Total Visits

Monday, 22 January 2018



The Law Society Gazette is the in-house magazine for the Society of England and Wales,which is the professional body for all Solicitors in the English and Welsh jurisdiction. Like all such organisations there is a creeping move towards political correctness and “positive action”towards “diversity”; “multi-culturalism and globalisation”. An example of this appeared recently in the 8thJanuary issue of the Gazette. It was entitled“Racial Disparity in exams by Max Walters”. Here is his article :-

Minority ethnic students lagging behind in LPC success

By Max Walters

White students are more likely to pass their legal exams and law conversion courses than people from an ethnic minority background, data from the Solicitors Regulation Authority has revealed.

According to an SRA report, almost 80% of white students successfully completed their LPC, compared with only 40% of black students and 53% of Asian/Asian British students.

The figures, which cover September 2015 to August 2016, were published on the SRA website at the end of last year.

They appear in the annual ‘Authorisation and Monitoring Report’ which focuses on the success rates for two qualifications – the legal practice course (LPC)and the common professional examination (CPE) – a conversion course for non-law graduates.

It will come as another blow for the profession’s reputation for diversity after barristers’ regulator the Bar Standards Board revealed at the end of last year that black and minority ethnic (BME) students were half as likely as their white counterparts to achieve pupillage.

The figures for CPE candidates were similar to those taking the LPC. Among white students, 74% successfully completed the course, compared with 33% of black students and 46% of Asian students.

The report also reveals a stark gap between success at training institutions.

For the LPC, one provider achieved a pass rate of 100%, compared with 30% at another. CPE completion rates were similar and varied from less than 45% to100%. ?The providers have not been named.

The report also reveals that the University of Hertfordshire has opted to reinstate the LPC this year. The university suspended the course in 2016 in light of forthcoming changes to qualification. The Gazette has contacted the university for comment.

Here is the link to the original article>>>

Here is my letter to the Editor in reply:-

Dear Sir

Your article in the 8th January issue of the Law Society Gazette:-“Racial disparity in exam results” by Max Walters

The statistics which Mr Walters quotes of “disparity” between “Black” and “Asian”Students and “White” Students may not actually “constitute a fresh blow to the profession’s reputation for inclusion”. For that inference to be properly drawn we would have to know whether the LPC “providers” were requiring the same levels of prior academic achievement from prospective students from each of these respective racial groups.

Anecdotally it would appear that the providers are actually not requiring the same level of academic achievement from each of the racial groups. Instead the providers appear to be offering course places at least partly on the basis of politically correct “positive discrimination”.

In other reports it also appears that “Asian” were 22% and “Black” were 9% of the total candidates. This is well over the percentage of these racial groups compared with their percentages of the population as per the 2011 Census. These percentages mean that even given their lower pass rates more Asian and Black candidates are becoming solicitors than these racial groups proportion of the population of England. It is actually English candidates who are underrepresented (so much for “White Privilege”?).

This supports the idea that “positive discrimination” is occurring which confirms that the “providers” are probably giving places to “Asian” and “Black” students who have not previously done as well academically as the “White”students. It may therefore be the reported results are hardly surprising. Law exams are testing knowledge of what is objectivity true. Hence, it was always improbable that racial discrimination came into the picture.

The disturbing implication of Mr Walters’ article is that he may be implying the academic standards for the LPC should be lowered. If this is his intention then the impact on the basic purpose of open examinations and of Professional regulation (which is to create a profession able to maintain and guarantee high professional standards of service to the public) would be sacrificed on the altar of politically correct “diversity” targets!

Yours sincerely

Robin Tilbrook

Solicitor& Chairman of the English Democrats

What do you think?


  1. This is the same for most professions in the UK now, and it seems the 'Diversity and Equality' brigade have targeted the judiciary with their PC agenda, dragging the profession down to a third world standard, who are the racists here...?

  2. Our local Police force has been described as "institutionally racist". This appears to be because it is falling short on recruitment targets for "Black" and "Asian" officers. It's the same problem as appears above and is endemic throughout our society. Recruiting a "Black" or "Asian" candidate is projected as preferable to recruiting a more able English candidate. Such is the stranglehold that Political Correctness has on society, that challenging these so-called "positive" discriminatory practices (discrimination is never positive it is always against someone) is verboten because anyone who does so is deemed to "hate" the beneficiaries of the discriminatory policy. He's a "racist" and no-one wants to risk that label being applied to them, so everyone keeps quiet about it. Bravo to you, Robin, for highlighting this evil once again. The question remains, how do we go about confronting Political Correctness and bringing it down? Its very purpose is to stifle debate and it does so with ruthless efficiency.

  3. Wouldn't law firms sift these special candidates out during their own selection process. Russell group graduates are always more desirable to prospective employers so a sort of discrimination would occur as it always has, wouldn't it?

  4. It's just another piece in the kaleidoscope of subversion, though not quite as egregious as:

    -- believe, but verify.

  5. For years non whites particularly muslims and blacks have wanted to take control of the judiciary. In the 1990's they effectively took control of the CPS but if they secure control of the civil litigation sector we are doomed legally. Robin, it will take a war to reverse now and in that scenario the laws will be made obsolete.


  6. Talking of racial disparity, did you hear the one about the Labour Party meeting, where English attendees were expected to pay £40 to hear Jeremy Corbyn spout is socialist claptrap but "Black" and "Minority Ethnic" attendees were charged £30? No? Read all about it in The Mail Online. There's a link via Stephen Morris's blog.

  7. I am informed that the other day, the BBC had a piece on its lunchtime news about the under-representation on local councils in Birmingham of members of the BEM community - I think that stands for Black and Ethnic Minority. In view of the fact that we are told that any day the majority in Birmingham will be non-white, the reason for this must obviously be the institutional racism of the indigenous white population. No such problem at the BBC, as apparently not only was everybody on the streets of Brum who was interviewed about the problem, a member of the BEM community but every reporter on the entire lunchtime news bulletin was the same. "Racism" on the part of the BBC undoubtedly as positive discrimination excludes the natives. Sorry, no it is just positive discrimination. There is no such thing as anti-white racism in Cultural Marxism.

    Meanwhile, Look North has just carried an item about an Indian lady in the North-east, whose parents had gone to live in Libya from India but had fled Libya because of what the "Nato humanitarian operation" has done to that rich and stable land - the richest in Africa - ruled over terrorist free by Colonel Ghaddafi. Rather than returning to India, the elderly Indian couple had landed up with their daughter in the North-East of England. The Home Office now wishes to deport them to the safety of India, they being Indian citizens with Indian passports. But this is being opposed by the daughter and the local half-African labour mp. It would seem that anybody who does not like living in their third world home can roll up in Europe, get free medical treatment and other benefits and then refuse to go home because it is not as nice as living in Europe. This has been going on since 1947. I thought they cheered when they all got their independence, what went wrong?

    We are back to the East African Asians who complained that we took them as indentured labour to Africa from India and yet when chucked out demanded that they come and live in the land of those horrible imperialists rather than returning to India, fully backed up by the Indian government who seemed to want to encourage the Indian diaspora.

    50 years in April since Enoch's rivers of blood speech. Enoch liked India and could not understand why Indians and Pakistanis would want to live here.
    After all, on the Real Marigold Hotel we were shown what a nice spot it was for aging Brits to retire to. Then why is it not a paradise for elderly Indians as well? Perhaps the welfare states of Europe have something to do with it.

    We learn on RT that the judge has ordered the removal of a crucifix from the wall of a Bavarian court room for the trial of an Afghan refugee accused of threatening to kill another Afghan for converting to Christianity. The cross does not worry the defendant but its removal has upset the local Catholics. We hear that another Afghan convert was murdered in Germany for converting to Christianity. So this is what Europe can expect in coming years as Islam turns on its own and then what will be the fate of the rest of Christian Europe I wonder?

  8. I would love to see a poll carried out amongst the natives of the countries of Europe asking how many, given the chance, would have chosen for their countries to become multicultural and diverse. If it was a free and anonymous poll then I would be very surprised if the results showed the majority in favour of diversity, an unnatural and unworkable concept which completely fragments and destroys the nation state. Democrats in America keep telling us that their nation's diversity is its strength but everybody knows that this is a left-wing lie.

    Looking at the talks between North and South Korea, it is interesting to see how, despite their political differences, the two peoples feel themselves as first and foremost Koreans and how they look what they are, oriental. Why did they have the choice but Caucasians never do?

  9. I would be interested to see a poll held amongst native Europeans, asking whether, had they been given the chance, they would have chosen diversity and multiculturalism for their countries over thousands of years of homogeneity. I would be very surprised if, it it were organised in a free and anonymous way, the results showed a majority in favour of diversity.

    Looking at the talks between North and South Korea, it is interesting to note how, despite their political differences, both peoples feel themselves to be Korean and all Koreans are oriental in appearance. Why do they have the choice to remain as they have always been but Caucasians do not? Democrats in the US keep telling us that their nation's diversity is its strength and yet they must know that such a claim is a total left wing lie. Diversity fragments and destroys the nation state whereas homogeneity is the glue that keeps it together. Everybody knows this to be the case but it is just the huge elephant in the liberal room.

  10. Not right on topic so not for publication

    She isn't a Brit either.

    And no, not all the cops depicted are cops. Same difference tho'.