Sunder Katwala - Positive Discrimination Is The Answer!

Sunder Katwala is in favour of racist and discriminatory policies – but only so long as they favour ethnic minorities, naturally:

This could be the fifth general election since the black and Asian breakthrough in 1987 where the Lib Dems fail to elect any non-white MPs to parliament. As you report: "Only four minority candidates are fighting for the Lib Dems in the party's top 100 target seats." And yes, the Lib Dems have "recently begun a programme of mentoring young minorities"; but this won't make much difference without a far clearer understanding of the problem.

You do realise, Sunder, that it's not the party that elects those MPs to Parliament? It's the people? The voters?

Because you speak as if it were a foregone conclusion that if the party put up an MP, they would make it. Are you sure that's an assumption you want to make about this year's campaign?

Last year I gave evidence to the Speakers' conference on the underrepresentation of minorities. It is clear that Labour and Conservative progress has accelerated. Only four of New Labour's 183 new MPs in the landslide class of 1997 were non-white, but Labour selections now are more than five times as likely (over 10%) to see black and minority ethnic candidates win.

Note that, for Sunder, it's only 'black and minority ethnic' individuals who count as 'minorities'.

The Conservatives elected only one non-white MP in the 20th century. But David Cameron's efforts to change the face of the party have paid off: they are now selecting black or Asian candidates in more than 5% of all selections, with a higher rate in Conservative-held seats.

And it's proved immensely divisive, and until May 7th, no-one will know if it was a worthwhile gamble..

The Lib Dems have often boasted that they have more minority candidates than the major parties. But these have nearly always been in seats with large minority populations, where the party is weak. A diversity strategy far too heavily based on an "ethnic faces for ethnic voters" approach is bound to fail.

So we don't need ethnic minority candidates in heavily-ethnic areas, eh? Where do we need them, Sunder?

So the Lib Dems need to start selecting non-white candidates when they replace retiring MPs in Lib Dem seats like Winchester, York or St Ives.

Ah. OK. Well...

Lib Dem members are resistant to A-list style pressure from "above"; but they need to do something if they want a parliamentary party that looks anything like Britain.

Errr...

But a minute ago you were suggesting that we needed black and ethnic candidates in regions known mainly for their lack of them?

Now, you are concerned that we need a parliamentary party that 'looks like Britain' from candidates for areas that don't look anything like those areas?

Is anyone else confused by that 'reasoning'?