Re: BBC’s “Positive” discrimination proposals
When I read about these I wrote a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act to the BBC and here is the text of my letter:-
Dear Sirs
Re: BBC’s Diversity “drive” – Freedom of Information Act Requests
I read the Daily Telegraph’s article on Saturday, 23rd April talking about the BBC’s sweeping new “Diversity” targets incorporated into a new “Diversity Strategy”, which appears to show that the BBC, in its drive to be politically correct, has abandoned all sense of both equality and of common sense.
It appears, for instance, that, in News Programmes, you propose that 50% of all commentators, experts and others brought onto the programme should be women regardless of whether they actually represent a genuine diversity of opinion, rather than represent a mere proportion of the population in the neo Soviet sense.
I also read that there are proposed targets across the BBC’s screen and back room staff which are to mirror the national population.
Since 60.4% of the population of England, according to the 2011 Census, identified themselves as being of “English-only” national identity, I ask, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, whether you propose to ensure that 60.4% of the staff, both on screen and in the back room shall be of English national identity? If you propose any other proportion then I request, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, the scientific basis on which you propose a different figure. If you do not propose to specify the proportion of people who are English then I request, under the Freedom of Information Act, your justification in failing to properly represent the population.
I note that you have set targets of 8% of on air roles of “LGBGT” people. I therefore formally request, under the Freedom of Information Act, how you arrived at 8%, given that the proportion of the population who are “LGBGT” is significantly smaller than that. Please also, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, confirm that you will reduce the numbers of “LGBGT” people down to 8% and ensure that they have no greater number than their proportion of the population, otherwise you will clearly be failing to properly represent the “non-LGBGT” proportion of the population. I again request your justification for such findings.
Since you propose that 15% of all “lead roles” as well as on “air positions” will have to be taken by “ethnic minorities”, please can you specify exactly which “ethnic minority” takes up which proportion of that 15% and how that figure is calculated, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. Please also provide the information which relates to how that 15% is calculated, given that 15% appears to be a larger proportion of the population than is demonstrated in the 2011 Census results. It would appear, prima facie, that you are seeking to have a larger proportion of “ethnic minority” people than the proportion in the population. How are you therefore properly representing the proportions of the population if you choose to have more than 15%? I again request your justification for such findings.
Please also let me have a list of those groups that you are including in your definition of “minority ethnic groups” that will be given this representation and please also specify where this definition has been taken from and why you have excluded other groups from the list.
Please note that in view of the simplicity of the information requested in this Freedom of Information Act request, I am presuming that there will be no charge for making the request. If there is to be a charge please notify me within the next 7 days from the date of this letter.
Further please note that if a deadline of 21 days for producing the information, which I hereby give, is insufficient, then I do require you to notify me within 7 days of the date of this letter.
If the information requested is in a document then I ask for all the information in the document including its formatting data, but would confirm that the provision of a copy of the document will be a sufficient discharge of this data request.
In the absence of such notifications and should I not receive the information requested, I shall forthwith make an Application to the Information Commissioner for an Order against you to order the disclosure of the requested information.
Yours faithfully
Here is the BBC’s response:-
Dear Mr Tilbrook
Freedom of Information Request – RF120160951
Thank you for your request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) received on 5th May 2016, seeking the following information:
1. Since 60.4% of the population of England, according to the 2011 Census, identified themselves as being of “English-only” national identity, I ask, whether you propose to ensure that 60.4% of the staff, both on screen and in the back room shall be of English national identity?
2. If you propose any other proportion then I request the scientific basis on which you propose a different figure.
3. If you do not propose to specify the proportion of people who are English then I request justification in failing to properly represent the population.
4. I note that you have set targets of 8% of on air roles of “LGBGT” people. I therefore formally request how you arrived at 8%, given that the proportion of the population who are “LGBGT” is significantly smaller than that.
5. Please also confirm that you will reduce the numbers of “LGBGT” people down to 8% and ensure that they have no greater number than their proportion of the population, otherwise you will clearly be failing to properly represent the “non-LGBGT” proportion of the population. I again request your justification for such findings.
6. Since you propose that 15% of all “lead roles” as well as on “air positions” will have to be taken by “ethnic minorities”, please can you specify exactly which “ethnic minority” takes up which proportion of that 15% and how that figure is calculated.
7. Please also provide the information which relates to how that 15% is calculated, given that 15% appears to be a larger proportion of the population than is demonstrated in the 2011 Census results. It would appear, prima facie, that you are seeking to have a larger proportion of “ethnic minority” people than the proportion in the population.
8. How are you therefore properly representing the proportions of the population if you choose to have more than 15%? I again request your justification for such findings.
9. Please also let me have a list of those groups that you are including in your definition of “minority ethnic groups” that will be given this representation and please also specify where this definition has been taken from and why you have excluded other groups from the list.
In response to 1, 2 and 3, the BBC does not currently ask staff to declare national identity. For more detail on what metrics the BBC aims to measure across the workforce see
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/tools_use/diversity_equality.html
In response to 4 and 5, we have based our targets on a combination of governmental statistics alongside intelligence and estimates.
In response to 6 and 7, the BBC currently publishes general figures relating to the ethnicity of its staff as an annual reporting requirement under the BBC Charter and Agreement and in line with the Public Sector Equality Duty. We reflect the ethnicity of our staff under three broad headings: Ethnic Majority staff (White British/English/Scottish/Welsh) Black and Minority Ethnic staff (Black, Mixed, Asian, Chinese, Middle/Near Eastern) and staff from Other White Backgrounds (Irish, Central & Eastern European, Gypsy/Traveller & white staff from other backgrounds). You can see more about this on the BBC Trust’s website:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/governance/tools_we_use/diversity_equality.html
It is not mandatory for staff to inform the BBC of their diversity information. Therefore the figures only relate to records, where the ethnicity is known (currently 98% of the workforce). The figures also excludes local recruits – staff who are recruited and work locally, outside the UK.
The BBC’s Equality Information Report for 2014/2015 can be found at the following address:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/strategy/equalityreport2015
In response to 8 and 9, we have based our targets on a combination of governmental statistics alongside internal intelligence, estimates and projections.
Please note that, as set out in section 6(1)(b)(ii) of the FOI Act, our subsidies (including BBC Studio & Post Production Ltd, UKTV, BBC Global News Ltd and BBC Worldwide Ltd), as well as the charities BBC Media Action and BBC Children in Need, are not subject to the Act, therefore information for their personnel is not included in the figures quoted above.
I hope this response satisfies your request.
Appeal Rights
If you are not satisfied that we have complied with the Act in responding to your request, you have the right to an internal review by a BBC senior manager or legal advisor. Please contact us at the address above, explaining what you would like us to review and including your reference number. If you are not satisfied with the internal review, you can appeal to the Information Commission. The contact details are:- Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF, Tel: 0303 123 1113 (local rate) or 01625 545 745 (national rate) or see http://ico.gov.uk/.
Yours sincerely
BBC People
And here is my response:-
Dear Sir
Re: Freedom of Information Request – RF120160951
Thank you for your unsigned letter of the 2nd June 2016 from which it would appear that you have next to no actual data which would enable you to justify a basic breach of principles of equal and fair recruiting, contrary, inter alia, to the Equality Act 2010.
For your information the categories which you describe in which you “reflect the ethnicity” of your staff are not “ethnicities” as recognised by Law. “Ethnicity” is a subset of another group such as the House of Lords found Sikhs were of the wider racial group of the Northern Indians.
Since one of the leading cases on the English as a Racial Group is a case against the BBC, one would, with respect, have thought that the BBC was capable of learning from its previous mistakes and, before undertaking the kind of egregious social engineering project as proposed, would have gone to the trouble of acquiring the requisite data.
For your information ‘White British’ is a legal oxymoron, given that British is anybody who has a British passport. English, Scottish and Welsh are separate National Origin and Racial Origin groups. The idea that “Black, Mixed, Asian, Chinese, Middle/Near Eastern” all represents a single “Ethnic” Group is bizarre. Obviously your “Other White Backgrounds” is equally a miss mash of different peoples. The fact that you quote these would seem to demonstrate that you actually have not done the required groundwork to depart from basic equality law principles in recruitment.
We invite you to correct us if there is any information which supports your proposed course of action?
Yours faithfully
What do you think?
Well done, Robin. I am waiting now for Gyspy Rose Lee to be seen reading the news or a Roma quotient. If the BBC applies the quota system so rigorously then why does not the FA? My heart sank watching the England Russia game. Obviously, Russia does not need to employ the same Marxist criteria with regard to their "diversity". England, in contrast does not either as I counted, I thought, six out of 11 players who were mixed race black on white or just black. Surely this is disproportionate? Germany did seem to have four Turkish players and one black so this is similarly disproportionate. If Football employs the criterion of talent then why not the BBC? But my heart sank when a comparison was made to the World Cup in 1966; probably the last occasion on which an England team truly was English. I wonder whether in ten years time the England team will be majority non-white as the French team was a few years ago. A French friend confused me when, despite having a half black grandson, he kept going on about the all black team!! It just shows that it is a question of numbers.
ReplyDeleteAnd now I come to recent events in Florida. I have come to the conclusion that there is now such thing as a spontaneous act of Islamic terrorism. All these terrorists seem to have been known to the various security forces. People are confused as to why the FBI allowed this to happen. There is something called a false flag event. All the events seem to have involved set-ups or patsies, like the Boston bombing. What events in Florida have shown is a crisis of the pluralism born of the French Revolution when the new financial aristocracy took over. France is unable to cope with its own invention and neither is its offshoot in the United States. Obama made a speech that was pure cultural Marxism about equality for all whatever their sex, race, religion, sexual orientation etc. Apparently, Russians are bewildered at Obama's pledge to introduces gender neutral toilets in schools. Ethnic and cultural pluralism is like a gigantic juggling act and America has just dropped all the balls. It does not work!! full-stop!! Enoch warned us. Europe is struggling just as much if not more.
Ironic, that this has occurred just after the interfaith funeral of Mohammed Ali when Rabbi Lerner seemed to be urging blacks to take revenge on whites; I wonder why?
As to the reason behind yet another CIA set-up; the target is obvious. All forces are being mustered to stop Trump. He has already fallen into the trap by vowing to stop the takeover by radical Islam which a Beeb journalist called insensitive. And now he has come out in support of the gun lobby. How did the FBI let that chap by automatic weapons unintentionally? The further irony is that Peter Tatchell has already been accused of Islamophobia and there is a battle between Muslims and homosexuals. I wonder what the many left-wing gays who probably voted for Sadiq Khan are thinking as the DT says that ISIL is targeting Western gays? The Muslim human rights commission here has said that this is not in their name and will stir up more Islamophobia. But the sad thing is that people in the West no longer feel they can trust Muslims or peaceful Muslims to rein in their own. Ian R Crane spoke of the destruction of the homogeneous nations of Europe. As they push ahead with it the predicted chaos is overwhelming us. And Gove has pointed out the hidden agenda for Turkish EU membership. I wonder whether the aim is to make us all Muslim. Certainly, Christianity is their chief enemy. The UN has said making children go to a Christian school assembly here is against their human rights!
Sorry, back again. I meant to say that Cameron is now desperately trying to stop a Brexit. Since Corbyn is not up to the job he has roped in Gordon Brown - he knows that Blair would have been worse - to stop Labour voters fleeing to the Brexit camp and he doesn't know what to do about the oldies who tend to vote Tory like sheep - not this one - and are three out of four for a Brexit.
ReplyDeleteIt struck me that the English have suddenly realised that the referendum is their chance at last to vent their spleen about the mass immigration which has occurred without any consent and been forced on them throughout nearly all their lives now. Only those over 70 have known a truly English England. Farage has made it plain that this is what the Brexit is really all about.
John Laughland, the Paris based philosopher and commentator on RT, said that it has been taboo to talk about mass immigration in Europe for decades. It has since the 1950s and those who dared to do so, like Enoch Powell, were sent to the intellectual gulag post haste!! Nothing was to stop the destruction of the homogeneous nations they planned on the road to a one world dictatorship by the new financial aristocracy.
I think you are correct. I would call the EU Referendum "England's Border Poll" because that is really what it is about. It is England that vote BREXIT, although Wales and NI may also vote BREXIT. Scotland is predicted to vote Remain, but if we do leave the EU the Scots have said they do not want another referendum. Perhaps having self government has settled the Scots, but it seems only BREXIT will satisfy us at the moment.
DeleteIf Remain do win, it will be by a whisker and the issue will not go away. I am hoping BREXIT win by a decent margin to prevent any doubt as to the legitimacy of the result. If other parts of the UK want to leave to join the EU that's fine. If NI want to stay in the EU give them the Irish Unity referendum.
Michael Gove has been good in this campaign, his father's fishing business was wrecked by the EU.
We see evidence of 19 point Poll leads for Leave, personally I think that is getting closer to what I hear.
Francis
Francis, I had heard that the Leave campaign were surging ahead but didn't have the figures. The last I heard it was neck and neck. As regards Scotland, as the SNP begin to flood Scotland with immigrants their star will begin to fade. I am sure that the Scots will not put up with the prospect of being a minority in their own country the way the English do. The Scots will be happy to vote remain as long as the immigrants all remain in England but I know that even Scottish voices are being raised about what is happening in Glasgow.
DeleteReturning to Florida, the shooter's father has had to backtrack on a homophobic comment and has a youtube channel in support of the Taliban. Despite this he was a guest of the State Department. So this shows that Washington is working with him and possibly was with his son. The crooked Hillary Clinton has now blamed Saudi and the Gulf States for financing terrorism despite the fact that the US is training and arming them in Syria. Fortunately, thanks to alternative media and satellite tv they cannot get away with their lies and cover-ups the way they used to. I see that they have taken RT off the air in Argentina. This will be their next move but they then have to stop people finding things out via the internet. Perhaps in the end they will close that down, too.
UTTER BOLLOCKS FROM ONGAR-AGAIN!-?
ReplyDeleteThe BBC is the sandbank at the end of the shooting range.You can fire a million bullets (inquiries)at it,most will be absorbed,lost occasionally ricocheted out,mangled and covered in bull**it.
So a question to you Robin-"When you already know the very predictable outcome to your inquiries with the notoriously evasive BBC do you choose to do this, ten days away from Englands D Day on 23rd of June?"
Is it because it serves as both a convenient distraction and ideal material, for what seems to be this blogs favourite pastime of regurgitating the obvious(for most well informed people) or refining waffling and whining techniques for a future retirement in Australia perhaps!
Having read the comments over the years, my astute observations of comment participants argues you change the title of the blog to-The Robin Francis and Mr Echo Bog!-?
Speciality! Waffling while England gets overrun into oblivion!
So what is your point? In order to prove discrimination, you need written evidence and statistics. Robin is a solicitor and knows the procedures involved. I am thorough sick of what's going on, and yes our D Day is only 9 days away. You should be aware that very weapons are available to us, only expensive litigation that most of us can ill afford and this once in a lifetime referendum that must be won.
DeleteFrancis
Robin you can also use Section 150 of the Equality Act 2010 to request the same info.
ReplyDeleteJust sue them for discrimination. How about diversity of political beliefs? I bet they couldn't answer that?
Francis
Does anybody know what happened about the chap who wrote to the Times about anti-English discrimination at the BBC having learned that he was rejected for not being an ethnic minority (yet!). I have noticed that programmes seem to be going into reverse in this respect, not so much on the BBC. Having almost reached the point of no return English faces and names are holding their ground. Is this correct and has a backlash begun or is it just merely wishful thinking on my part?
Deletehttp://www.the-savoisien.com/wawa-conspi/viewtopic.php?id=1192
ReplyDeleteChapter IX. 'Aliens and the BBC', from "The Alien Menace" (1934) by A.H. Lane
The BBC was always rotten to the core.