Search results

Following attacks on multiculturalism and its replacement with a de-racialized concept of community cohesion, the dimension of 'race' is steadily disappearing from public policy. The process was started during New Labour's last term of office but has accelerated since the election of the Coalition government. Equality is now officially a 'dirty word', equality impact assessments a bureaucratic burden, and the public sector equality duty an obstacle to rapid policy change at local level. National and local statutory and voluntary organizations concerned with racial equality are being dismantled or downsized and a series of political pronouncements gives nods and winks to those wishing to ignore the issue of racial disadvantage. Meanwhile, minorities are hit hardest by public expenditure cuts, are disproportionately criminalized in the criminal justice system, and are increasingly affected by racism and 'race' hate crime.

This is a review of the UK black and minority ethnic (BME) third sector that has emerged since the 1950s, identifying research and policy issues facing the sector now. The sector has been marginalised both in relation to welfare policy as a whole but also within the third sector more specifically. The BME 'voice' is now, at a time of severe financial pressure but growing needs, in danger of disappearing.

Social justice is a contested concept. For example, some on the left argue for equality of outcomes, those on the right for equality of opportunities, and there are differing emphases on the roles of state, market and individual in achieving a socially just society. These differences in emphasis are critical when it comes to examining the impact that public policy has on minority ethnic groups. Social justice should not be culture-blind any more than it can be gender-blind yet the overwhelming burden of evidence from the UK shows that public policy, despite the political rhetoric of fifty years of governments since large-scale immigration started, has failed to deliver social justice to Britain's minorities. In terms of outcomes, in respect for and recognition of diversity and difference, in their treatment, and in the failure of governments to offer an effective voice to minorities, the latter continue to be marginalised in British social, economic and political life. This is not an argument for abandoning the project of multiculturalism, however, but for ensuring that it is framed within the values of social justice.

Social justice is a contested concept. For example, some on the left argue for equality of outcomes, those on the right for equality of opportunities, and there are differing emphases on the roles of state, market and individual in achieving a socially just society. These differences in emphasis are critical when it comes to examining the impact that public policy has on minority ethnic groups. Social justice should not be culture-blind any more than it can be gender-blind yet the overwhelming burden of evidence from the UK shows that public policy, despite the political rhetoric of fifty years of governments since large-scale immigration started, has failed to deliver social justice to Britain's minorities. In terms of outcomes, in respect for and recognition of diversity and difference, in their treatment, and in the failure of governments to offer an effective voice to minorities, the latter continue to be marginalised in British social, economic and political life. This is not an argument for abandoning the project of multiculturalism, however, but for ensuring that it is framed within the values of social justice.

Fifteen years ago, the term `community capacity-building' was not to be found anywhere within the policy literature. Now it is used worldwide, particularly in the context of urban policy, regeneration and social development. The paper argues that the term has been introduced as part of a political fashion but that in practice it is difficult to distinguish it from the practice of community development. A critique, drawing on experience worldwide, suggests that its widespread use represents a continuing failure of governments properly to engage in `bottom-up' development, is built on a `deficit' model of communities which fails to engage properly with their own skills, knowledge and interests, and helps to obscure structural reasons for poverty and inequality.

Report Back provides news, views and reports from local government and the voluntary and community sectors. These reports are related, whenever possible, to the special theme of each issue of Benefits, but the most important consideration is their topicality and relevance to as wide an audience in these fields as possible. Benefits may commission pieces for particular themes but individual contributions are welcomed from those working in these areas and should be sent to the Editorial Office. These contributions might focus on either local government or the voluntary and community sectors, or on relationships between the two.