§ 2.46 p.m.
§ Lord MILVERTONMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they consider that the less frequent use of terms such as "racial inequality" would help reduce tensions by encouraging people to employ more positive phrases; and whether the Government will set an example.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, HOME OFFICE (Lord Belstead)My Lords, the Government's aim is to improve racial harmony, and reduce tensions, by every possible means. The careful choice of language has a contribution to make, but the Government believe that an understanding of the fundamental problems which give rise to such tensions is much more important.
§ Lord MILVERTONMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer, but would he not agree that as well as hearing about whether there is racial equality or inequality, it would be good if we could hear from the Government—not only this Government, but other Governments—that we are working for the dignity, honour, and respect of all peoples, both men and women? Would the noble Lord not agree that it would be good if those words were heard more from Governments and if Governments gave a lead in that respect?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I do not dissent from anything which my noble friend has just said. I think the best way of avoiding the problem my noble friend has raised is for everyone to get a real understanding of the facts so that the influence of language itself is minimised.
§ Lord TANLAWMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in the field of 1363 anthropology the term "race" or" racial equality" has no validity and is quite meaningless? Therefore, is the noble Lord prepared to give a definition of how one can distinguish one British citizen from another in racial terms?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, I cannot say that I have thought of the problem entirely in the terms that the noble Lord has put to me. I think that I would support the spartan principle of calling that which is just equal, not that which is equal just.
§ Lord TANLAWMy Lords, can the noble Lord say why the word "race" is used in all the relevant legislation that has been passed through this House, if he is unable to give it a definition?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, the definition which I think I can put to the legislation which this Government put their name to, as far as community relations matters are concerned, would fall within the scope of my last answer to the noble Lord.
§ Lord BROCKWAYMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether the term "racial inequality" does not represent the facts? And those facts cannot be dismissed by a more satisfying phrase. Will the Minister apply what he himself said in his original Answer, by ending racial inequality in our immigration laws, especially as regards employment in this country for black boys on leaving school?
§ Lord BELSTEADMy Lords, as the noble Lord will know, at present the Rampton Inquiry, which was set up by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education last year, is looking into the serious matter of the education of children from the ethnic minorities.