What exactly is the dream?

By Bill Dewison

Who can forget that famous speech made on the steps of the Lincoln Monument in 1963 when Martin Luther King said “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the content of their character, but by the color of their skin”?

But hold on, he didn’t say that did he?

History can not be rewritten any more than King’s speech can. It is a fact that women were not allowed to vote, that Africans were shackled and sold like cattle and that half a century ago it was illegal to be homosexual in Britain. But what we perceive as right and wrong in society changes given time and the courage of people like Martin Luther King. But how would he have reacted to the Equality Bill that is now being paraded as a step forward for equality and fairness in our society?

Born out of good intention, there is something very wrong with the Equality Bill. It claims to promote equality and fight discrimination in all forms, but it doesn’t do that at all. What it does do is bring about a new form of discrimination, discrimination based on the colour of someone’s skin. It brings back a neo-medieval system promoting birthright over merit and the ethnic target – White English.

Those who lend their support to this Bill will rubbish any argument that so-called positive discrimination is in itself racial discrimination against a portion of Britain’s society, but they would have a hard time explaining the case of Abigail Howarth, a young woman of 18 years who was not judged by her academic merit or her personality when she applied for a job with a government environmental agency. We know this as fact because she received a letter from PATH National, the firm handling the recruitment process, telling her that there really was no point her applying because she is white and English.

Had Abigail been white Scottish, white Welsh or white Irish there wouldn’t have been a problem at all. Had she been Asian English or Black English, again, she would have been welcome to apply for the job, but simply because she was a combination of white and English she has been discriminated against. One young person and one environmental job may not sound like a compelling case against the Equality Bill in its current form, but when you consider the outrage and the legal battles that would have followed had Abigail been black or Asian, it becomes clear that there is nothing equal or fair with this new breed of racism.

This isn’t a one sided argument either. How are those perceived worthy enough to be added to the government’s list of ethnic minorities supposed to feel when they get a job now? Should they feel patronised that they may have been chosen not on merit, not because they were the best person for the job, but because they fitted into a tick box assigned by a piece of government legislation. I do not believe for a minute that ethnic minorities in this country want what amounts to a charity handout when it comes to seeking work and why should they be denied their pride for achieving through hard work rather than an ill-conceived law?

Another consideration that has been overlooked, or most likely ignored, is the real risk of a backlash with regards to this legislation. Unless the government now have access to some form of mind-reading equipment or they intend to do what was suggested for benefit claimants and begin hooking up employers to lie detectors, how is anyone really going to know what made them decide to employ one person over another? Nobody can tell an employer, particularly in the private sector, who he or she should employ and the very fact that this Bill attempts to do that could swing things in an unexpected direction. Aside from feelings of resentment, employers could at any given moment decide not to include minorities in their shortlists and if questioned about their employment decision, what do you expect them to say? Will they admit that they are sick and tired of the government telling them who they should and shouldn’t employ, or will they opt for the more appeasing qualifications or experience argument?

The Equality Bill in its present form is nothing more than a document that encourages racial differences. It may address the issue in the minds of politicians and make for a good badge to wear when speaking to those of ethnic minorities, but the truth is that it is unenforceable, ill-conceived and ultimately a political statement telling those who are English and white that they are now less important to the political process than other white people in the United Kingdom.

Ask yourself a question: before Martin Luther King was murdered in cold blood for his passion, his courage and his belief, what did he really mean when he said “All men are created equal”?