Tories at war over Boris’ equality agenda


by Sunny Hundal    
5:18 pm - August 7th 2009

Tweet       Share on Tumblr

A war of words has broken out between Boris Johnson’s adminstration at the GLA and some supporters within the Conservative party.

The London Mayor published his long-awaited report on equalities policy this week titled – Equal Life Chances for All.

But before the report came out councillor Harry Phibbs, from Hammersmith and Fulham, wrote a long, rambling article for ConservativeHome arguing that Boris has been, “shamefully allowing Ken Livingstone’s ideology of quotas, interest groups, thought crime and racial separatism to remain largely intact.”

Among other things, Phibbs had problems with:

The draft has promised a commitment to “eliminating institutional discrimination”, which includes “unwitting prejudice.” It states that Mayoral appointees will “reflect the diversity of London.” It promises “responsible procurement”.

That tirade was taken up by Ed West on the Telegraph website, who said:

What’s so odd about the Tory strategy is that Boris won probably the most racially divided election in British history, winning huge support from white Britons in the outer boroughs “doughnut” and failing to win a majority of a single minority (with the exception of the Jews). This was partly because of Livingstone’s history of promoting black and now Muslim grievance politics, and partly because of demographics.

London is turning into an American-style racially divided city, thanks to runaway immigration and white flight, and in those sorts of societies people vote for their tribal party. For the Conservatives to cooperate with black racial identity politics is suicide, because the sort of black voters who believe their problems are down to racism and lack of taxpayer’s money, and not fatherlessness and a culture of violence and ignorance, are not going to vote Conservative.

Note how minorities are implicitly blamed for “white flight”. Also note how “black identity politics” is equated with “a culture of violence and ignorance”.

But the Boris administration, to their credit, were having none of Harry Phibbs’ tantrums. In an interview, deputy mayor Richard Barnes said:

Well I think Harry Phibbs has a lot to learn about life really hasn’t he? It was drawn to my attention what he said and he also criticises the language we used that it’s overly PC. Well when Harry aspires to be a little more than a councillor in Hammersmith and Fulham then I’m sure we can address and sit down and recognise the real issues.
…
The days of walking into an organisation with a machete in one hand and a sub-machine gun in the other are long gone.

Ouch!

Dave Hill provides some context, saying that:

The new element – as stressed by Boris’s deputy Richard Barnes in an interview here – is the recognition that those marooned in London’s margins aren’t necessarily defined by membership of an ethnic or sexual minority. They also include those such as jobless young white people and the elderly. Barnes describes this wider embrace as of a piece with enhancing social cohesion: “These are issues for all of us.”

Councillor Harry Phibbs, not happy with the rebuke, hit back with the paranoid theory that Boris was “oddly preoccupied with seeking to ingratiate themselves” with anti-Boris bloggers like Adam Bienkov and Political Animals.

Phibbs’ tirade against the ‘equality agenda’ was also rejected by Boris earlier when the Mayor’s deputy explained his willingness to enter the Stonewall Employers list again.

He also had some support from ConHome editor Tim Montgomerie who called deputy Mayor Richard Barnes “childish“.

For now, the Mayor’s administration are ignoring the nut-job wing of their party. But for how long?

   Tweet   Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Graham Smith

“London is turning into an American-style racially divided city, thanks to runaway immigration and white flight, and in those sorts of societies people vote for their tribal party.”

Which London is he living in?

2. Richard Gadsden

For now, the Mayor’s administration are ignoring the nut-job wing of their party. But for how long?

So when someone actually agrees with you and comes in from the cold, that’s how you treat them? Staggeringly ungracious.

3. Richard

“For now, the Mayor’s administration are ignoring the nut-job wing of their party.”

If by the nut-job wing you mean those who don’t see the need for bizarrely named positions like “diversity co-ordinators” then I would suggest such “nut jobs” are actually fairly representative of public opinion (regardless of whether or not one believes the public are correct). If they were opposed to the very concept of legal equality then I think “nut job” would be an accurate description.

4. Sunny H

I would suggest such “nut jobs” are actually fairly representative of public opinion

Next you’ll be telling me no doubt that Boris Johnson and Anthony Browne have a long record of bending over to satisfy the politically correct police.

Or I could suggest that the roles and the work being targeted here are not how they are made out to be. It’s quite easy to scream and shout from blogs without much knowledge. It looks more like Boris has gotten into power and realised things are a lot more complicated than when he was composing soundbytes against Livingstone for Andrew Gilligan.

The same applies here. The quote by Richard Barnes says it all really.

5. Holiday Maker

Calling people “nutjobs” is another way of abusing people on the grounds of their mental health. Didn’t you take Guido to task for calling Gordon Brown “bonkers”.

6. Tom

“Calling people “nutjobs” is another way of abusing people on the grounds of their mental health.”

OK, what shall we call them? I fairly randomly switch between ‘ultras’, ‘PX/CCO’, ‘wingnuts’, ‘neocons’ and have recently started calling them the Bilious Tendency, but I’m open to offers that don’t offend the ordinary decent mentally ill community by comparison. They’ve got enough to deal with without being compared to Phibbs and co.

7. Sunny H

I took him to task for specifically attributing mental illness not just using the word ‘bonkers’.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    : Tories start warring over Boris equality agenda http://bit.ly/If7QE

  2. Adam Bienkov

    RT @libcon: Tories start warring over Boris equality agenda http://bit.ly/If7QE #containsphibbs

    [Original tweet]

  3. Leon Green

    RT @AdamBienkov: RT @libcon: Tories start warring over Boris equality agenda http://bit.ly/If7QE #containsphibbs (via @pickledpolitics)

    [Original tweet]

  4. Liberal Conspiracy

    : Tories start warring over Boris equality agenda http://bit.ly/If7QE

    [Original tweet]

  5. Adam Bienkov

    RT @libcon: Tories start warring over Boris equality agenda http://bit.ly/If7QE #containsphibbs

    [Original tweet]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.