Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

No dogs! No straights! And no white students!!

Scroll to see replies

youngsters barred from applying for internships at Whitehall and in the police... because they are white

White middle-class students have been banned from applying for internships with Britain’s biggest police force and in Whitehall.
The temporary jobs, which offer thousands of pounds for work in the summer, are billed as the internships ‘that could change your life’.
They provide students with invaluable work experience at a time of soaring graduate unemployment.
But critics yesterday told of their anger at the decision by the Civil Service and the Metropolitan Police to exclude all but certain ethnic minorities from applying.
They say the schemes cause resentment among staff and are discriminating against white people ‘via the back door’.
The Metropolitan Police, which employs more than 50,000 people, publicly offers only one work experience programme. The 12-week Diversity Internship will pay six interns more than £3,000 to work in a range of departments. While there is no guarantee of a post at the end, it gives students a head start in the battle for police jobs.
But the application form says only students from specific ethnic groups – including black African, black Asian or Chinese – can apply. Applicants are also quizzed about religious beliefs and sexuality.
The force offers a few other work experience places to students from specific colleges.
The Civil Service also has only one central internship programme – marketed as ‘two months that could change your life’ – and also specifically for students from ethnic minorities.
The only white candidates eligible to apply for the Fast Stream Summer Diversity Internship are those whose families are from ‘under-represented socio-economic backgrounds’.
Others can get occasional work experience through individual departments.
The scheme, paying about £3,000, is a clear route to the prestigious Civil Service Fast Stream graduate programme.
MPs, campaigners and police are furious that prominent public bodies are discriminating against white, middle-class students by denying them the chance to apply.

Tory MP Dominic Raab last night said: ‘We won’t end discrimination by introducing it via the back door. That is precisely what positive discrimination like this does.’
Nadhim Zahawi, a Tory MP who identifies himself as Kurdish, said: ‘These schemes are degrading. Margaret Thatcher didn’t need positive discrimination to become prime minister.’
One Met inspector said: ‘At a time when people in the Met are being offered voluntary redundancy, the Met funds such schemes. Such incentives can only fan the flames of racial division.’
Emma Boon, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, called the schemes ‘tokenistic’.
The Metropolitan Police said: ‘This scheme assists us to understand the needs of the diverse communities we serve.’
A Cabinet Office spokesman said: ‘We think the Civil Service should represent the people we serve and we make no apology for that. Selection for permanent positions is available to all and is always based on fair and open competition.’

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1370567/Middle-class-youngsters-barred-internships-Whitehall-police--white.html#ixzz1HwL7gD3B

Yes, its unfortunate!
I personally have never experienced much racism so am not in a position to argue whether or not dogmatically racist beliefs are still prevalent in most of society (obviously there is always going to be some degree of prejudice by someone towards someone) and I would hope that modern days society is open enough to judge people purely on ability etc.

But, I can understand that if specific areas exist where there is an ethnic divide in the community, with the policeforce being (for example) white-english, then it is possible for some people to hold beliefs that the other community is not law-abiding/intergrated/worthy of positions of authority whilst the community not a part of the force may feel vulnerable and not represented.

I love being from a place where everyone is intergrated and completely see the benefits in a single, shared, community but if this isnt happening in some districts, all the government can do is ensure intergration within its own structure.

Not that Ive been to many places where segregation is a problem of our generation but... I suppose, other than having ensured my ancestors did what the danes do (have all immigrants, to be allowed to stay IF they accepted citizenship and as a part of that, prove some knowledge of the danish language and culture) but... too late now so...

I dont have a solution

Just... I understand the dangers of segregation!

Reply 41

username234673

Don't worry about it. Soon there'll be so many non white people here that us whities can legitimately set up whites only groups and call that positive discrimination.

Reply 42

emiliee21

If they arent employing white people surely that isn't diversity ?

Reply 43

morecambebay

Original post by aeonflux

What bigoted rubbish.

Are you telling me that as a straight white male I am incapable of representing or understanding someone from another background?

Do you realise how incredibly patronising these kinds of programs are towards the 'under-represented' sections of the population?

We don't need police/civil servants of every possible demographic imaginable to represent the population, we need the best possible police/civil servants regardless of background. Anything else and we cannot claim to be a meritocracy.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 44

ilickbatteries

Original post by Miu-Miu

At least someone is doing something for white working class kids now instead of PhillyPoppa and Tarquinius Poshtwattius......boohoo cry me a river

I'm white, but I come from a white, working-class, Northern background.

I'd get more satisfaction from beating Tarquin, Rubert and Felicity in a fair contest than being given a leg-up because I come from an under-represented socio-economic background.

I know that I'd rather have an exceptional candidate who is white and middle-class than a poorer candidate who is black. Not because of skin colour, but because of ability.

We shouldn't compromise standards to try and meet quotas. What's the point? To increase diversity? It's not real diversity, it's artificial diversity.

If people from those socio-economic backgrounds don't meet the criteria for a place, they shouldn't have the bar lowered. Lowering the bar reduces the quality of intake.

The only time I can see a benefit to having any kind of quota in place is when taking an applicant from a specific social-group is absolutely necessary, like getting more men into primary education for example. Men are ridiculously under-represented, to the detriment of boys in primary education who lack a male role model in their lives.

Reply 45

canimakeit

I think people have forgotten that there is such a thing as white working class, if they can apply for these positions is this discrimination based on race or class....

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 46

aeonflux

Original post by morecambebay

It is not bigoted. Try reading it properly. I very clearly stated that it would be possible for you to pick up the understanding second hand. But second hand knowledge is never as good as first hand. There is nothing wrong with admitting that and allowing people to capitalize on whatever first hand knowledge they have. Do you seriously believe that imagining what a situation must be like is equal to having lived through it? It is subtle bigotry, but bigotry nonetheless. Firstly because you assume that all black/gay people have first hand experience of racism/homophobia. Secondly because you assume that all white/straight people haven't (as an example, I have several straight friends who have all experienced homophobia despite not being gay). Thirdly, and most importantly, because you are still asserting that there are 'black issues' and 'gay issues' that can only be understood by a person within the 'black community' or 'gay community' - and this I categorically reject. I don't believe, for example, that homophobia is a 'gay issue' that can only be understood by gays. I believe homophobia is a problem with the whole of society and is something we all need to come to terms with and deal with together. By labelling it a 'gay issue' it becomes easier to marginalise and ignore.

You still haven't addressed the point about how patronising these programs come across. Do you not believe there are enough people from 'diverse' backgrounds that are capable of winning a job on merit so they need the jobs handed to them on a plate?

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 47

morecambebay

Original post by aeonflux

It is subtle bigotry, but bigotry nonetheless. Firstly because you assume that all black/gay people have first hand experience of racism/homophobia. Secondly because you assume that all white/straight people haven't (as an example, I have several straight friends who have all experienced homophobia despite not being gay). Thirdly, and most importantly, because you are still asserting that there are 'black issues' and 'gay issues' that can only be understood by a person within the 'black community' or 'gay community' - and this I categorically reject. I don't believe, for example, that homophobia is a 'gay issue' that can only be understood by gays. I believe homophobia is a problem with the whole of society and is something we all need to come to terms with and deal with together. By labelling it a 'gay issue' it becomes easier to marginalise and ignore.

You still haven't addressed the point about how patronising these programs come across. Do you not believe there are enough people from 'diverse' backgrounds that are capable of winning a job on merit so they need the jobs handed to them on a plate?

I did not assume that all black/gay people would have experience of racism/homophobia. I stated three times that the criteria should include experience/understanding.

Nor did I say that white/straight people havent, If they have they would have the understanding/experience and would meet the selection criteria. Statistically this isnt very likely to happen though is it.

I quite clearly stated that it would be possible to gain the understanding/experience without being part of the community. Homophobia is obviously going to be much better understood by gay people than straight. It affects them much more directly than it effects straight people. The venom is aimed at them. Do you think that you witnessing homophobia every once in a while gives you the same perspective as somebody living with it under constant attack? Do you think you have the same ability to help a victim of it?

The whole patronising thing is completely irrelevant to what I said. I havent said that people should be selected because they are from a diverse background, I have said that they should be given credit for the knowledge/experience that they have of those backgrounds. Not the same thing.

Whether you like to admit it or not, the absolute best way to gain knowledge/experience of a group of people and their situation is to be one of them.

The police dont just want more gay coppas to tick some box, their first hand experience is invaluable to the understanding of the community as a whole. They already have lots of people offering the middle class white experience.

If you are going to argue with me at least argue over what I wrote instead of what you think I wrote.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 48

Selkarn

More anti-white racism that I see? See sig. Something is going to break soon (I hope), this racist government has to fall.

Reply 49

aeonflux

Original post by morecambebay

I did not assume that all black/gay people would have experience of racism/homophobia. I stated three times that the criteria should include experience/understanding.Well that's pretty irrelevant, because it isn't what the criteria are.

Nor did I say that white/straight people havent, If they have they would have the understanding/experience and would meet the selection criteria.

But they wouldn't meet the selection criteria because the article states: "The application form says only students from specific ethnic groups – including black African, black Asian or Chinese – can apply."

Homophobia is obviously going to be much better understood by gay people than straight. It affects them much more directly than it effects straight people. The venom is aimed at them. Do you think that you witnessing homophobia every once in a while gives you the same perspective as somebody living with it under constant attack? Do you think you have the same ability to help a victim of it?

Yes, I do. As an example I know quite a bit about the Samaritans. Their volunteers their come from a massive variety of backgrounds. Some have been through attempted suicide themselves, others have witnessed it with a close family member, others have no direct experience of it outside the Samaritans. The thing they have in common is that they've all been trained and are willing to give up their time to listen to people going through it. Now would you tell a Samaritan that hasn't directly had experience with suicide themselves that they are less capable of understanding or helping people than someone who has? Because I think a lot of them would that massively ignorant, if not downright offensive. You really have no idea how good a volunteer someone would be from their background, or even their experiences.

Likewise you have no idea how good a police officer/civil servant would be from the colour of their skins or their sexual orientation, and to suggest otherwise is wrong.

The whole patronising thing is completely irrelevant to what I said. I havent said that people should be selected because they are from a diverse background

Well that is exactly what the police and civil service are doing, so do you agree with it, as your initial post implied, or do you not? Seems to me like you've realised the position you've tried to defend is pretty weak, so you've tried to move to the middle ground and argue that it is experience rather than actual skin colour or sexuality that counts. But as I've pointed out, that isn't what you defended initially so I'm asking you now to take a position - is discrimination based on race and sexuality acceptable or not?

Whether you like to admit it or not, the absolute best way to gain knowledge/experience of a group of people and their situation is to be one of them.

No, I don't agree. There is nothing for me to 'admit', that statement is opinion and nothing more.

The police dont just want more gay coppas to tick some box

Judging by what friends have told me of working in the public sector, that's exactly the kind of thing they want...

In short, the police and civil service already look for relevant experience when recruiting normally. Discrimination based on experience is perfectly acceptable and legal. What is being discussed is not discrimination based on experience, but discrimination based on physical attributes and sexuality which have no relevance to the job - something which, in my opinion, is always wrong.