#ash_sarkar

  • The report of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities

    The Commission’s report sets out a new, positive agenda for change. It balances the needs of individuals, communities and society, maximising opportunities and ensuring fairness for all.

    The Commission has considered detailed quantitative data and qualitative evidence to understand why disparities exist, what works and what does not. It has commissioned new research and invited submissions from across the UK.

    Its work and recommendations will improve the quality of data and evidence about the types of barriers faced by people from different backgrounds. This will help to inform actions and drive effective and lasting change.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-report-of-the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities

    #rapport #UK #Angleterre #racisme #discriminations #inégalités
    #Commission_on_Race_and_Ethnic_Disparities (#CRED)

    pour télécharger le rapport :
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/974507/20210331_-_CRED_Report_-_FINAL_-_Web_Accessible.pdf

    • Downing Street rewrote ‘independent’ report on race, experts claim

      Commissioners allege No 10 distorted their work on inequality, after conclusions played down institutional racism.

      Officials at Downing Street have been accused of rewriting much of its controversial report into racial and ethnic disparities, despite appointing an independent commission to conduct an honest investigation into inequality in the UK.

      The Observer has been told that significant sections of the report published on 31 March, which were criticised and debunked by health professionals, academics, business chiefs and crime experts, were not written by the 12 commissioners who were appointed last July.

      The 258-page document was not made available to be read in full or signed off by the group, which included scientist and BBC broadcaster Maggie Aderin-Pocock and Samir Shah, former chair of the Runnymede Trust, nor were they made aware of its 24 final recommendations. Instead, the finished report, it is alleged, was produced by No 10.

      Kunle Olulode, an anti-racism activist and director of the charity Voice4Change, is the first commissioner to condemn the government publicly for its lack of transparency. In a statement to the Observer, Olulode’s charity was scathing of the way evidence was cherrypicked, distorted and denied in the final document.

      “The report does not give enough to show its understanding of institutional or structural discrimination … evidence in sections, that assertive conclusions are based on, is selective,” it said. “The report gives no clear direction on what expectations of the role of public institutions and political leadership should be in tackling race and ethnic disparities. What is the role of the state in this?”

      One commissioner, who spoke out on condition of anonymity, accused the government of “bending” the work of its commission to fit “a more palatable” political narrative and denying the working group the autonomy it was promised.

      “We did not read Tony’s [Sewell] foreword,” they claimed. “We did not deny institutional racism or play that down as the final document did. The idea that this report was all our own work is full of holes. You can see that in the inconsistency of the ideas and data it presents and the conclusions it makes. That end product is the work of very different views.”

      The commissioner revealed that they had been privy only to the section of the report they were assigned, and that it had soon become apparent the exercise was not being taken sufficiently seriously by No 10.

      “Something of this magnitude takes proper time – we were only given five months to do this work, on a voluntary basis,” they said. In contrast to the landmark 1999 #Macpherson_report (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/feb/22/macpherson-report-what-was-it-and-what-impact-did-it-have), an inquiry into the death of #Stephen_Lawrence, or the 2017 #Lammy_Review, both of which took 18 months to conclude, the report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities (Cred) was not peer reviewed and was published just seven months after the group first met on a videocall.

      The group, led by Sewell, was set up by #Samuel_Kasumu, No 10’s most senior black special adviser, who resigned from his post on the day the report was published, aghast at its final findings. Accusations that #Munira_Mirza, director of No 10’s policy unit, was heavily involved in steering the direction of the supposedly independent report were not directly addressed by a No 10 spokesperson, who said: “I would reiterate the report is independent and that the government is committed to tackling inequality.”

      A source involved in the commission told the Observer that “basic fundamentals in putting a document like this together were ignored. When you’re producing something so historic, you have to avoid unnecessary controversy, you don’t court it like this report did. And the comms was just shocking.”

      While the prime minister sought to distance himself from the criticism a day after its publication, unusually it was his office rather than the Cred secretariat which initially released the report to the press.

      A spokesperson for the race commission said: “We reject these allegations. They are deliberately seeking to divert attention from the recommendations made in the report.

      “The commission’s view is that, if implemented, these 24 recommendations can change for the better the lives of millions across the UK, whatever their ethnic or social background. That is the goal they continue to remain focused on.”

      https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/apr/11/downing-street-rewrote-independent-report-on-race-experts-claim

      #récriture #modification #indépendance #contreverse

    • voir aussi les critiques dans la page wiki dédiée au rapport :
      Reactions

      Political:

      Sir Keir Starmer, leader of the Labour Party, said that he was “disappointed” by the Commission’s report.[10][11]

      Isabelle Parasram, vice president of the Liberal Democrats, issued a statement that the Commission had “missed the opportunity to make a clear, bold statement on the state of race equality in this country”. Parasram said that the “evidence and impact of racism in the UK is overwhelming” and that “whilst some of recommendations made in the report are helpful, they fall far short of what could have been achieved”.[12]

      The Green Party of England and Wales issued a statement condemning the summary of the report as “a deliberate attempt to whitewash institutional racism” and that “Institutional racism in the UK does exist”.[13]

      Other:

      David Goodhart welcomed the report as “a game-changer for how Britain talks about race”.[14]

      Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the Bishop of Dover, described the report as “deeply disturbing”; she said the “lived experience” of the people “tells a different story to that being shared by this report”.[15]

      The historian David Olusoga accused the report’s authors of appearing to prefer “history to be swept under the carpet”.[16]

      A Guardian editorial quoted Boris Johnson’s intent to “change the narrative so we stop the sense of victimisation and discrimination”[17] when setting up the commission, and as evidence of the reality of racial inequality listed five recent government reports on different aspects:[18]

      - the criminal justice system (the David Lammy review of 2017[19][20]);
      - schools, courts, and the workplace (the Theresa May race audit of 2017[21]);
      - pay (the Ruby McGregor-Smith review of 2017[22][23]);
      - deaths in police custody (the Elish Angiolini report of 2017[24]);
      - the Windrush scandal (the Wendy Williams review of 2020[25][26]).

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Race_and_Ethnic_Disparities