Illustration: Eleanor Shakespeare/The Guardian Illustration: Eleanor Shakespeare/The Guardian
Fri 16 Apr 2021 01.00 EDT
Last modified on Fri 16 Apr 2021 02.37 EDT
Plenty has been said about the politics of the governmentâs latest report on race. Barely any attention has been paid by most of the media to its actual evidence, even from supporters delighted that it has some. âThis report DOES have facts,â cooed Rod Liddle in the Sun, with the same sunny pleasure that a toddler might take from a book having words.
Yet the nature of those facts has barely been scrutinised by journalists. Instead, newspapers on the right have complained about âzealots of wokedomâ (the Express) and their âbaseless abuseâ (the Telegraph) of Tony Sewell, the commissionâs chief. As Matthew Syed wrote in the Sunday Times, âshouldnât this be on the evidence rather than the person who assembled it; shouldnât we play the ball rather than the man?â
Last modified on Thu 1 Apr 2021 14.28 EDT
Leading academics cited in the government’s controversial racial disparity report say they were not properly consulted, and claim that they were never tasked to produce research specifically for the commission.
The report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, released on Wednesday, says that while racism and racial injustice do still exist, geography, family influence, socio-economic background, culture and religion all have a greater impact on life chances.
The commission notes it requested new research from a number of sources, including Veena Raleigh and Shilpa Ross from The King’s Fund. But a spokesperson for the independent thinktank said this was not “strictly true”.