BNP always feels like a pompous, self-regarding comedy turn – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a serious political force. Extremists gain leverage when the Establishment, or what the public believes is the Establishment, fails to talk about the issues that bother it.
My own speech had been squarely about the two questions that are at present top of the political charts – race and immigration. But I also wanted to deal with a wider question: at a time when our society is wealthier and better educated than ever before, who’s being left behind – and why?
To be sure, the problems of racial discrimination against minorities haven’t gone away – black and Asian young men are still up to seven times more likely to be arrested by the police; Pakistani men will earn more than a quarter of million pounds less than their white equivalents over a lifetime; and young Bangladeshi women are having to settle for jobs for which they are overqualified.
But we are also confronting for the first time in my lifetime an equality deficit not much talked about at Westminster. I am referring to the growing underclass of poor white boys – a forgotten group who also face a kind of institutional racism. I am deeply worried that they will grow into poor, disillusioned, alienated white men.
Why should the Equality and Human Rights Commission care? Many people, including our friends, think that it exists largely to shout the odds for anybody who is not male, white, straight and able-bodied. But that is wrong on every count.
We aren’t a minorities’ pressure group. We work for the whole of society, not just those at the margins – though those who suffer most disadvantage have a right to come first in the queue for our support. (And let’s remember that some of those who face systematic inequality aren’t small minorities – women are a majority, most of us will become parents and virtually all of us will get old.)
What we are is a body that attacks unfairness wherever it sees it. That’s why some of the wider trends that may be leading to greater inequality are right at the top of our agenda – economic change, the skills gap and, above all, migration.
Let me be unambiguous about this last issue. I am pro-immigration. The British people’s experience is that managed migration has brought great advantages to the country, not the tide of hate that Powell prophesied. But immigration has also raised important issues – not least that if we aren’t careful, the benefits from it will fall into the hands of employers, shareholders and middle-class professionals, while any burdens are left to be borne by the poorest in society.
So we have to ensure that the positive impact of migration is not offset by the costs – such as public services under increased pressure and an infrastructure that is struggling to cope. Let these issues languish in the tray marked “too difficult to talk about”, and resentment will grow. We also need to be clear that worrying about the consequences of immigration does not make you antiforeigner. And we must tackle a vital question: why are some groups in society not getting the chances they deserve? Last week two reports highlighted again the issue of underachievement. A report by the Bow Group, the Conservative think tank, showed that in the past 10 years almost 4m pupils left school without gaining the basic qualifications of five good GCSEs.
The cost to the economy of low educational attainment – and low social mobility – is £32 billion a year, or £1,300 to the average family, according to Reform, the independent think tank. Its report spoke of the “why bother?” generation – people who feel shut out by the system. If people feel shut out, they will try to find someone easy to blame: the outsider, the immigrant.
At the commission, we are doing research on educational underachievement and its link to ethnicity. Initial findings reveal that, for example, Bangladeshi and black African students at school outperform their white peers from comparable economic and social backgrounds. Statistics also show that black African, Bangladeshi and Pakistani students achieve higher GCSE scores than equivalent white students.
We know that it is not only white children from poorer background who are struggling. Black Caribbean children are also underachieving.
In the autumn, after our research is published, we will host a conference on white working-class boys. We want to listen to the pupils themselves, the teachers and the parents. And we need to demonstrate that fairness is about equal treatment for all – black, white or Asian.
It is only in tackling these issues that we take the toxicity out of debates on immigration, race and socio-economic underachievement. Fair treatment and equal chances are everyone’s right. No one should feel the work of the commission is “not about me”.
Trevor Phillips is chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission
Times Online
I had just given a speech – on the future of immigration, diversity and good relations in Britain – at the Birmingham hotel where 40 years earlier Enoch Powell had chosen to talk of the River Tiber “foaming with much blood”. As I made my way out of the hotel, one of my colleagues nudged my elbow and mouthed silently: “BNP.”
Hearing that we were in town, the British National party had arrived at the hotel, complete with an Enoch Powell lookalike, to deliver the same speech as Powell had made decades earlier.
In the flesh the BNP always feels like a pompous, self-regarding comedy turn – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a serious political force. Extremists gain leverage when the Establishment, or what the public believes is the Establishment, fails to talk about the issues that bother it.
My own speech had been squarely about the two questions that are at present top of the political charts – race and immigration. But I also wanted to deal with a wider question: at a time when our society is wealthier and better educated than ever before, who’s being left behind – and why?
To be sure, the problems of racial discrimination against minorities haven’t gone away – black and Asian young men are still up to seven times more likely to be arrested by the police; Pakistani men will earn more than a quarter of million pounds less than their white equivalents over a lifetime; and young Bangladeshi women are having to settle for jobs for which they are overqualified.
But we are also confronting for the first time in my lifetime an equality deficit not much talked about at Westminster. I am referring to the growing underclass of poor white boys – a forgotten group who also face a kind of institutional racism. I am deeply worried that they will grow into poor, disillusioned, alienated white men.
Why should the Equality and Human Rights Commission care? Many people, including our friends, think that it exists largely to shout the odds for anybody who is not male, white, straight and able-bodied. But that is wrong on every count.
We aren’t a minorities’ pressure group. We work for the whole of society, not just those at the margins – though those who suffer most disadvantage have a right to come first in the queue for our support. (And let’s remember that some of those who face systematic inequality aren’t small minorities – women are a majority, most of us will become parents and virtually all of us will get old.)
What we are is a body that attacks unfairness wherever it sees it. That’s why some of the wider trends that may be leading to greater inequality are right at the top of our agenda – economic change, the skills gap and, above all, migration.
Let me be unambiguous about this last issue. I am pro-immigration. The British people’s experience is that managed migration has brought great advantages to the country, not the tide of hate that Powell prophesied. But immigration has also raised important issues – not least that if we aren’t careful, the benefits from it will fall into the hands of employers, shareholders and middle-class professionals, while any burdens are left to be borne by the poorest in society.
So we have to ensure that the positive impact of migration is not offset by the costs – such as public services under increased pressure and an infrastructure that is struggling to cope. Let these issues languish in the tray marked “too difficult to talk about”, and resentment will grow. We also need to be clear that worrying about the consequences of immigration does not make you antiforeigner. And we must tackle a vital question: why are some groups in society not getting the chances they deserve? Last week two reports highlighted again the issue of underachievement. A report by the Bow Group, the Conservative think tank, showed that in the past 10 years almost 4m pupils left school without gaining the basic qualifications of five good GCSEs.
The cost to the economy of low educational attainment – and low social mobility – is £32 billion a year, or £1,300 to the average family, according to Reform, the independent think tank. Its report spoke of the “why bother?” generation – people who feel shut out by the system. If people feel shut out, they will try to find someone easy to blame: the outsider, the immigrant.
At the commission, we are doing research on educational underachievement and its link to ethnicity. Initial findings reveal that, for example, Bangladeshi and black African students at school outperform their white peers from comparable economic and social backgrounds. Statistics also show that black African, Bangladeshi and Pakistani students achieve higher GCSE scores than equivalent white students.
We know that it is not only white children from poorer background who are struggling. Black Caribbean children are also underachieving.
In the autumn, after our research is published, we will host a conference on white working-class boys. We want to listen to the pupils themselves, the teachers and the parents. And we need to demonstrate that fairness is about equal treatment for all – black, white or Asian.
It is only in tackling these issues that we take the toxicity out of debates on immigration, race and socio-economic underachievement. Fair treatment and equal chances are everyone’s right. No one should feel the work of the commission is “not about me”.
Trevor Phillips is chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission
Times Online
Labels:
BNP,
diversity,
immigration,
Trevor Phillips
July 12, 2007
Top Tory's blog on BNP is cleared
More than 180 complaints against Welsh Conservative leader Nick Bourne's blog criticism of the British National Party (BNP) have been officially rejected. The Mid and West Wales AM was cleared by a Welsh assembly standards committee inquiry after a post in February. More than 180 complaints were registered about the comments.
Mr Bourne, who believed the complaints were politically orchestrated, called it a "victory for common sense and a victory for the right of free speech".
"I stand by every word I made about this organisation and its supporters. I have no intention of apologising for making them. I am delighted that the standards committee rejected these complaints out of hand. To condemn the language I used against this organisation would have sent out totally the wrong message from the National Assembly. I believe the National Assembly has today sent out a strong message that it will not tolerate such prejudice as we seek to build a fair and tolerant society."
During the recent assembly election campaign Mr Bourne joined a cross-party campaign to promote tolerance and diversity in Wales.
AMs and candidates backed the Wales Friends of Searchlight's Hope not Hate campaign against discrimination.
BBC News website
Mr Bourne, who believed the complaints were politically orchestrated, called it a "victory for common sense and a victory for the right of free speech".
"I stand by every word I made about this organisation and its supporters. I have no intention of apologising for making them. I am delighted that the standards committee rejected these complaints out of hand. To condemn the language I used against this organisation would have sent out totally the wrong message from the National Assembly. I believe the National Assembly has today sent out a strong message that it will not tolerate such prejudice as we seek to build a fair and tolerant society."
During the recent assembly election campaign Mr Bourne joined a cross-party campaign to promote tolerance and diversity in Wales.
AMs and candidates backed the Wales Friends of Searchlight's Hope not Hate campaign against discrimination.
BBC News website
April 25, 2007
Anti-racism music festival moves to Finsbury Park
The anti-racism music festival, 'Rise: London United', which going to take place on Clapham Common in South London on Sunday July 15, will now take place in Finsbury Park, North London.
The decision to the change the venue was taken in order to ensure the scale and range of activities at Europe's largest anti-racist festival could be maintained.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone said: "Although we wanted Clapham Common to host this year's Rise: London United, it would have been necessary to reduce the number of stages and the event would have been smaller.
"I hope we can stage the festival on Clapham Common in the future. In the meantime, in a period when even greater numbers need to show they are opposed to racism, I would like to invite people living in south London, as well as across London to come Finsbury Park on 15 July, to reinforce the message that all Londoners stand together and will not accept racism in the most diverse city in the world."
Cllr Lib Peck, Cabinet member for environment and culture on Lambeth Council, said: "We fully endorse the Rise festival and while it is a shame that it’s not possible to hold it in Lambeth this year, the council supports the decision to move it to Finsbury Park.
"It became clear that the festival was too large to be held safely on Clapham Common without scaling it down, so the decision to move it was sensible and the right one.
"I hope as many people as possible from Lambeth will still attend the festival to show, as Londoners, their support for harmony and diversity and abhorrence of racism in all its forms."
Rise: London United is a free event backed by the Mayor of London, Trades Union Congress, National Assembly Against Racism and diverse community organisations.
This year's festival will feature a wide range of music, performance and other activities. Past performers include De La Soul, Graham Coxon, Common, Buzzcocks, Roy Ayers, Sway and the Wailers, with stages featuring African, Asian and Cuban music, Dub and hip hop DJs, comedy acts and the annual Poetry Slam organised in conjunction with the Poetry Society.
24dash
The decision to the change the venue was taken in order to ensure the scale and range of activities at Europe's largest anti-racist festival could be maintained.
London Mayor Ken Livingstone said: "Although we wanted Clapham Common to host this year's Rise: London United, it would have been necessary to reduce the number of stages and the event would have been smaller.
"I hope we can stage the festival on Clapham Common in the future. In the meantime, in a period when even greater numbers need to show they are opposed to racism, I would like to invite people living in south London, as well as across London to come Finsbury Park on 15 July, to reinforce the message that all Londoners stand together and will not accept racism in the most diverse city in the world."
Cllr Lib Peck, Cabinet member for environment and culture on Lambeth Council, said: "We fully endorse the Rise festival and while it is a shame that it’s not possible to hold it in Lambeth this year, the council supports the decision to move it to Finsbury Park.
"It became clear that the festival was too large to be held safely on Clapham Common without scaling it down, so the decision to move it was sensible and the right one.
"I hope as many people as possible from Lambeth will still attend the festival to show, as Londoners, their support for harmony and diversity and abhorrence of racism in all its forms."
Rise: London United is a free event backed by the Mayor of London, Trades Union Congress, National Assembly Against Racism and diverse community organisations.
This year's festival will feature a wide range of music, performance and other activities. Past performers include De La Soul, Graham Coxon, Common, Buzzcocks, Roy Ayers, Sway and the Wailers, with stages featuring African, Asian and Cuban music, Dub and hip hop DJs, comedy acts and the annual Poetry Slam organised in conjunction with the Poetry Society.
24dash
Labels:
anti-racism,
diversity,
Finsbury Park,
harmony,
Ken Livingstone,
London United,
racism,
Rise
April 07, 2007
Magic bus - last stop against racism
After 14 days, 1,700 miles and greeting thousands of supporters, the Daily Mirror's Hope not Hate bus pulled into its final destination yesterday.
The double decker roared into Glasgow's city centre and was met by Gordon Brown and Big Brother's Jermaine Jackson - who are backing our anti-racism message. In a speech made from the top deck, the Chancellor praised the Mirror's campaign to cheers from the crowd of hundreds below.
He said: "Glasgow is saying there is no place for racism in our society. "There is no place for discrimination and there is no place for prejudice. There is no place for bigotry."
The Mirror has had a huge amount of support from local communities on our two-week journey from Dagenham, through to the opening of a Sheffield mosque, a visit to Leicester's Golden Mile and a food festival in Birmingham. The bus also visited shopping centres, deprived estates, cathedrals, football grounds and white, black and Asian communities. It was welcomed everywhere it has gone.
Yesterday Jermaine Jackson added his voice to the campaign. From the top of the bus he thanked Mirror readers for standing up against the racist bullying in the Celebrity Big Brother house, where he was a contestant earlier this year. He applauded our campaign that celebrates all that is great about Britain's diversity.
Jermaine said: "I'm proud to support it because racism has been bred in the hearts and minds of so many people in the past, and it's important to look to the future and promote hope. The younger generation have got it right on target. We've got to get the message out there that we are all God's children, and there are many different cultures in this world."
After listening to Jermaine owners of traditional clothing shop, Slanj, gave the star a plain black isle kilt and sporran. He joked: "I won't be a traditional Scotsman because my mother told me I should always wear underwear."
Celebrities who supported the campaign include Kelly Holmes, Corinne Bailey Rae, Rio Ferdinand, the Sugababes, UB40, Amir Khan, Shilpa Shetty and Ms Dynamite.
Nick Lowles, from Searchlight, co-organisers of the bus, said: "As the BNP prepares to stand in more council seats than ever before, with a record number of council candidates, the Hope not Hate bus has brought a vital message of hope to communities across the country."
Mirror
The double decker roared into Glasgow's city centre and was met by Gordon Brown and Big Brother's Jermaine Jackson - who are backing our anti-racism message. In a speech made from the top deck, the Chancellor praised the Mirror's campaign to cheers from the crowd of hundreds below.
He said: "Glasgow is saying there is no place for racism in our society. "There is no place for discrimination and there is no place for prejudice. There is no place for bigotry."
The Mirror has had a huge amount of support from local communities on our two-week journey from Dagenham, through to the opening of a Sheffield mosque, a visit to Leicester's Golden Mile and a food festival in Birmingham. The bus also visited shopping centres, deprived estates, cathedrals, football grounds and white, black and Asian communities. It was welcomed everywhere it has gone.
Yesterday Jermaine Jackson added his voice to the campaign. From the top of the bus he thanked Mirror readers for standing up against the racist bullying in the Celebrity Big Brother house, where he was a contestant earlier this year. He applauded our campaign that celebrates all that is great about Britain's diversity.
Jermaine said: "I'm proud to support it because racism has been bred in the hearts and minds of so many people in the past, and it's important to look to the future and promote hope. The younger generation have got it right on target. We've got to get the message out there that we are all God's children, and there are many different cultures in this world."
After listening to Jermaine owners of traditional clothing shop, Slanj, gave the star a plain black isle kilt and sporran. He joked: "I won't be a traditional Scotsman because my mother told me I should always wear underwear."
Celebrities who supported the campaign include Kelly Holmes, Corinne Bailey Rae, Rio Ferdinand, the Sugababes, UB40, Amir Khan, Shilpa Shetty and Ms Dynamite.
Nick Lowles, from Searchlight, co-organisers of the bus, said: "As the BNP prepares to stand in more council seats than ever before, with a record number of council candidates, the Hope not Hate bus has brought a vital message of hope to communities across the country."
Mirror
Labels:
bigotry,
BNP,
diversity,
Gordon Brown,
Hope not Hate,
prejudice,
racism,
racist,
Searchlight
March 12, 2007
Lincolnshire County Council Declaration
[Wouldn't you love to see a statement like this adopted by every local authority]
We, in Lincolnshire, are proud of our diverse and multi-racial heritage, which we regard as a source of cultural, social and economic strength. We will work vigorously to combat all forms of racism to rid Lincolnshire of racial discrimination and to enshrine the principle that individuality and universality are the foundations of justice and peace.
We declare that:
• We value the contribution that all communities make to the quality of life in Lincolnshire and recognise ethnic and cultural diversity as a source of cultural, social and economic enrichment.
• We endorse the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are opposed to racism in all its forms.
• We will encourage a changing culture within the public services and the wider community that recognises the unacceptability of all forms of racism and takes action to combat it.
• We acknowledge that progress towards a more just society may not always be smooth, but as partners we are committed to maintaining dialogue and resolving our differences.
• We accept that without transparency and openness in the public services, progress towards a successful multi-cultural community will be hampered.
• We believe that the composition of the public services workforce should reflect that of the wider community, and will work to break down perceptions and barriers that prevent equal access to employment.
• We believe that all citizens should have the right to expect equal protection and equal treatment from all public services.
• We believe that children from all backgrounds are entitled to an education free from discrimination and harassment.
• We understand the essential role of the education system in Lincolnshire in developing the future of our multi-cultural community and commit ourselves to supporting and enhancing this work.
• We believe that our success will properly be measured not by our policies but by our actions in promoting equality for all the people of Lincolnshire.
• We call upon the residents of Lincolnshire to support us in this by respecting the dignity of all people and by constant vigilance for any expression of racism or racial discrimination.
Signed
Cllr Martin Hill
Cllr Robert Parker
Cllr Marianne Overton
Cllr John Marriott
[We couldn't find the source for this statement so until we do, the link goes to its default source]
Stop the BNP
We, in Lincolnshire, are proud of our diverse and multi-racial heritage, which we regard as a source of cultural, social and economic strength. We will work vigorously to combat all forms of racism to rid Lincolnshire of racial discrimination and to enshrine the principle that individuality and universality are the foundations of justice and peace.
We declare that:
• We value the contribution that all communities make to the quality of life in Lincolnshire and recognise ethnic and cultural diversity as a source of cultural, social and economic enrichment.
• We endorse the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are opposed to racism in all its forms.
• We will encourage a changing culture within the public services and the wider community that recognises the unacceptability of all forms of racism and takes action to combat it.
• We acknowledge that progress towards a more just society may not always be smooth, but as partners we are committed to maintaining dialogue and resolving our differences.
• We accept that without transparency and openness in the public services, progress towards a successful multi-cultural community will be hampered.
• We believe that the composition of the public services workforce should reflect that of the wider community, and will work to break down perceptions and barriers that prevent equal access to employment.
• We believe that all citizens should have the right to expect equal protection and equal treatment from all public services.
• We believe that children from all backgrounds are entitled to an education free from discrimination and harassment.
• We understand the essential role of the education system in Lincolnshire in developing the future of our multi-cultural community and commit ourselves to supporting and enhancing this work.
• We believe that our success will properly be measured not by our policies but by our actions in promoting equality for all the people of Lincolnshire.
• We call upon the residents of Lincolnshire to support us in this by respecting the dignity of all people and by constant vigilance for any expression of racism or racial discrimination.
Signed
Cllr Martin Hill
Cllr Robert Parker
Cllr Marianne Overton
Cllr John Marriott
[We couldn't find the source for this statement so until we do, the link goes to its default source]
Stop the BNP
Labels:
community,
cultural,
diversity,
enrichment,
ethnic,
Lincolnshire,
multi-racial,
racism
March 08, 2007
Cadet leader is a BNP boss
North Wiltshire MP James Gray says he is concerned that BNP chairman Mike Howson is a youth leader for youngsters at Rudloe Air Cadet unit.
Mr Howson sparked controversy last month when he set up BNP patrols in Corsham in a bid to combat anti social behaviour. He claims the vigilante patrols were a response to concern by Corsham residents about thugs in the town.
But Mr Gray says that any member of a youth organisation responsible for young people should not hold a political position. He said: "Members of the armed forces can be court marshalled for being publicly linked to a political role so I don't see why this should be any different. I think it is very questionable that he should be taking part in political activities at the same time as leading youngsters. The ATC should be equally concerned that someone like this can be allowed to lead in this organisation. What if a black child was to join, would he treat them any differently from the other cadets and how would that affect the child."
Mr Howson, who was commended as youth worker of the year in 2006, after his cadets nominated him, hit back saying that Mr Gray has forfeited his right to judge others after his 19-month affair with countryside campaigner Philippa Mayo.
Mr Howson said: "I will be speaking to the adulterer at his next surgery about his comments. I don't think he is really in a position to attack the BNP. He may not like our policies but we don't approve of adultery. As far as I am concerned my political life and my youth work stay totally separate. When I am at the air cadets I am there for the youngsters and not to encourage future voters."
Air Training Corps headquarters said that if the welfare of cadets and staff at a Squadron was brought into doubt because of Mr Howson's political activities an investigation would be launched.
A spokesman said: "The Air Cadet organisation encourages diversity and does not tolerate improper behaviour, which includes actual or encouragement of racism."
Gazette and Herald
Mr Howson sparked controversy last month when he set up BNP patrols in Corsham in a bid to combat anti social behaviour. He claims the vigilante patrols were a response to concern by Corsham residents about thugs in the town.
But Mr Gray says that any member of a youth organisation responsible for young people should not hold a political position. He said: "Members of the armed forces can be court marshalled for being publicly linked to a political role so I don't see why this should be any different. I think it is very questionable that he should be taking part in political activities at the same time as leading youngsters. The ATC should be equally concerned that someone like this can be allowed to lead in this organisation. What if a black child was to join, would he treat them any differently from the other cadets and how would that affect the child."
Mr Howson, who was commended as youth worker of the year in 2006, after his cadets nominated him, hit back saying that Mr Gray has forfeited his right to judge others after his 19-month affair with countryside campaigner Philippa Mayo.
Mr Howson said: "I will be speaking to the adulterer at his next surgery about his comments. I don't think he is really in a position to attack the BNP. He may not like our policies but we don't approve of adultery. As far as I am concerned my political life and my youth work stay totally separate. When I am at the air cadets I am there for the youngsters and not to encourage future voters."
Air Training Corps headquarters said that if the welfare of cadets and staff at a Squadron was brought into doubt because of Mr Howson's political activities an investigation would be launched.
A spokesman said: "The Air Cadet organisation encourages diversity and does not tolerate improper behaviour, which includes actual or encouragement of racism."
Gazette and Herald
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
