The following survey on race equality and the Lib Dems was conducted on SurveyMonkey by myself. It is my own survey, not done in conjunction with EMLD.
Comments by the candidates are in italics, and the standard answers they picked are in normal font. Candidates are listed in alphabetical order (surname). My commentary is in blue.
Question 1: Lib Dems should deliver equality and diversity training to local parties where they are, not just sessions at party conferences
Sal Brinton – I agree. She added: “We will need to train more people to deliver this, which I know has started, but it is too slow”
Daisy Cooper – “I agree, and believe a lot of practical interventions can be cost neutral”
Linda Jack – I agree
Liz Lynne – I agree
COMMENTARY: All candidates agreed that diversity training should be expanded out of party conferences, which only a slice of members attend, and taken directly to local parties. Sal noted that the party would need to train people to deliver this and the process had already started but was “too slow”, and Daisy said “a lot of practical interventions can be cost neutral”
Question 2: There should be ‘zipping’ or quotas for BAME (Black, Asian and other Minority Ethnic) members on key committees like FE and FPC, along the lines that the FE is proposing for Women at the 2014 federal conference in Glasgow
Sal Brinton – I agree; this should be done as soon as possible. She added: “We can’t do one under-represented group and not others. FE will have to decide the proportion, but as they want it for women, now is the time to extend it.”
Daisy Cooper – I agree, but we first need a consultation on zipping / quotas for all under-represented groups including the disabled, LGBT+ etc.
Linda Jack – I agree, but we first need a consultation on zipping / quotas for all under-represented groups including the disabled, LGBT+ etc.
Liz Lynne – Commented: “I have never agreed with zipping or quotas for anyone as it can lead to tokenism, I would rather try and change the culture within the Party”
COMMENTARY: Sal Brinton and Linda Jack both believe that if the party adopt quotes (or ‘zipping’) for women that should be extended to BAME’s. Linda and Daisy favoured a consultation with all under-represented groups including the disabled, LGBT+ etc. Sal noted “we can’t do one under-represented group and not others. FE will have to decide the proportion [of BAME places], but as they want it for women, now is the time to extend it.” Liz was the only candidate who did not favour mechanics to lever change. She noted: “I have never agreed with zipping or quotas for anyone as it can lead to tokenism, I would rather try and change the culture within the Party.”
Question 3: BAME Labour have a place on their party’s ruling National Executive Committee. Should the Lib Dems follow this example and hand a place on the FE to EMLD?
Sal Brinton – If the FE happens to be all-white they should co-opt a BAME member. She also picked – No; the current system of allocating an FE member to liaise with EMLD works well and as such their views are reflected adequately.
Daisy Cooper – Commented: “I would like protected groups to be represented, but not necessarily automatically by SAOs”
Linda Jack – Yes, along with other key SAO’s representing members covered as protected groups under the Equality Act, such as LDDA (disabilities), LDA (gender) and so on
Liz Lynne – No; all members on the FE should be elected on merit
COMMENTARY: Linda believes the party should follow Labour’s example of reserving a place on their ruling National Executive Committee for the BAME Labour organisation, and hand places on the FE to EMLD and other SAO’s for under-represented groups such as LDDA and LDW. Sal was more cautious and noting: “FE is already a large body, and if zipping is introduced, there will be BAME members on it. The current allocation of liaising works as well as the FE member doing it, so not always adequate, but some FE members take their link role v seriously.” However Sal believes the FE should co-opt a BAME member if it is all-white. Liz opposed the idea of reserved places for SAO’s, believing all FE should be elected on merit. Daisy said “I would like protected groups to be represented, but not necessarily automatically by SAOs”
Question 4: (MULTIPLE CHOICE – TOP THREE OUT OF SEVEN OPTIONS LISTED) Lib Dems would have more appeal to BAME communities if…
Sal Brinton -
- …we had BAME MPs
- …we had better policies that resonated such as ways of specifically tackling race discrimination
- …we did a better job at selling our policies to those communities
Daisy Cooper -
- …we had BAME MPs
- …we could more effectively outreach and recruit from those communities
- …we had better policies that resonated such as ways of specifically tackling race discrimination
Linda Jack -
- …we had BAME MPs
- …we had better policies that resonated such as ways of specifically tackling race discrimination
- …we did a better job at selling our policies to those communities
Liz Lynne -
- …we could more effectively outreach and recruit from those communities
- …we had BAME MPs
- …we had better policies that resonated such as ways of specifically tackling race discrimination
COMMENTARY: Candidates were asked to rank seven options in order of preference. I have only counted the top three choices. All four candidates believed the party would be doing better if we already had BAME MPs, which we don’t – yet! Linda and Sal believes the party can improve on the way we sell our current policies to BAME communities. Daisy, Linda and Liz believes we need better policies to specifically tackle racism.
Question 5: When legalisation allows, the Lib Dems should introduce all-BAME shortlists for the selection of PPCs in held seats that become available and winnable seats
Sal Brinton – Yes; but it should not be imposed. There could be regional targets for the selection of BAME PPCs in held or winnable seats. She added: “if no progress made in the GE 2015, the party must debate AWS again (that was in the 2011 motion). I want to see BAME added to that. Unlike LAbour, we don’t have certain safe seats, so 12% of candidates might well mean none were elected.”
Daisy Cooper – I like the idea but it seems unworkable. She added: “Local parties should be required to ensure that selection short-listing panels are as representative of its community”
Linda Jack – Yes; but it should not be imposed. There could be regional targets for the selection of BAME PPCs in held or winnable seats
Liz Lynne – No, all PPCs should be elected on merit
COMMENTARY: On the question of all-BAME shortlists for PPCs, if and when legislation allows, both Sal and Linda agreed there should be such action but that it shouldn’t be imposed. There could be regional targets for the selection of BAME PPCs in held or winnable seats. Sal noted that if no progress was made [electing more women MPs] “party must debate AWS again”, adding “I want to see BAME added to that”, but was mindful that unlike Labour the party don’t have any safe seats. Liz opposed all-women and all-BAME shortlists on grounds that all PPCs should be elected on merit. Daisy liked the idea but believed it would be unworkable, favouring instead local parties “required to ensure that selection short-listing panels are as representative of its community”
Question 6 – (MULTIPLE CHOICE – TOP THREE OUT OF SEVEN OPTIONS LISTED) Although the party president does not deal with national policy, what do you feel are the best policy solutions to deal with disproportionate race discrimination
Sal Brinton -
- We need to empower and properly fund the Equality and Human Rights Commission, giving them new Audit Commission-like powers to investigate and if necessary sanction (fines / prosecutions) for failure to address inequality
- A new Stephen Lawrence / Macpherson public inquiry to assess how far we have come
- It is the job of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor and offer advice in this area
Daisy Cooper (two answers given) -
- We need to empower and properly fund the Equality and Human Rights Commission, giving them new Audit Commission-like powers to investigate and if necessary sanction (fines / prosecutions) for failure to address inequality
- It is the job of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor and offer advice in this area
Linda Jack -
- We need to empower and properly fund the Equality and Human Rights Commission, giving them new Audit Commission-like powers to investigate and if necessary sanction (fines / prosecutions) for failure to address inequality
- A new Stephen Lawrence / Macpherson public inquiry to assess how far we have come
- There is already enough evidence covering many areas of public life, what is needed now is radical action like Affirmative Action to force employers and service providers to eradicate any race disproportionality in their workforce
Liz Lynne -
- We need to empower and properly fund the Equality and Human Rights Commission, giving them new Audit Commission-like powers to investigate and if necessary sanction (fines / prosecutions) for failure to address inequality
- It is the job of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor and offer advice in this area
- A new Stephen Lawrence / Macpherson public inquiry to assess how far we have come
COMMENTARY: Candidates were asked to rank in order of preference options for policy solutions to deal with disproportionate race discrimination. Out of seven options I have only counted the top three. All four candidates gave top preference to the idea of empowering and properly fund the Equality and Human Rights Commission, giving them new Audit Commission-like powers to investigate and if necessary sanction (fines / prosecutions) for failure to address inequality. Sal, Liz and Linda also believed Britain needed A new Stephen Lawrence / Macpherson public inquiry to assess how far we have come. Sal, Daisy and Liz believed it is the job of the Equality and Human Rights Commission to monitor and offer advice in this area. Linda was the only candidate to pick the most radical option – ‘There is already enough evidence covering many areas of public life, what is needed now is radical action like Affirmative Action to force employers and service providers to eradicate any race disproportionality in their workforce.’
