nm1166: in the previous lecture to today we er on British politics we [0.3] 
explored [0.4] er the issue of immigration [0.4] and saw how immigration was [0.
2] the prism [1.2] through which [0.6] er [0.5] the politics of race has played 
itself out [2.6] but we also saw how [0.4] the central importance of 
immigration didn't just lie in [1.1] the need to control numbers [0.2] entering 
the country per se [0.8] but was m-, more specifically [0.9] and [0.2] 
centrally about [0.9] establishing a coherent [0.5] conception of British 
identity [0.3] in the post-war context [3.9] er we also saw how the discourse 
on immigration [1.0] er and within that discourse on immigration race [0.7] was 
perceived to be a problem [0.8] from [0.4] the very start [11.0] so the 
importance of immigration [0.4] is not simply about numbers [0.7] it has a 
subsidiary [0.4] possibly even a primary [0.7] er purpose that goes beyond that 
which is in terms of defining [0.3] the conception of Britishness [4.8] where 
numbers does come into play [0.4] the issue of how many black people [0.3] live 
in Britain [2.2] is with respect to [0.3] the need to ensure good race 
relations [6.3] because much of the 
discourse around immigration was premised on the notion that if [0.4] numbers 
[0.2] were limited [0.9] then one could ensure [1.0] that race relations m-, 
would remain [1.0] in some sense good [1.3] or [1.0] taking it from the other 
side [0.7] if numbers were unlimited [0.4] then there was a threat [0.6] to 
good race relations and stable race relations [3.8] and that whole notion was 
premised on the idea [2.0] that allowing [1.7] too many people into Britain [0.
5] from the new Commonwealth [2.5] would cause problems in terms of [0.3] the 
ability of British society to assimilate [0.3] or integrate [1.6] those numbers 
[5.3] and what we see in the post-war period [0.4] at a time when immigration 
[1.2] er [0.4] is [0.3] the primary discourse [0.4] is the emergence of a 
secondary subsidiary discourse [0.3] around [0.5] the notion of [0.2] race 
relations very specifically [2.8] and in particular [2.3] articulated by the 
question of how [0.5] to integrate [1.6] specifically black minority groups [0.
9] into Britain [0.6] and into a British way of life [3.5] and as i mentioned 
last week there were already [0.8] perceived problems [0.4] emerging betw-, in 
relations 
between blacks and whites in Britain [0.3] from an early stage [1.0] whilst 
they reached their pinnacle [0.5] er [1.0] in nineteen-fifty-eight [0.2] in the 
[0.4] social unrest in Notting Hill [0.5] and in Nottingham [1.9] one should 
also note that the first [0.9] acknowledged racist murder in Britain in the 
post-war period [0.7] er occurred in nineteen-forty-eight [0.6] in Camden [0.2] 
in London [3.9] there was also a historical legacy [0.6] of recognizing the 
problem of race relations [0.5] as we saw [0.3] in last week's lecture [0.3] in 
terms of the [0.9] antagonisms [0.3] that had existed [0.4] between [0.5] 
earlier minority groups like [0.5] the Irish [0.4] and the Jewish [0.4] 
communities [1.0] and the indigenous white community in Britain [5.1] but the 
specific issues [1.7] er around which questions of race relations [0.6] er [0.
3] focused in the post-war period [1.9] were distributional issues [4.2] and 
distributional issues [0.4] in the context [0.3] of post-war [0.3] 
reconstruction [3.1] and more specifically [1.3] it hinged around [0.4] the 
idea [0.2] or the perception [0.4] and a widespread perception [2.2] that the 
arrival of black immigrants into Britain [0.4] was 
threatening the allocations [0.6] of goods and services [0.2] and jobs [0.7] 
for the indigenous white population [11.4] those goods and services included 
immediate welfare provisions [2.5] but also housing [9.6] and more directly [1.
3] issues of employment [1.1] and from a very early stage in Britain and 
remember we're talking about a context within which there is no [0.3] legis-, l-
, legislative redress [0.4] for [1.2] ethnic minorities at this stage [2.0] 
that from an early stage [0.4] there were colour bars [0.2] operating [0.7] in 
[1.0] almost every area of the provision of goods and services and jobs in 
Britain [1.3] in every area in the public sector and the private sector [0.4] 
they were [0.2] colour bars that were [1.0] often explicit [4.1] and sometimes 
[2.1] were more de facto [1.4] in operation [0.6] implicitly [6.6] now 
unsurprisingly [2.5] the [3.0] realities of discrimination in Britain [2.4] 
intensified the disaffection of black people [0.6] who had arrived [1.5] 
unsurprisingly [0.7] er [0.3] black people were not [0.7] especially [2.0] 
enamoured [1.1] to a situation in which [1.0] in [0.2] often incredibly 
explicit terms they were [0.5] denied access to 
goods services and jobs [5.2] more especially [0.9] er there was growing 
concern within black communities from a very early stage [0.6] that in the face 
of [1.0] that sort of discrimination [0.3] they were offered no [0.5] 
protection under the law [5.9] now in that context one has on the one side [1.
9] white antagonisms to the black community because of white fears over 
distributional [0.4] concerns [1.4] and on the other side [0.3] one has [0.2] 
disaffection in [0.2] the black community [0.3] because of the de facto 
realities of [0.4] being discriminated against [0.5] as a result almost of 
those concerns within the white community [1.9] and in that context [0.7] 
through the nineteen-fifties and early nineteen-sixties [1.7] there was an 
increasingly clear [1.0] view within [0.5] the British state [1.9] that there 
was [0.7] an acute danger of social conflict arising out of [1.4] the problems 
[2.7] of black and white relations [14.5] now [0.2] even though [0.2] the 
problem of [0.3] race relations [0.2] [sniff] [0.3] as we saw last week [0.3] 
er can be traced back to the very [0.3] earliest stages of post-war black 
immigration [1.2] in general [0.3] despite the acknowledgement [0.3] 
of the problem [0.3] of race relations [0.3] [sniff] [1.3] the state's attitude 
in general [2.0] was to hinge [1.8] policy [0.9] attempts at [0.8] resolving 
those issues around the one [3.9] basically hammer-like implementation of 
policy around immigration [0.5] immigration control [0.7] for fifteen-odd years 
[2.8] was generally regarded as [1.5] the only possible way [0.3] of ensuring 
good [0.2] race relations there was effectively no other [0.3] policy input [0.
3] at the level of the state [0.9] [sniff] [5.3] and it isn't until [2.5] the 
mid to late nineteen-sixties [0.4] that there's any attempt by the state in 
Britain [0.6] to actively intervene [0.6] in tackling [0.4] discrimination [0.
4] against [0.7] black [0.3] British [0.4] people [0.8] [sniff] [12.2] now in 
lieu of the state's involvement [0.9] what sort of protective mechanisms did [0.
5] the black community have [2.1] well immediately after the Second World War 
[2.2] there were various groups and movements [1.3] that did begin to grow 
around [0.7] the issue [0.2] of immigrant [0.3] welfare [0.8] [sniff] [2.4] and 
as i suggested [0.2] these emerged [2.1] as a result of [1.7] an absence of s-, 
[0.2] any organized provision in law [1.5] by the state [2.5] now the majority 
of those [2.7] voluntary 
organizations [1.0] were white led [1.2] and were [0.2] philanthropic in nature 
[4.1] and their aim [0.2] was most often [1.2] to advance the effective 
integration [1.1] of black people [0.2] into [0.3] the host society [1.9] and 
on the whole [0.7] those voluntary groups didn't receive state support [0.4] 
until [0.4] well into [0.4] the nineteen-sixties [7.5] so what causes or what 
is the impetus for [0.8] state intervention [0.7] during the nineteen-sixties 
[4.0] well most obviously [0.2] by the mid-nineteen-sixties there are strict 
immigration controls [0.3] in Britain [7.1] however [1.1] the problem remains 
[1.2] that there are still black people in Britain [2.8] and the problem 
remains that those black people are now [2.1] unless repatriated [1.6] going to 
be a permanent feature [0.5] of British life [8.8] and in that context [0.6] 
and the recognition of the permanent presence [0.5] in the context of [0.2] 
endemic discrimination [3.6] and in the context of widespread hostility towards 
[0.3] that permanent black presence [0.4] there was increasingly perceived to 
be a need [0.3] to actively intervene [0.2] at this stage [8.0] there was 
increasingly a 
perception of the need [0.6] for the state to actively intervene [0.5] in the 
relations between blacks and whites in Britain in order to [0.5] allow for the 
effective integration [1.7] of black people [0.3] into [1.0] the host society 
[5.2] and moreover [1.0] external [2.3] events [2.9] held a double [0.2] 
emphasis [1.8] 'cause of course during the nineteen-sixties and the mid-
nineteen-sixties [3.0] the British public is witnessing [1.8] some of the most 
tumultuous events in American society [1.5] namely the height of [0.5] the 
radical [0.2] end of the civil rights movement [8.6] it isn't just the laudable 
claims of Martin Luther King [2.1] to end discrimination in the South [0.8] 
that is being witnessed at this moment [1.4] but is also [1.3] a recognition [0.
7] of massive [1.0] violence and upheaval across the north [0.3] of at-, the 
United States [2.7] from around nineteen-sixty-four to sixty-eight [2.3] the 
every summer of [0.3] in the United States there is massive [0.3] urban unrest 
[1.0] massive urban unrest centred around the issue of race [6.3] that focuses 
[0.4] attention [1.0] and fears and concerns [0.6] of the British public [1.3] 
as for the 
possibility of such tensions emerging here [0.8] and of the necessity to avoid 
those tensions [19.0] now in the earliest periods [0.2] er [0.2] where the 
state is concerned to intervene in race relations [0.6] er [0.2] its main [0.2] 
concern [0.5] is to find ways of overcoming [0.3] differences [0.3] between 
immigrant [0.4] and indigenous populations [4.0] differences it regards [0.3] 
as primarily those of [0.4] culture [0.2] and identity [1.3] and again we can 
see how that ties in [0.4] quite centrally [0.5] to questions of [2.3] 
Britishness [0.9] of what is to be British [4.1] during this earliest period [1.
3] there is a perception [0.6] that the only way in which to ensure good rel-, 
race relations [0.4] is to integrate [1.5] actively [0.5] that immigrant 
population [0.5] into broader conceptions [0.4] dominant conceptions [0.5] of 
British [0.3] national [0.3] life [0.3] and British [0.2] national identity [9.
7] now one [0.2] needs to think through what underlies [0.5] that sort of [0.2] 
conception [2.6] it is a conception which requires one to think [0.4] of ways 
in which black people [0.3] can be made [0.6] to fit [0.3] the model [0.7] of 
[0.3] Britishness [6.8] and as soon as the problem is identified to be one of 
difference [0.2] in culture [0.3] and identity [2.5] then the solution to that 
problem is to find ways of [5.8] is to find ways of [2.3] undermining those 
differences of culture and identity or lessening [0.3] their problematic nature 
[0.5] the view [0.5] at the time the view f-, [0.4] w-, [0.2] during the 
nineteen-sixties was [0.3] that those differences of culture and identity were 
only temporary differences [4.5] they were temporary differences that could be 
ironed out [0.4] of the immigrant population [9.6] cultural differences [2.9] 
could be flattened [0.9] in a way that would allow for the effective 
integration of black [0.3] people into white society [0.4] linguistic 
differences [0.4] were regarded linguistic differences were regarded as a 
central feature of that [0.8] one of the major problems between black and white 
societies was [0.5] one of language [2.9] ironing out those sorts of 
differences would allow for effective integration [0.4] now [0.4] it follows 
pretty obviously if you take that view [7.9] that the easiest way to pursue 
integration [1.8] is to get the black 
population to be [0.4] like the white population [2.7] to make the cultural 
significance [0.2] of the black population [0.7] less significant [10.0] and 
during the nineteen-sixties there were very deliberate attempts to pursue 
exactly [0.8] that concern [7.7] cultural [0.6] cohesiveness [0.2] amongst the 
black population [0.9] was regarded to be [0.4] a feature of its concentration 
in particular areas [1.0] the fact that the black population was [0.2] 
concentrated in certain large cities [0.4] meant that [0.9] it was always going 
to be able to protect a culture that was regarded as [0.3] problematic [4.4] 
therefore [0.8] a way of overcoming that problem [0.2] was to distribute [0.3] 
the black population [1.9] deconcentrate [1.5] the black population [1.0] in a 
way in which its cultural identities [0.4] and cultural bonds [0.7] would not 
be able to be maintained [10.9] the most notorious example of this [0.3] was a 
policy pursued by most [0.6] major [0.6] metropolitan local authorities [0.4] 
throughout this period [1.9] and it was the active intervention of local 
authorities to distribute an ethnic minority population [3.1] 
into white society so one got for example in terms of public housing [0.6] in 
[0.4] cities like Manchester and Birmingham [0.6] the attempt [3.3] to 
establish housing ratios [0.4] of ethnic minorities [3.1] to deconcentrate 
ethnic minorities [0.4] councils would [0.8] establish a particular ratio that 
they it regarded as [0.3] an optimum one [1.0] for [2.7] the concentration of 
black people [0.2] within white society [0.2] so in Birmingham for example [0.
3] every [1.3] every [0.3] housing estate [0.8] had a particular ratio inputted 
on it [1.7] there would be thirteen white families for every one black family 
[2.8] in Manchester the figure was one in i think nine [9.0] in the education 
sector [0.7] ethnic ni-, minority [0.2] children [2.5] were required [5.7] to 
be taught [0.3] only in English [2.8] with no move [0.4] to integrate them 
slowly into that process [0.6] the idea was if they were made to speak English 
they would just be forced to speak English [0.5] whether they could or not 
they'd have to learn [8.3] but these were generally ad hoc measures during this 
period [13.0] but they are ad hoc measures [1.0] that are perceived to be the 
right 
way forward in terms of integrating ethnic minorities [0.3] and they are a 
stimulus and a pressure [0.3] for the state [0.4] to advance [0.2] a more 
coherent [0.3] and deliberate response [1.1] in the form [0.2] of [0.2] race 
relations [0.3] protection [0.6] for ethnic minorities [2.7] because what is 
clear [2.0] is that despite attempts to integrate [0.3] the black community [0.
3] there is still hostility [0.3] from the indigenous white population [0.3] 
and there is no guarantee [0.7] of how long it will take [0.8] purs-, pursuing 
policies like [0.2] distributing black populations et cetera for them to be [1.
3] integrated effectively into British society [0.4] there is a recognition 
that without protection in law [0.7] the black community in Britain [0.2] is [0.
9] utterly vulnerable [3.3] to the prejudices of white society [3.5] and the 
attempt by the state [0.3] to offer black people protection in the law [1.6] 
come to fruition [0.4] in the mid to late nineteen-sixties [0.2] in the form of 
the nineteen-sixty-five [0.4] and nineteen-sixty-eight [0.4] Race Relations 
Acts [14.9] now the nineteen-sixty-five Race Relations Act [1.7] was to say the 
least [0.6] 
limited [0.5] in its effects [1.1] and even the potential [0.3] of its effects 
[3.2] the nineteen-sixty-five act established no criminal sanction [0.7] for 
those guilty of racial discrimination [0.9] [sniff] [1.3] and the Race 
Relations Board [1.8] was set up as part of the act [0.6] to deal with cases [1.
3] of racial discrimination [1.2] but the Race Relations Board [0.3] had a very 
narrow remit [2.9] and in practice was unable to deal with [1.3] the vast 
majority of complaints it initially received [0.4] [sniff] [2.8] the nineteen-
sixty-eight act was tougher [7.3] before detailing some of the aspects of that 
let's just remember what's going on in nineteen-sixty-eight [0.6] and this is 
part of the state's dual strategy [0.3] with respect to race relations [0.3] 
because it isn't just about protecting ethnic minorities [0.3] it's also still 
about [0.5] maintaining [0.4] that need to be tough on immigration [0.4] it's 
about maintaining the need to define [0.2] absolutely [1.2] what [0.3] being 
British is about [1.0] because remember in nineteen-sixty-eight [1.3] there is 
the perceived flood [0.2] of Kenyan Asians into 
Britain [1.4] escaping persecution in Kenya [4.1] nineteen-sixty-eight [0.3] is 
[0.9] the pinnacle moment [0.2] of [0.6] Powellism [2.2] and of the concerns 
expressed about the presence of ethnic minorities in Britain [6.9] so the 
state's response to ethnic ni-, minorities is not simply a protective one [0.5] 
it's a protective one on one side [0.8] and a [0.5] tough [1.4] uncompromising 
one on the other [3.0] the nineteen-sixty-eight Act [1.7] made it unlawful in 
explicit terms [0.3] made it unlawful to discriminate [0.2] on the grounds of 
race [0.3] colour [0.2] or ethnic [0.3] or national [0.2] origin [7.6] and it 
specifically highlighted [0.6] discrimination in the areas of employment [0.6] 
and of housing [0.6] and of the provision [0.2] of goods [0.2] and services [0.
5] [sniff] [1.4] and the nineteen-sixty-eight act banned [0.5] discriminatory 
notices [0.3] and adverts [2.8] and it also expanded [1.0] the remit of the 
original Race Relations Board [0.6] offering it firmer [0.2] legal sanctions [5.
8] so far so good [2.9] but the problem with both of those acts in nineteen-
sixty-five and nineteen-sixty-eight [2.1] was that [0.4] they represented [0.6] 
a very [0.6] specific [2.2] way of 
understanding [0.8] what racial discrimination amounted to [5.5] in both of 
those acts [1.3] racial discrimination [0.3] was primarily understood [0.2] in 
fact [0.6] that's wrong i-, they were exclusively [0.7] both acts understood 
racial discrimination [0.3] to be a matter of active [0.8] and purposeful [0.5] 
discrimination [5.4] that is to say [0.8] any attempt to establish that racial 
discrimination had occurred [0.5] required one to prove [0.3] that there had 
been explicit [0.3] intention [0.2] to discriminate [0.4] against [0.3] ethnic 
minorities [0.3] in some way [4.2] unsurprisingly [3.2] under n-, [1.6] either 
of these acts very few people [0.8] were successful [0.6] in making claims [2.
6] and indeed even fewer [0.6] were particularly successful [0.6] at 
prosecuting successfully [0.4] those initial claims [5.5] and it's here we can 
see quite centrally [0.3] why it's important we understand the nature of race 
and racism [6.1] 'cause if we u-, [0.3] if we understand racism for example [0.
2] in terms of individual activity [4.3] if we understand racism as 
identifiable within [0.4] the locus or the origin of [0.4] a particular 
intended activity [2.9] then of course we 
have the advantage [1.4] of knowing what we're looking at when we're trying to 
put legal sanction against it [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 [0.3] you know what you're looking at [1.0] you know that you can 
say that's against the law you're not allowed to do that [2.6] the problem 
though [1.0] is how much racism is like that [15.9] because as we discussed 
earlier [0.5] in the course [1.5] if you [0.8] understand racism in a different 
way if you understand it in some institutional sense [0.4] or if you understand 
it as something [0.3] systemic rather than [0.2] something that just [0.4] 
happens to be what people believe [3.2] if you believe that racism is 
reproduced [0.9] through operations in the economy [0.2] and in society [0.3] 
and in culture [3.8] then does it have to be intentional [4.7] does it have to 
be about the deliberate [0.3] actions [0.2] of a set of individuals [0.2] who 
make [0.3] their [0.3] deliberate intentions explicit [9.7] so racism may in 
fact be something [1.3] more general [5.5] and less [2.1] 
deliberate in those ways [0.5] but then the problem immediately arises [0.3] as 
that if that's the case [0.5] then how do you begin to legislate against it [0.
9] 'cause what are you identifying [1.0] if you can't find people who are 
saying i'm being a racist and i'm not going to employ you [0.2] then what are 
you looking at [7.7] moreover how do you begin [0.4] to conceive of how [1.0] 
whatever that racism amounts to at an institutional level how do you begin [0.
4] to understand its relationships with other forms of discrimination [0.8] 
gender discrimination [2.2] discrimination [2.3] with respect to sexuality [7.
5] at this point are we not moving into the realms [0.4] of some vague notion 
[0.5] that people are just not treated very fairly [0.3] h-, m-, and at that 
point if we are [1.1] how do you get any sense of precise legal definition [0.
4] over that [1.6] that is a core concern for the state [1.2] during this 
period [7.3] but it's the recognition that [0.3] by focusing on individual 
explicit intentions [1.7] it's the recognition that by [0.2] focusing on that 
[1.9] th-, [0.9] there is no effective [0.5] or [0.8] particular 
legislation aimed at that is not effective in overturning discrimination [0.3] 
it's the recognition of that [0.2] that leads to the state [0.5] during the 
nineteen-seventies [1.1] leads to the state's rethinking [0.3] of its 
approaches [0.4] to race relations [1.5] which comes together [0.4] in [1.8] 
the codified [0.9] Race Relations Act of nineteen- [0.2] seventy-six [1.2] 
[sniff] [3.3] the Race Relations Act of nineteen-seventy-six follows close on 
the heels of the Sex Discrimination Act [0.3] of nineteen-seventy-five [1.5] 
and in both cases [0.6] these were legislation [0.5] that emphasized [0.5] not 
only [1.1] the illegality of intentional acts of racism [1.0] but also [0.4] 
made illegal [2.1] those [0.8] procedures [0.2] and activities [0.3] that 
systemically [0.3] produced [0.6] or reproduced [0.2] discrimination [2.3] what 
we otherwise refer to as indirect discrimination [3.0] and it's in the nineteen-
seventy-six Race Relations Act [0.5] where the emphasis shifts from [0.3] 
intentional acts [0.6] that discriminate [0.3] in explicit ways [2.3] to [1.5] 
a focus instead on the outcomes [0.8] of procedures [0.4] that in practice [0.
3] discriminate [0.2] whether they [0.3] explicitly intend 
to or not [1.6] so the focus goes to outcome [2.1] rather than [1.1] focusing 
on [0.2] intention [6.2] what that allowed for [0.2] therefore [0.7] was that 
even where policies and procedures [0.3] were equal in a formal sense [5.2] 
what mattered was whether the outcome [0.6] of those procedures [0.8] was to 
discriminate against certain [0.3] racially designated groups [0.6] and if they 
could be shown [0.4] in their outcomes [0.3] to discriminate [0.2] whether they 
meant to or not [0.2] whether they explicitly denied that that was the case or 
not [0.8] then they were deemed to be illegal [5.9] that came under the remit 
[0.7] of the Commission for Racial Equality [2.2] which was set up [0.4] 
specifically [0.3] to streamline [0.4] the administration [0.7] of [0.2] this 
particular area of the law [3.8] now you can read about [2.0] the Commission 
for Racial Equality in your reading i would make a few comments however [0.6] 
these are that [0.2] despite what i think is an enormous shift [0.3] in 
emphasis [0.3] in the race relations [1.0] perspective [1.2] on behalf of the 
state despite [0.3] that enormous shift in emphasis [0.3] from [0.2] intention 
[0.2] to outcome [1.4] the 
Commission for Racial Equality in practice [2.9] has not been effec-, as 
effective as i suspect [0.4] was once hoped [1.4] because even today twenty 
years later [0.4] what is clear is [0.3] that its definitions of discrimination 
[0.9] and its [0.6] attempts to impose those definitions in judgements of [0.3] 
discrimination claims [0.3] are still incredibly vague [3.0] it isn't clear how 
[0.2] general definitions of [0.8] racist outcomes [0.2] still [0.3] get [0.2] 
put into practice [0.3] as [0.4] the criteria for judgement [0.7] of 
discrimination cases [1.7] moreover [0.2] the Commission for Racial Equality [0.
7] is administratively cumbersome [1.5] and incredibly time-consuming [0.7] for 
those engaged [0.3] in trying to make claims [1.9] and further [0.5] the 
Commission for Racial Equality [0.6] does not have [0.4] a particularly harsh 
set [0.2] of sanctions [0.3] in practice [0.2] for those it finds guilty of 
discrimination [9.4] and the one thing [0.6] that the Commission for Racial 
Equality doesn't have [0.2] in any way at all [2.9] is any form of [0.2] 
positive sanction [0.4] to reverse [0.2] what it regards as discrimination [0.
2] it does not have the ability to positively [0.3] 
discriminate [0.5] to reverse what it regards [0.2] as discriminatory practices 
[0.3] it has the ability [0.4] to stop [0.7] discrimination [0.5] at the moment 
it finds it [0.3] but it does not have the sanction [0.2] of [0.3] of requiring 
[0.2] an employer [0.2] or the provider of goods and services [0.3] to actively 
redress that balance [12.4] but the nineteen-seventy-six act [0.3] a-, also 
represented something much [0.7] more [2.9] well much less tangible but perhaps 
more important nevertheless [0.4] than [0.6] simply the view [1.9] of a way in 
which race relations could be thought of [0.6] in terms of integrating and 
assimilating black people [0.3] about helping black people overcome their 
problems [0.3] the nineteen-seventy-six act reflected something [0.2] very 
different [0.5] again in the thinking [0.2] about race relations more generally 
[0.9] because the seventy-six act [0.3] recognized even in a half-hearted way 
[0.7] it nevertheless recognized [0.4] that conceptions of good race relations 
[0.3] could not be premised on the idea of simply [0.2] needing [0.2] to 
assimilate black people into dominant white society [3.4] it recognized [4.0] 
in 
very explicit ways in terms of what it regarded as a remit of the Commission 
for Racial Equality [0.6] what it regarded as [0.2] the context within which [0.
2] the nineteen-seventy-six act would take its course [3.6] it recognized [1.7] 
that Britain was [0.2] explicitly and permanently [0.3] a multicultural society 
[1.7] a pluralistic [0.2] society [7.5] and it presupposed that in the context 
of being a multicultural [0.3] and pluralistic society [3.2] Britain [3.1] 
would r-, [0.6] or British society [0.3] would need to include [0.3] and 
encourage [0.4] those people [0.2] it had previously [0.5] designated as 
different [1.1] in their difference [0.7] the aim was not now to iron out 
differences [1.1] it was about encouraging [0.3] the positive articulation of 
those differences [1.9] in helping to shape in an active way [5.2] the nature 
of [3.2] British public life [1.2] and British social life [10.9] now of course 
the reality [0.3] despite that rhetoric and despite that recognition [0.3] the 
reality was actually quite different [0.4] er [0.2] in many ways or the reality 
was w-, at least more begrudging [1.4] than [0.2] that rhetoric would 
presuppose [3.7] because 
of course during the nineteen-seventies there were further restrictions [0.4] 
placed on [1.5] black immigration into Britain [1.1] again sending out a rather 
different message about [0.9] the nature of that pluralism [0.2] the nature of 
that multiculturalism [0.3] the nature of the boundaries that were being drawn 
around British identity [4.9] nevertheless there was something pragmatic [0.3] 
in this approach [0.5] in regarding Britain [0.2] as multicultural [0.4] in 
regarding Britain [0.2] as pluralistic [0.7] the pragmatics of this were [0.2] 
that it simply was not possible [0.4] to look at British society and pretend 
there weren't black people there [1.2] and to pretend that those black people 
suddenly become white [0.5] culturally [1.2] or become white in their 
identifications [3.4] politically and socially [2.4] there was a recognition 
that there was [0.3] there were differences [0.8] that were important 
differences [0.2] that couldn't be [0.3] whitewashed [10.6] and that black [0.
5] communities in Britain would not [0.6] take an active participatory role in 
British life [0.4] unless [1.0] those 
differences were acknowledged in some sort of positive way [1.4] now the 
nineteen-seventy-six act was [0.7] the last major [0.5] state inspired [0.4] 
initiative [0.3] in this area [0.4] twenty years later [0.9] more than twenty 
years later [2.0] there has been no [0.4] state [0.5] legislation [0.9] at the 
national level [0.9] in the area of race [0.3] relations [5.3] for the most 
part therefore for the last twenty years [0.3] it hasn't been at the national 
level [0.3] where the issue of race relations has for the most part played 
itself out [2.1] over the last twenty years the main focus for [0.2] debate [0.
3] and [2.5] moves forwards and r-, regressive moves backwards in this area [0.
2] have almost entirely been [0.2] played out at the local level [2.0] [sniff] 
now of course the local level is important because the local level is exactly 
[0.3] where the politics of race and racism get played out [1.7] it's exactly 
at the local level [0.2] that we see notions of community coming together [0.5] 
it's exactly at the losh-, local level [0.2] that we see [0.2] the importance 
of the identities those communities [0.2] assume [1.1] i mean 
you're thinking of it in thinking of it in the most simple terms [0.3] it's at 
the local level that we think about [0.2] what [0.8] our neighbourhoods are 
like [0.2] it's at the local level [0.4] we think [0.2] in the most explicit 
terms [0.2] about who our neighbours are [2.7] and it's at the local level [0.
9] that we will [0.4] er or we have seen [0.3] that those tensions operate [0.
5] those tensions operated in Notting Hill [0.2] because Notting Hill was a 
local area where there were black people [0.2] living in antagonistic 
relationship to white people on the ground [1.9] it was at the local level [1.
4] that Peter Griffiths in Smethwick [0.5] in the mi-, mid-nineteen-sixties [0.
2] could make his appeal [0.6] about [1.4] h-, if you want a nigger neighbour 
vote Labour [0.4] because it was at the local level [0.9] that the politics of 
race [0.6] was articulated in such a frenzy [0.4] and such [0.6] intensity [1.
2] during the sixties and seventies [6.8] local authorities [1.5] became 
actively involved in the process [0.4] of [0.7] intervening in race relations 
at the local level [2.9] after [0.4] and very much [0.6] as a direct 
consequence [0.4] of [0.6] the urban unrest in the nineteen-eighties [2.5] the 
most violent and frightening [0.4] manifestation [0.2] of local antagonisms [0.
3] between blacks and whites [6.5] it's in this context [0.4] the first [0.7] 
deliberate [1.3] and actively empowering moment [0.4] in black political life 
as i will argue later in the course [1.1] it's at this very moment that the 
black community begins to exert pressure [0.3] on [0.4] local authorities [1.2] 
to address problems [0.6] that are not being addressed effectively at the 
national level [0.4] of [1.0] discrimination in employment in housing in 
service provisions [0.3] in education [0.2] in the social services et cetera et 
cetera [2.5] and it's here we see the shift [3.2] from a national level 
recognition of the multicultural society [0.6] to a a rather different emphasis 
at the local level [0.3] towards anti-racism [2.3] here it's not simply about 
[0.3] Britain's a multicultural society [0.2] lots of different groups [0.6] 
live together in we're going to try and make it harmonious this is about 
addressing [0.3] the specific problem of racism [13.2] 
and as a consequence of the idea [0.2] that what needed to be addressed here 
was not [0.2] simply how to make [0.3] life for black people in Britain 
harmonious how to make race relations harmonious [0.3] but was actually about 
actively intervening [2.0] to address the problem of racism [3.3] the 
consequence of that realization [0.6] was the [0.5] emergence of a number of 
initiatives that were [0.4] pursued by local authorities across the country [1.
4] these included [0.4] the active monitoring of outcomes [0.7] of service 
provisions [0.7] in order to identify [0.3] discrimination [1.3] councils would 
increasingly monitor [0.6] their services [0.3] to see whether there were 
differential benefits going to one group or another [1.9] there was also an [0.
3] active [0.7] pursuit [1.0] of more ethnic minority recruitment [0.5] within 
local authorities [0.3] whether they be teachers [0.3] or local authority 
council workers [0.4] of whatever sort [0.7] or council officials themselves [1.
1] and moreover [0.2] large numbers of authorities [0.2] took the initiative [0.
2] in trying [0.3] to consult [0.5] in a much more [1.1] friendly manner [0.2] 
with the 
ethnic minority communities [0.7] and these ranged with all sorts of er [0.9] 
initiatives but the most obvious one now is that almost every local authority 
in Britain now [0.4] has translation services for all of its [0.9] information 
[0.2] i mean just a little example [0.6] that's now [2.0] a standard practice 
[0.3] now all of that those sorts of policies were initiated by [0.2] and were 
led [0.7] by [0.4] radical left [0.2] local authorities during the nineteen-
eighties [0.6] authorities like Haringay [1.7] in London Brent in London [1.1] 
Manchester City Council Liverpool City Council [2.7] now we all of course know 
[0.2] that it was exactly those same authorities during the nineteen-eighties 
[0.3] that were vilified at the national level [0.3] in the press [0.2] and by 
political parties [0.2] as being [0.3] the loony left [8.8] the intense media 
focus [0.3] on this these groups [0.2] of local authorities [0.2] focused 
absolutely centrally [0.4] on the question of what they were doing for our 
ethnic minorities [0.4] the whole discourse was pitched in terms of special 
treatment [0.3] for ethnic minorities [0.2] some of you may 
recall or will have read about [0.8] the apparent bans on things like golliwogs 
in [0.2] nursery schools [7.1] all of this stuff became equally pitched in 
terms of [0.6] the overt [0.2] and unnecessary and debilitating consequences of 
political correctness [4.9] where in education [0.8] authorities like the 
London [0.2] Inner London Education Authority [0.3] began to promote [0.7] 
explicitly anti-racist curricula [1.6] they were accused of brainwashing 
children [5.7] we will remember that there were active pursuits of policies 
around [0.2] adoption [1.3] where local authorities would try and encourage [0.
2] same race adoptions [2.1] this again was regarded [0.7] not only [0.2] as 
political correctness gone too far [0.4] but actually reverse discrimination [1.
1] [sniff] [4.1] a central focus of [0.2] local authority work [0.7] in this 
area became [1.0] contract compliance [0.7] local authorities would put their 
contracts out to tender [0.5] but would require [0.6] that [0.6] any company [0.
2] employed by the council [0.2] would have to meet certain requirements with 
regards [0.3] to ethnic minority representation and treatment [2.3] that [0.2] 
measure [1.0] was attacked [0.4] by [0.6] the Conservative government at the 
time [0.2] Margaret Thatcher explicitly accused these councils [0.4] of 
interfering with the market mechanism [1.6] imposing unreasonable demands on 
what would otherwise be a free market [2.2] and perhaps [0.5] the most 
controversial of all [0.5] of those local authority initiatives [0.4] was what 
was regarded [0.2] or was er [0.2] commonly [0.7] er called [0.3] race 
awareness training [0.7] [sniff] [2.3] race awareness training [0.4] 
initiatives [0.4] were essentially [1.9] promoting [0.5] the idea that [0.5] if 
one could change people's views on race [1.4] at the local level [0.2] if one 
could [0.2] challenge existing prejudices [3.3] then perhaps one could get some 
institutional [0.4] cultural change [0.5] in [0.5] prevailing racist ideas [0.
7] at the local level [2.5] now again race awareness training [0.2] was 
regarded [0.4] by the right as brainwashing [2.9] again [1.2] not again [2.1] 
ironically [0.5] race awareness training was attacked from the left [1.0] as [0.
5] emphasizing [2.4] or misemphasizing [1.5] individual activity [0.6] when you 
should have been emphasizing [0.2] institutional [0.8] results [5.3] and race 
awareness training 
really was the pinnacle moment [0.4] of this whole process [0.4] it was the 
point where local authorities [0.2] actively got involved [0.3] to try and 
change people's minds about race [4.6] and there's nothing obviously good about 
that [1.6] and in the practice of race awareness training some of you may even 
have gone through it [2.4] the realities of race awareness training are [0.5] 
that it is [0.4] in effect in its practice [0.2] was bullying [1.3] in effect 
local authorities did not reach a moment where they could genuinely say [0.5] 
that they were introducing some cultural change [0.3] into the organized 
institutions of local [0.3] politics in Britain [10.8] that is the management 
of race in Britain [1.4] in its most significant forms [1.6] what we see today 
in terms of the sensitivities [0.2] that we may acknowledge that councils have 
[0.5] that we may acknowledge in terms of employers' [0.8] commitments to [0.2] 
some level of equal opportunities [0.3] have come through that history [0.6] 
we'll explore the [0.4] more recent developments of that in the next lecture