The surest way to make it clear that the community does not tolerate caste discrimination is to support the legislation

• Published in: Eastern eye no. 1198
• Main Author: Gardiner, Barry
• Format: Newspaper Article
• Language: English
• Published: London (UK) Ethnic Media Group Ltd 03.05.2013
• Subjects: Caste; Discrimination; Hindus; Media coverage; United Kingdom > UK
• ISSN: 0965-464X

Perhaps the media were not the only ones who were twisting things. Of course, [Satish Sharma] may not have realised that Lord Harries, who introduced the amendment, is a crossbench peer, not a Labour one. Perhaps he did not realise that it was seconded by Lord Deben (John Gummer), a Conservative peer, not a Labour one. Lord Deben was followed immediately by Lord Avebury (Liberal Democrat), Lord Alton (crossbench) and Baroness Flather (Conservative), all of whom supported the amendment. It is worth recalling that in the 2010 debate, when the Labour government decided to delay implementing caste as a protected characteristic, it was the Conservative opposition who said Labour was not going far enough. Conservative Baroness Warsi referred to a study, Hidden Apartheid-Voice of the Community-Caste and Caste Discrimination in the UK, and declared that it "illustrates that there is a real and widespread problem" [Official Report, 11/1/10; col. 340.] Many predict that the Conservatives will do a U-turn and will accept Lord Harries's amendment before Parliament prorogues for the Queen's Speech. We believe that the Conservative proposal to carry out a massive 'education campaign' about caste is profoundly mistaken. We can see no purpose in teaching people about the caste system where they do not already know about it, when the objective is to eradicate discrimination on the basis of caste. But Labour has also listened carefully to what thoughtful community leaders have been arguing, and the party has now put to the government a set of proposals to render Lord Harries's amendment more workable and acceptable.