Hugh Muir Is Going To Scream & Scream Until He’s Sick…

In matters of diversity, our quest for order and fairness resulted in the Equality Act 2010, meaning that, whatever prejudices we all have, we agree to curb them for the public good. This is not going to hell in a handcart. This is the way we have decided to live.

Another use of the ‘Royal we’ there? Gosh, how unexpected for CiF…

So let’s consider Heywood, just outside Rochdale and the minicab firm that has responded to the conviction of two local Pakistani Muslim drivers for sexual “grooming” offences by agreeing to send what customers term “local” (ie white) drivers to those who ask for them. It is easy to understand how, in a febrile, anxious atmosphere, such a request might arise. But, like Mick, the firm’s customers can’t always get what they want, for such mass stereotyping of all Pakistani-origin Muslim drivers deviates pretty seriously from the society we have decided to have, and from the laws put in place to construct it.

Ah, right. So, if it’s against the law, as Hugh seems so confident it is, we can expect speedy action, right?

The local council, asked to comment, said the practice did not appear to contravene the firm’s operating licence, though it belatedly added that it would see if the firm would pass the “fit and proper” test licence-holders.

Hmmm, not the immediate cavalry charge of bureaucrats that Hugh was hoping for…

The Equality and Human Rights Commission said it has written to the firm and the council to check the employment details of the drivers, white and Asian. “Equality legislation covers employees and self-employed people in different ways,” a spokesman said.

Well, well, well. Hugh is, of course, OUTRAGED! OUTRAGED, I say!

… I’m sorry, this is tiresome. Let’s deal with those who demand white drivers.

Deal with them how, Hugh? What would you like to see, a bit of lynching?

The Equality Act 2010 addresses those who encourage others to discriminate. It also says firms cannot offer a discriminatory service to the public, without recourse to very rare exemption. It imposes on public authorities a clear public sector equality duty to “eliminate discrimination” and “advance equality”. The firm seems hazy about the law. That might be forgiveable. As for the other two bodies: poor show.

Or maybe they find that since they are the ones who have to work with the law in the real world, and not merely splutter impotently and pontificate about it in the newspaper, it’s not quite as simple as it seems, eh, Hugh?