Not In My Name Quotes

Bolaji Alajija, 42, a student nurse from North London:
“I don’t see why there is all the fuss. What’s the harm in having a black doll? It’s exactly the same as a white doll. People shouldn’t be so sensitive.”

"People want to know why Asian people are getting this kind of special treatment. But Asian people didn't ask for it. They don't want these organisations [race equality bodies]. Asian people have been living in this area for more than 50 years and are quite able to look after themselves. They don't want to be treated differently. They feel insulted by these groups." Councillor Karam Hussain from Dewsbury on the abolition of race equality bodies.

“None of these open days should have been closed to white communities. I couldn’t give two hoots if they are white, black, Asian, male or female – they should be the best person for the job.” Batook Pandya, director of Bristol-based charity Support Against Racist Incidents, on the subject of fire service open days aimed only at ethnic minorities recruits.

"I feel that someone has to take a stance on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Service, and more importantly for black and ethnic officers who do not share the Black Police Association’s [BPA] views on racism within the Met Police. I am a 43-year-old black officer of African-Caribbean descent, who has served in the Met for over 21 years. The BPA of today I feel is now a power hungry political group operating within the Met, whose members are focused on achieving personal success by continually brow beating the Met under the banner of racism by issuing misleading press statements. The BPA do not speak for the majority of black or ethnic officers within the Metropolitan Police. We feel that we can speak for and defend ourselves when necessary without causing controversy, or screaming racism when it is unjustified. The BPA is doing us an embarrassing and damaging disservice and it needs to reassess the way in which it presents itself and the views of the black and ethnic people it claims to represent. It was not created to cry racism every time one of its members is found to have acted inappropriately or has failed to gain promotion based on ability." Detective Constable Rod Austin, Specialist Crime Directorate, New Scotland Yard

"What matters is their [politicians'] politics, not their skin colour. I reject identity-based representation not only because the idea that one should be represented only by one’s own kind is, and always has been, at the heart of the racist agenda, but also because such representation acts as an obstacle to what you call ‘a genuinely participatory democracy’. Minority groups are as divided by nationality, class, gender, faith, age and so on as is the rest of the population. If every experience deserves its own representation, then we would end up with a babble of voices and no common way forward. On the other hand, if we divide society up into a small number of ‘communities’ (black, Asian etc), and demand representation for each of those communities, then we ignore the differences within those groups. A recent poll conducted for Channel 4’s Dispatches programme showed that less than four per cent of Muslims think that the Muslim Council of Britain represents British Muslims. Whatever organisations such as the Muslim Council of Britain represent, it is not their ‘community’." Extracts of a debate contribution by Kenan Malik on political correctness in politics and the selection of our politicians.

"For a long time now, certainly a number of years, the council has only put up things which say 'season's greetings' on town halls. There was a strong perception that political correctness was behind this. I think this kind of PC does more harm than good to community relations. This year we will be putting up 'Merry Christmas' signs on all our town halls." Councillor Khizar Iqbal from Dewsbury on Christmas.

"[Ethnic monitoring makes] a false assumption about the nature of ethnic identity, assuming it is something absolute, like a date of birth, when for many people it is a thing of complexity and fluidity.... But how much better it would be if organisations just accepted that such an approach to monitoring diversity was intellectually flawed and morally dubious." Sathnam Sanghera on ethnic monitoring.

Writing in The Times, Anjana Ahuja says that a black police association is a bad, outdated idea and asks why partition members of the same profession along the lines of skin colour?

She writes: "My opinion was once sought by Times executives on how to attract non-white writers. The paper planned to offer internships to ethnic minority candidates who had graduated in media studies.

It was well intentioned but misguided, I ventured, because I knew of no colleague whose passport to these venerable corridors had been secured by such questionable means. There were historians, linguists, lawyers, classicists, philosophers, biologists, physicists, even an Egyptologist — but no media studies graduates. My view was this: if a brown writer sails in on an easier ticket than a white wordsmith, The Times would be construed as patronising rather than progressive and the intern would struggle against whispers of lowered standards.

Such was my influence that The Times went ahead anyway, although the scheme didn’t last long. Such schemes rarely do, which is why, in the miserable tale of Ali Dizaei, the Scotland Yard commander convicted of corruption, the fact that sticks out most is the continued, seemingly pointless and possibly harmful existence of the National Black Police Association. Substitute “black” with “white” and an outdated collective becomes an illegal organisation that is morally impossible to defend.

Why partition members of the same profession along the lines of skin colour? I would not join an organisation for black journalists (or female ones) because its identity lies wholly in the exclusion of white hacks (or male ones)."

In response to the article posted by Anjana Ahuja, R Nair said: "I'm Indian, but attended school in England for several years when my father was transferred there on work. I returned to India with some of the very best memories - wonderful years.

(And I got to play rugby - a very non-Indian sport, which I absolutely loved, and wouldn't otherwise have discovered. And ended up addicted to British rock. British pop, however...)

My best defence against racism did not lie in special "ethnic" favours of any kind. It lay in self-confidence, forthrightness, and respect - for myself, and for the country and people and culture who were hosting me. And, yes, for my own heritage, which the latter did not preclude.

Above all, my best defence was a strong network of friends, who respected me (and whom I respected in return). That respect had to be earned, on both sides. My friends (mostly white, as it turned out) and I didn't give a damn what colour my skin was - being an idiot would be rewarded with a well-kicked behind, irrespective of the colour of said behind. Most importantly, the opposite was also true.

I don't think I would have had that, had I been perceived as being the recipient of special favours."

Former Islamic terrorist says political correctness is encouraging home grown terrorism in the UK

Ed Husain, in a stark interview with the Daily Mail, says: "Make no mistake, terrorism is flourishing in our country as never before. Why? Because a toxic combination of politically correct policy, denial and fear have opened the way for hate to grow in our midst."

He goes on to say: "Unwilling or unable to recognise the scale and cause of the danger we are all facing, our leaders have turned a blind eye to what is going on. There are now tens of thousands of Muslims living in Britain, physically present in our country, but psychologically attached to Muslim-dominated countries. Large parts of our cities have become Muslim ghettos, where you can wake up in the morning and go to bed at night without seeing a non-Muslim face. They might as well be in Pakistan or Afghanistan for all the contact they have with ordinary Britain. They can send their children to Muslim state schools, go to Muslim NHS doctors, and do business at the Islamic bank. Not only this, but we, the taxpayers, fund many of these Muslim ghettos. When immigrants arrive in this country to claim free housing from the Government, they are given a choice of Muslim areas to settle in. Why do we allow this? Why not offer these new arrivals housing where they can integrate with the British people and learn about our nation's culture?

Meanwhile, our prisons have become recruiting centres for radical imams, or Islamic priests. Around 10,000 ordinary Muslims are in our prison system, sharing space with convicted terrorists and extremists, putting them at risk of brainwashing. But instead of protecting them from this, our system actually directs them towards these forces. So when a young Asian drug dealer from Bradford's streets goes down, he is designated a practising Muslim, whether he was previously religious or not. He is issued with a prayer mat and a copy of the Koran and is handed over to the prison imams, many of whom come from the same Islamic school of thought that produced the Taliban. Time and time again, I have seen Muslims go into prison as young Asian men, and return to their communities as something very different.

Then there are the satellite television stations that freely transmit the radical Islamic message straight into British homes. Thousands of UK Muslims-watch the Islam channel for their news instead of the BBC or ITN. The tragedy is that it doesn't have to be like this. There are four million Muslims living in America, and yet they are not producing 'home-grown' bombers like ours, despite America leading the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that are so often cited by extremists as the root cause of their grievance. Because of their stronger national identity, the Americans encourage immigrants to join their culture and newcomers are expected to be loyal to the U.S. For us, it is not too late. We can reverse the damaging policies that have made Britain a seedbed for terrorists. But if we fail to do so, I fear we will see further carnage unleashed on our streets."

First black Miss England says she has never experienced racial discrimination

Linford Christie's niece, who recently became the first black woman to win Miss England, said in an interview: 'You hear black kids say: "I can't do anything with my life. I live in a ghetto." I say: "Well, get off your backside and get out of it. Stop making your ethnicity an excuse. I want to show them you can do anything you want, whatever your colour. I don't like hearing: "I can't do this or that because I'm black." They should stop behaving in a way that stereotypes them. If you come across as smart, if you dress nicely and speak well, it shouldn't make a difference if you're black or white. Maybe some people have experienced racial discrimination. Not me.'

Carla and Cornel Nurse have three biological children - all with different skin colours. Six-year-old son Jermaine has golden skin and brown eyes. Daughter Tanisha, four, takes after her father, with dark skin, dark eyes and tight curls in her hair. And two-year-old son Jayden has fair skin, blond hair and blue eyes.

In politically correct terms they would fit into different tick boxes when it came to their ethnicity and, in some cases, they would receive different treatment as a result. This family so neatly shows all that is wrong with political correctness - why on earth does it matter what colour of skin someone has and why should we constantly be forced to divide people up into artificial categories when life is not as simple as that?

Minette Marrin - with friends like Harman, women don’t need enemies

In an excellent piece on the Equality Bill, Minette Marrin said: "Here we have a spectacle that is about as bad for women as it gets. Female politicians, many promoted above their ability, seek to promote another woman above her democratic entitlement and against their own principles and meanwhile legislate to promote working women over men. With supporters like Harman and her crew, we women do not need enemies."

She went on to say: "It is a piece of modern cant, driven by misplaced guilt about the sexist and racist past, that voters can be represented only by people just like themselves. I don’t need a white woman to represent my views and wishes, even though I am a white woman. I need an intelligent, responsible person of any colour or sex, someone of experience and broad understanding. After all, most of the greatest novels about the female psyche were written by men – evidence that women do not have a monopoly on understanding what other women think and feel."

Is it right for people with disabilities to fall into the same social category as ex-offenders and drug users? asks Emma Suddaby in the Shropshire Daily Star.

Every few months the Shropshire Council magazine is delivered, uninvited, to my door. It gatecrashes through my letterbox and is treated to a serious mauling by my canine doorman, who takes his security duties very seriously indeed.

By the time I get to it, it’s in tatters on the floor. What do I do? Do I smooth its ripped pages, lavish attention on the news it brings? I’m afraid not. I mutter about the mess and scoop its many tattered pieces straight into the bin.

But bearing in mind the changes afoot with regard to the new unitary council, this time I thought I’d show their poor, molested magazine some mercy. I decided to actually read the spring issue and make its short, traumatised life worthwhile. Now that I have, I remember exactly why I tended to avoid this sort of super-politically-correct, squeaky-clean exercise in customer relations.

Reading through it I notice again and again many mentions are made of the council’s “vulnerable constituents”. Vulnerable is not a word many have ever used to describe me, but like it or not it is the category I fall into. Along - according to Shropshire Council magazine - with ex-offenders and those with a history of substance misuse.

Thing is, I find it quite offensive to be perpetually lumped in with the dishonest and the self-indulgent. And it’s not the first time in life, in a wider sense, that I’ve noticed a tendency to group those with disabilities - through no fault of their own - in with a section of society whose problems are somewhat more self-inflicted.

I’m being very careful what I say, it may be after all that a large part of my readership are just about to reach for their seventh double whisky, before heading out the door, toolkit in hand, for another night on-the-rob!

But I’d like to bet I’m not the only “vulnerable” resident who’s growing tired of having my problems and needs likened to those of an ex-offender or a crack addict. And I can’t be the only one concerned that the pool of resources available to help a disabled person live an independent life are equally as accessible to those whose problems stem from their own self-destructive actions

So I’m afraid I haven’t been moved to save the next edition of Shropshire Council magazine from the violent assault I know is awaiting it, next time it pokes its bland and “appropriate” pages through my letterbox. And I certainly won’t feel guilty as I dispose of its unread remains. It’s left me feeling uneasy about our new council.

My husband and I are the proud parents of two gorgeous children (we have another on the way), whom we are raising to appreciate the fact that despite people coming in all shapes, sizes and colours, we all breathe the same air, bleed the same colour, want to be treated with love and respect and want the best for our families. I certainly do not want our children being obsessed and hung up about skin colour.

I was therefore incensed to learn that the Department of Transport will now be conducting an Equalities Impact Assessment to examine whether expansion of Heathrow Airport will have a disproportionate effect on different demographic groups in terms of race, disability, age or gender.

I believe this is plain wrong and morally objectionable. I do not believe that my needs are different to my white husband's, simply because I am black.

These types of exercises do nothing but create a further divide in our already broken society.

Our recent history has taught us that when we start to divide on the basis of race, nothing good will ever come from such actions.

Have we not learnt anything from the damages to race relations caused by these politically-correct obsessions in the past few years?

Comedian Inder Manocha says we are now "overly sensitive" because of political correctness

In an interview, comedian Inder Manocha said, "Growing up in the 70s and 80s in London, as one of only two Asian kids at his school, getting picked on was inevitable. But the current demand for political correctness can be even worse. Everyone’s very sensitive now, overly sensitive. A lot of people are very careful about my culture and I’ve been called ‘someone of colour’ before now. Everyone’s so inclusive now and when I was growing up I felt like a bit of an outsider so it’s a bit suffocating all of a sudden. I do a lot of stuff about cultural identity, my own identity and what that means. I also try to play with preconceptions people have about Muslims and prejudices that Asians themselves have, which doesn’t get touched on often."

Police selection just political correctness gone mad

We might all be equal in the eyes of God, but when it comes to the real world treating people fairly rather than equally is more important says Roshan Doug.

Peter Fahy, the outspoken Chief Constable of Cheshire Police and a former Association of Chief Police Officers’ lead on Race and Diversity would like to see fixed quotas for Black and Asian officers, a monitoring system that ensures good representation of ethnic minority groups especially in senior ranks.

So irrespective of the calibre of candidates, the police must put forward a certain number of black and Asian officers. It’s what many on the left would call ‘positive discrimination’.

At the same time, as if it’s not an oxymoronic way of thinking, he insists the police must ensure all candidates are treated fairly.

I’m pleased he’s used the word ‘fairly’ and not ‘equally’. In my opinion ‘equality’ is used rather too loosely in today’s politically correct world. We’re all ‘equal’, we’re told as if it’s a fact that cannot be challenged.

A group of young thugs who stab a hard-working family man outside his home because he complained about their rowdy, anti-social behaviour are not in my opinion, his equals.

Or a burglar who gets shot whilst carrying out a burglary in a dwelling place of an elderly man, is not his equal. Similarly a psychopath who throws chips at a young couple and fatally stabs one of them, is not their equal.

And hooded thugs who rob a promising, hard working a solicitor and stab him to death – all for the sake of a mobile phone and twenty odd quid – are not, I’m sorry, his equals.

We must not get wrapped up in a politically correct social philosophy of thinking we’re all equal. And it’s all because of very time-consuming, ineffectual monitoring procedures. But at the same time, unlike Peter Fahy, I don’t want people promoted purely on the basis of the colour of their skin – call it ‘positive discrimination’ or something else. To me that’s rather patronising – as if Asians and blacks are a little more than token staff to appease the CRE. I would like to see the best men and women for the job. Quite often it seems that political correctness gets in the way of common sense. How many times have I seen diminutive police officers – voluntary and professional – walking about in the streets no more confident or stronger than children in our local primary schools. It does not fill me with confidence to know that when tall, burly dangerous thugs – well armed – are rampaging in our cities at least the police authorities are regarding all candidates as equal and giving everyone the opportunity to wear the uniform.

The same trait seems to apply to education, where schools and colleges employ black and Asian support staff and learning assistants even when their English is not quite up to the standard. And in a local college where my friend teaches, there’s a severely dyslexic white member of staff who teaches literacy to students with learning difficulties. The college has to offer this member of staff a personal assistant so that the PA can do all the paperwork for him. That, to me, is hideous and bizarre – it’s that clichéd case of political correctness gone mad.

We have to be lead by our common sense and a compulsion to exercise fairness but not by a legislative imperative to regard everyone as an equal.

In an article on the blog Conservative Home, former aspiring MP Ali Miraj said he felt that the white working classes in the country were being ignored. He also mentioned that he understood why many were turning to the BNP for answers saying, "It is, in my view, a perfectly rational reaction by a growing proportion of the white working class who feel marginalised by a political elite that would rather ignore them." Had this been said by someone who was white the reaction would have been predictable but this piece has not elicited the usual claims of racism naturally! Of course by not commenting on these remarks, those who normally tend to shout the loudest against others just prove what racists they actually are as it clearly demonstrates that they are the ones who treat people differently based on their race. To read the whole well thought out and well written contribution by Ali Miraj in pdf format click here.

Women are not discriminated against most of the time - they just make different choices says India Knight

I’ll tell you what the issue is with women in business or women and work. It is extremely simple. It is not to do with sexist dinosaur male bosses or with male-dominated industries crushing our genius. It is not to do with glass ceilings. It is to do, very straightforwardly, with the number of hours we are prepared to put in. If you’re happy to work a 16-hour day and never see your children, you too can become a master of the universe. Simple as that, as McQueen might put it.

Men have been doing this for generations and the common interpretation is that they don’t mind, that there is no emotional cost, that they can just do it, guiltlessly, because they have a penis. It’s complete nonsense: ask any man who works impossible hours. There is a vast emotional cost. There are health costs. There is often a marital cost.

Why do we assume that men feel perfectly happy and breezy about never seeing their kids, living a truncated version of family life and claiming that it causes them no anguish? It clearly does but they do it anyway. Ask a woman to do it anyway and you’re a sexist pig. Why?

Few women are prepared to make that kind of sacrifice. This is entirely their right and good on them. However, it is surely both dishonest and intensely stupid to apportion blame - in the form of so-called corporate discrimination - to what is essentially a completely personal choice: power versus being there at bath time, conferences versus the park, business trips versus getting home in time for homework, giving “110%” versus sleeping more than five hours a night.

Why blame somebody else for a subjective decision? If you’re a woman who wants to run the world, giving up the things that everyone else in your position has also given up, go right ahead.

When is black, black anyway and what does it all mean?

One journalist asked various bodies to confirm what is meant by the term "black". We have heard this phrase a lot recently - separate teaching for black boys, was the call of Trevor Phillips of the Commission for Racial Equality and more black police officers are needed said the Metropolitan Police. But what do they mean by the phrase "black". This excellent article by Sean Thomas of the Sunday Telegraph (13 March 2005) just shows what a nonsense our obsession with colour of skin really is. To read this excellently written piece just click on the 5 extracts below or go straight to the story on the Telegraph website (especially if you do not have broadband) by clicking here.

Philip Davies, Parliamentary Spokesman for the Campaign Against Political Correctness, has asked a series of questions in the House of Commons which have revealed just some of the costs of political correctness which have previously been unknown. This - we are sure - is very much only the tip of the iceberg!

Click here to see the details from the Treasury. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Northern Ireland Office. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for International Development. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Transport. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department of Health. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Defence. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department Children, Schools and Families. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Ministry of Justice. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Ministry of Justice (Prisons). (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Government Equalities Office. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Work and Pensions. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Duchy of Lancaster. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Welsh Office. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Scottish Office. (Alternative Link)
Click here to see the details from the Department for Communities and Local Government. (Alternative Link)

Gender Pay Gap is not caused by discrimination - says female CBI Director

In response to yet more statistics on the so-called "Gender Pay Gap", Susan Anderson, director of human resources policy at the CBI, said that it was completely wrong to blame widespread employer discrimination for this.

She said, "Women are most likely to work in lower-paid sectors than men. They also still take a lion’s share of bringing up families so their careers plateau while men continue to progress."

The Government's plans to make incitement to homophobic hatred a crime has been criticised by gay journalists. Click here to read one such article in The Times. Matthew Paris also follows this up in April 2008 with the following observations:

"One of my first diaries on this page took a sideways look at a particularly silly idea from the Government: The promise of Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, to outlaw “gay hate speech”. I argued that free speech demands rough-and-tumble and give-and-take, that from time to time insults and condemnation must inevitably fly; that honest opinions and religious beliefs on the morality of different kinds of sexual behaviour do differ; and that to treat homosexuals as a pathetic minority in need of special protection from harsh commentary was, itself, insulting.

These days we gays can stand up for ourselves. In 1980 we could perhaps have done with protection like this, but that was before sexual tolerance became fashionable in the media, the Government or the Opposition. As Rowan Atkinson says, the point at which criticism of any group is considered so outrageous that it's a vote-winner for politicians to outlaw it is probably the point at which the law's protection is no longer needed.

Well, just before midnight on Monday the House of Lords went a long way towards squashing the Government's proposals. By a substantial majority it approved a clause that would protect our present freedom to criticise or question sexual practices.

So two cheers for our Noble (and in many cases Reverend) Friends. In the Commons Mr Straw may now try to overturn their amendment. Instead, the Commons should push it further, and restore the freedom of speech casually to insult as well as seriously to criticise sexual practices.

Gloucestershire Police said it had been trying to 'advance diversity' when it rejected 108 men in favour of women and ethnic minority candidates. Chief Constable Dr Timothy Brain's force confessed it had acted unlawfully because of their sex and skin colour. It has agreed to pay one of the snubbed men, 30-year-old Matt Powell, £2,500 in damages. The tribunal said the force had been 'at the very least disingenuous and at worst misleading'. Mr Powell, who has wanted to join the police since he was a child, said: 'I didn't come here for the money. I just want to be heard. I firmly believe a wrong has been done here. I was, I still am, desperate to be a police officer and they have unfairly discriminated against me.'

The force was under pressure to meet a Government target of ethnic minority recruits making up seven per cent of force strength by 2009. At the time, they made-up only 1.6 per cent, forcing senior commanders to take desperate - and illegal - measures. Mr Powell, along with the 107 other men was told he had made it through to the second round of the recruitment process. But, two months later, they received letters stating they had been 'randomly deselected'. No explanation was given by recruitment officials.

It has since emerged the police had taken the decision to deselect the men as part of an 'advance diversity' drive. Every one of the 129 female and ethnic minority candidate who applied was accepted. Police only came clean following an investigation by the Commission for Racial Equality and the Equal Opportunities Commission, yesterday's employment tribunal was told.

Laura Midgley said, "All these so-called equality and diversity schemes cost a lot of money in the first place - money which could be far better spent. And now we have more money being spent on tribunals and compensation - again money which could be far better spent. And this has all been in pursuit of an objective that most people in this country don't want and certainly don't approve of."

Debate by Police Chiefs to boost the recruitment of black and Asian and female officers by positive discrimination

"People want the best police force, and if you start ring-fencing jobs for certain groups, I think you're going down a very dangerous path," he said.

Brighton and Hove City Council have said that applicants for a job at a local museum can't be white. John Midgley, Co-Founder of the Campaign Against Political Correctness said:

"To deny someone a job on the basis of their skin colour is racist. It is very troubling that Brighton and Hove City Council are being blatantly racist on this occasion and more importantly that they do so with the full protection of Race Equality Laws - which are proving very counter-productive to race relations. Brighton and Hove City Council are not alone in pursuing these politically correct and highly discriminatory measures and those who want real fairness and equality of opportunity need to make sure these moves are highlighted and opposed at every opportunity."

This discrimination being perpetuated in the name of political correctness is not just a one off and is happening on a regular basis now. Anyone who is opposed to discrimination should surely be very concerned to know that this sort of thing is a) legal and b) being encouraged. At the end of the day - What is black? (see article above too on this subject) What is white? Why on earth should someone's skin colour matter and be used as a measure of diversity? Isn't diversity about more than this - diversity of talent, ideas, backgrounds, attitudes etc and not just the superficial colour of someone's skin.

Click here to read the story in the Brighton Argus.
Click here to read the story in the Daily Mail.
Click here to read the story in the Daily Telegraph.

Click here for an article in the Daily Telegraph about the colour of skin.

The following exchange took place between Philip Davies MP and the Minister for Women and Equality Ruth Kelly (who is also the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government) in the House of Commons yesterday:

Philip Davies: Will the Minister promise the House that in her desire to see more women in senior positions in the medical profession, she will not go down the politically correct route of having quotas, targets and positive discrimination? Will she always hold to the fact that jobs should be given on merit, irrespective of people’s gender?

Ruth Kelly: Of course jobs should be given on merit, but if the hon. Gentleman is suggesting that the majority of female undergraduates who are currently training in medical school should not have the opportunity to have their careers progress at the same rate as men’s, I believe that he is mistaken.

So, equality of opportunity - the fair approach - is deemed less preferable than the unfair system of a fixed outcome thanks to some quota! This is hardly something anyone who believes in trying to get rid of discrimination and unfairness should be encouraging!

Mr Hussain's views echo those of Bishop of Lichfield the Rt Rev Jonathan Gledhill, who said most other faiths wished Christians were more 'up front' about their beliefs.

He said: "I don’t know where they get this view from. The way we are going at the moment, articles and headlines like this won’t help the community get together, it will damage the community. Everybody should celebrate each other’s festivals, whether it be Christmas, Diwali or Eid — it’s about getting together and not dividing. Who are these people who are saying this about Christmas? It’s not representative and doesn’t represent Muslim people."