Afternoon:
10°c
THE STRUGGLE to tackle racism in the police force, renewed today with an investigation launched by the Mayor, is crucial in the fight against crime.
This is not political correctness or a long-drawn out response to the death of black teenager Stephen Lawrence back in 1993 and the Macpherson report into the Met that followed in 1999. It should go without saying that in a city where 29 per cent of the population is from an ethnic minority, and between a quarter and a third of workers are born abroad, policing must be for everyone. The faces in the force must as far as possible reflect the wider population. Otherwise, besides perpetuating discrimination, the Met will not command the respect and co-operation of all the communities it polices.
On recruitment, progress was made under Commissioners Sir John Stevens and Sir Ian Blair, and one in five recruits is now from a minority background. Today, however, the Runnymede Trust has warned that minority citizens continue to suffer from disadvantage both as police officers, where they still face discrimination, and at the hands of the force. This is a troubling verdict on any public institution, let alone one as important as the police service.
Anecdotal evidence still suggests that the “canteen culture” can be racist. The investigation now being conducted by the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) must not make the mistake of heightening tensions rather than enabling the cultural change that is necessary.
After all, even now that 20 per cent of recruits are from minorities, senior ranks cannot immediately reflect that proportion. That is not evidence of discrimination but a consequence of recruitment patterns 20 or 30 years ago.
Credit must be given to senior officers who, despite growing up in a world where attitudes to race were very different, have made a real effort to tackle discrimination. However, the MPA is right to keep asking hard questions about whether more must be done in order to shape the police force that London needs.
Sticky wicket
ENGLISH cricket is reeling from the news that billionaire Texan sponsor Sir Allen Stanford has been charged with massive fraud by the US securities regulator. The obscure accountancy practice which audited his Stanford International Bank is now under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office.
The story seems designed to prove the truth of the adage that if an offer looks too good to be true, it probably is. Not only may that resonate with investors in Stanford's bank, which offered improbably high interest rates, but it is also relevant to Giles Clarke, the chairman of the England and Wales Cricket Board, and his chief executive David Collier.
Rather than cutting a one-year deal with Sir Allen on a try-it-and-see-basis, the pair aimed to sign up for five years with their new sponsor, who last year landed by helicopter at Lord's with a Perspex box full of dollars. Negotiations have now been suspended. However, the gap left will create serious difficulties for the English game, quite apart from the stain left from allowing a man now accused of wide-ranging fraud to buy credibility through sports sponsorship.
The mere 10 days of due diligence investigations the ECB carried out into Sir Allen now look perfunctory in the extreme. Those who objected to Sir Allen's behaviour with team wives and stated hatred of Test cricket look prescient. Mr Clarke should resign and allow new leadership to repair some of the damage.
Lonely platform
LORD Adonis, the Transport Minister, has observed that waiting on a deserted station platform can be a frightening experience. This newspaper's Safer Stations campaign has pressed for tougher obligations on rail operators to improve security for passengers, and we welcome Lord Adonis's commitment. Safer platforms would mean more off-peak travellers, and that would benefit the rail companies as well as the rest of us.
