The initiative of assimilation was closely followed by the concept of integration. One way to foster good race relations was to learn about ‘other’ cultures and ensure all children learn about them too. Roy Jenkins in 1966 defined this approach as ‘ equal opportunity accompanied by cultural diversity in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance.’ (Blackstone, Parekh & Saunders; 1998:22). Multicultural policies were debated and implemented. However, at its core the integrationist model still had a commitment to promoting social and cultural stability but it was still in a framework where ‘black’ was the ‘problem’ of the individual ‘British’ meant ‘white’ and ‘Britain’ was equated with homogeneity (Saraga; 1998:111). But the problem with the implementation of equal opportunities in the context of cultural pluralism was later undermined by a series of Immigration Acts designed to keep black people out of Britain. Black people were repeatedly seen as unwelcome, not as part of Britain, therefore restriction on their entry would lead to better social or race relations (Skellington; 1996:64). The 1968 and 1971 Immigration Acts strengthened institutional racism in immigration control. The linking of immigration controls with integrative measures was seen as a significant step, since it signalled a move towards management of domestic race relations as well as legitimising the institutionalisation of firm controls at the point of entry. This followed with the implementation of three successive Race Relations Acts, 1965, 1968, 1976, which made direct and indirect racial discrimination a criminal offence (Solomos and Les Back; 1995:174). At the same time, there was criticism of multicultural policies from both the left and right. The left argued that understanding the ‘other’ of black cultures did not tackle the power relations of racism. The approach led to an exoticisation of black cultures, which left the white culture unexplored and untouched. The right argued that it was important to keep ‘cultures’ distinct and therefore, campaigned for this (Bhavnani; 2001:77). These arguments for cultural distinctiveness and separation were counterpointed by policies on race equality and antiracism. The policies on race equality were given momentum by the disquiet of black parents in the 1960s and early 70s over the institutionalised inequality in the education system. This was still visible in the early eighties when the Rampton Report (1981) identified intentional and unintentional racism in the educational system and recognised it as a key factor in disadvantaging black children ().
The 1976 Race Relations Act, that created the Commission for Racial Equality moved local authorities under Section 71 to implement equal opportunity policies (Williams; 1989:91). All
Acts have established the legal and political framework for initiatives to tackle racial discrimination and inequality to this day (Solomos and Les Back; 1995:173). These policies have been held together by the notion that the main objective of equal opportunities policies in this field is to secure free competition between individuals and eliminate barriers created by racial discrimination. Yet research findings have shown that in practice the impact of public policy in this field has been limited. Solomos and Les Back (1995:174) argue that recent research on such diverse areas as housing, employment and welfare indicates the equal opportunity policies have had only a limited effect on levels of discrimination. It also faced the problem as such that the 1976 Act saw the extension of the law to cover indirect discrimination. The problem was, as Law (1996:12) suggests, the vast majority of cases heard was of direct discrimination. Nevertheless, lawsuits about wrongful dismissal on grounds of race are frequent and of high profile. Critically, the Act negates the principle of voluntary interaction. A free society which Britain claims it is, cannot force individuals to co-operate without their mutual consent. Neither so in the labour market. If a person wants to take race into account in dealing with people, no matter how stupid that would be, he/she has a right to do so. By forcing a company to follow a certain hiring policy, you negate their property rights and weaken the foundations on which a capitalist society rests. Another point to be argued is a distinctive to hire people from racial minorities. If companies regard a group of people as potentially harder to dismiss should conditions change with associated risks of severe lawsuits, they are less likely to employ them. At the same time it can be relatively hard to determine whether a company has a racist policy or not. Also, what about the quotas that require employers to hire a certain number of people from various racial minorities? This in recent years has become part of the legal system with the rationale that the wheels of change have to be given the push by the government. Could it not be argued that this in it self is racist. Black people would like to think they are being employed on merit not because that company has a duty to employ a certain number of Black minorities within it.
Nevertheless by the 1990s race had become neutralised. No process or dialogue was initiated on how racism could be challenged. Racism had disappeared from public consciousness or was merely included in a general equalities agenda. That is however until the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, racism was explicitly mentioned as an urgent matter for public policy. As Bhavnani (2001:97) notes, ‘the agenda on social policy and planning became a reaction to a specific event, currently the Lawrence Inquiry.’
The Inquiry on Stephen Lawrence’s murder provided a space within which to refocus public attention towards the enduring problem of racism. The Inquiry Report had found that the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist (Bhavnani; 2001:97-98). The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry generated a flurry of positive responses to the findings and 70 key recommendations for change. This led to the 2000 Race Relations Amendment Act, which requires public bodies to promote race equality as a statutory duty. It came into force in April 2001 and as a result of campaigning by many groups, including the Commission of Racial Equality, the government was forced into amending the Bill to include indirect discrimination ().
Also significant, is the legislation that affects local government and public sector, including the 1998 Human Rights Act, which came in to force in October 2000. For the first time, individuals had the right to enforce their European Convention rights in the UK courts. The right to be free of discrimination and the right to a fair trial are among the rights included (Bhavnani; 2001:101). Spencer (2000) has written about the implications of the Human Rights Act in relation to race and racism. She argues that the right to family life may enable families to challenge their separation by immigration controls or deportation. Freedom from degrading treatment may provide an additional ground on which to challenge discriminatory treatment or harassment. In each case the act protects people from religious and racial discrimination in the enjoyment of their rights. Together, the Race Relations Amendments Act and the Human Rights Act have set a culture for promoting equality and strengthening group and individual rights.
In this context, social policy is positive on the one hand, in that we now have legislation and an action plan to promote race equality. On the other hand, we have witnessed a stream of legislation and political discourse which fuels racism and which excludes a whole range on minorities from feeling British (Bhavnani; 2001:101). For instance the successive implementation of the immigration Acts, but more recent, the Immigration and Asylum Act (1999). Carriers’ liability and visa sanctions before entry will prevent many endangered people from fleeing even the countries internationally recognised for their abysmal human rights record. Those who do arrive will be subject to poverty, exclusion and separation from a supportive community. The dispersal policy compels asylum seekers to be spread out over the country, provision for them is likely to be poor, since local government has not been given resources to handle extra housing and benefit needs. Also debates in the popular press have fuelled racism with cries of ‘spongers,’ ‘anxious to live of the state,’ ‘unwelcome’ are screamed from the tabloids. It can be argued that the Act like the previous Acts have effectively fuelled racism (Bhavnani; 2001:102).
On a more recent note, there is currently a bill to abolish the right of defendants to jury trial for offences such as minor theft, criminal damage and assault. This will have a greater impact on black people since they are over-represented in such cases and have historically received the most severe sentences (). All these developments confirm and exacerbate institutional racism.
This essay has attempted to discuss historically to present day the extent to which Social Policy in the UK reduces or increases race discrimination and oppression. The ethnic minority population of Great Britain had grown rapidly since the end of the 2nd World War, and since the mid-50s in particular. By the 1960s Britain had, for the first time, to find solutions to the new problems arising out of its transformation into a multiracial society, and successive governments enacted the first statutory measures to combat discrimination in this country. There was the successive implementation of the Race Relations Acts and the Human Rights Act to promote race equality, while these policies tried to alleviate the problem, there were others working directly against it such as immigration policies. Those who tried to enter the country were faced with hardship and poverty. With media images of the ‘unwelcome sponger’ all effectively added to racism. In this context, social policy gives from one hand then takes away with the other. Therefore, it could be argued that social policy in the UK both increases and reduces race discrimination and oppression at the same time. At present, it is without doubt that racial discrimination persists in the UK despite Race Relation Legislation. Ethnic minorities still suffer discrimination in all areas of the public and private sectors (). It is produced and reproduced by a variety of social, economic and political processes. However, what has recently come to light is upon analysis of official figures, if the population of ethnic minorities keeps on growing at the current rate of 4%, it could be that the white population in Britain will be for the first time in history the ethnic minority by the end of the century (Donnellan; 2001:40). Will racism have been eradicated or is the white population of the future to be subjected to the same kinds of racism that Black people have suffered in Britain over the last decade? Only time will tell.
Bibliography
Bhavnani, R. (2001). Rethinking Interventions in Racism. England: Trentham Books Ltd
Blackstone, Parekh and Sanders. (1998). Race Relations in Britain. London: Routledge
Donnellan, C. (2001). The Racism Issue. England: Independence
Pierson, C. (2001). Beyond the Welfare State. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd
Law, I. (1996). Racism, Ethnicity and Social Policy. England: Prentice Hall
Skellington, R. (1996). ‘Race’ in Britain Today. London: Sage Publishers
Solomos, J. (1993). Race and Racism in Britain. London: Macmillan Press Ltd
Solomos J. and Back, L. (1995). Race, Politics and Social Change. London: Routledge
Solomos, J. and Back, L. (1996). Racism and Society. UK: Macmillian Press Ltd
Taylor, D. (1996). Critical Social Policy – A Reader. London: Sage Publications
Young, P. (2000). Mastering Social Welfare. London: Macmillan Press Ltd
Williams, F. (1989). Social Policy - A Critical Introduction. UK: Blackwell Inc
