Press Release - 26th September 2007

Statement by the Ethnic English Trust following
the refusal of a Judicial Review application
in the High Court against the
Commission for Racial Equality

The Ethnic English Trust is disappointed by the decision to refuse its application because it thought the application provided an opportunity for the court to clarify certain matters concerning English identity.

Our stance
At the heart of our position is the belief that the English way-of-life values certain qualities; one of them being fair-dealing. It is this quality that promotes a belief in the rule of law and equality before the law. We believe this to be the crux of the matter.

It should be clearly understood that we accept that there are many meanings of the word English and there are many views on the matter. We hoped that the Judicial Review would be concerned with:
(a) the legal definition of ‘English’ under the Race Relations Act (RR Act);
(b) ensuring that the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) and its successor, the Commission on Equality and Human Rights, give proper recognition to the existence and composition of the English racial group so that its members may individually and collectively freely enjoy the rights, benefits and privileges granted to racial groups under the RR Act.

We merely want the English racial group to be free to enjoy its lawful rights under the RR Act.

The English Racial Group
In law the English are a racial group by reason of their ‘national origins’, which means that they are members of a community whose members share a history, culture, ancestry and communal name, and are identified with a territory, i.e. England. (BBC Scotland v Souster, 2001)

Complaints
The Trust alleged that CRE appears reluctant to acknowledge and make widely known the existence in law of an English racial group and is instead intent on promoting a place-based inclusive English identity, i.e. everyone born or living in England is English.

The Trust alleged that CRE has supplied incorrect, inaccurate and misleading advice concerning the existence, status and membership of the English racial group. The effect has been to obscure the existence and status of the English racial group from administrators and policy makers. It has also helped create among members of the English racial group – and particularly the young - a lack of understanding and appreciation of their racial identity as ‘English’.

The Trust alleged that due in part to CRE’s incorrect, inaccurate and misleading advice, the Ethnic English Trust had been unable to obtain charitable status for its proposed beneficiaries and purposes. Thus the racial group ‘the English’ has not been afforded the same rights as other racial groups.

The Hearing
The Trust argued that the Commission for Racial Equality had published misleading and inaccurate information which, when taken together, had the effect of obscuring the existence and status of the English racial group. The Trust produced a list of examples but the judge chose to look at them one-by-one and pointed out there was no error in law in any of them. So when, for example, CRE gave a list of racial groups and omitted the English it was not wrong in law, the list was merely incomplete – just a list of examples. There could be no Judicial Review of the code merely because of poor drafting. There would need to be clear and obvious mistakes that needed correction in the public interest. He held that there were no grounds to proceed and the application was refused.

We lost – but . . .
Despite the decision there are positives. The judge found nothing objectionable in The Trust’s definition of its beneficiary group as being those who (a) would tick the ethnic English box on the new census form and (b) belonged to the racial group known in law as the English. He didn’t quibble with the Trust using the term ‘indigenous English’ to describe its beneficial group, but the judge was not prepared to say that ‘English racial group’ means the same in law as ‘indigenous English’. To have done so would have caused a major upheaval because it would conflict with the policies and mindset of the Government and Commission for Racial Equality. So, although the judge thought the matter of English identity and the status of the indigenous English in law was interesting, he did not think it the time and place to get involved in such things.

What Happens Next?
Although we did not succeed in our application, our action on behalf of the indigenous English will have registered with those who govern us. This, together with other matters that the Trust and other English organisations are involved in, is sending a signal that there is disquiet and rumblings of rebellion amongst the indigenous English community. Perhaps those people who would prefer that we didn’t exist will simply take the route to conflict and devote more resources to convincing us that everyone living in England is English and that the ‘English racial group’ should be redefined in an inclusive way which strips the indigenous English of their communal identity. Hopefully they will shy away from that route and take a constructive approach which acknowledges the existence of the indigenous English (and the Scots and Welsh) and enable us to enjoy the same rights, benefits and privileges that other racial groups enjoy. We will see.

General Statement
The Trust believes that as a result of CRE’s advice, many organisations with a statutory duty to promote racial equality and combat racial discrimination have failed to acknowledge the existence of the English racial group and have failed to collect statistics and other information relevant to that group. Thus the English racial group is invisible to many administrators and policy makers. This in turn has meant a lack of recognition of the special needs and interests of the English racial group and a lack of appropriate policies and resource allocation to address those needs and interests.

It had been hoped that a successful judicial review would ensure that the Commission for Equality and Human Rights (CRE’s successor) would be made aware that it has a duty to recognise and make known the existence of the English racial group and to ensure that the group is able to fully and freely enjoy its lawful rights, including the registration of English specific charities. There are, after all, thousands of ethnic specific charities for other racial/ethnic groups. To deny the English the right to form such charities is clearly discriminatory.

The Commission on Integration and Cohesion, and the Department of Education and Skills in its diversity and curriculum review, acknowledged that the indigenous English (which they include in “the long settled White community”) have been stripped of their identity and alienated from British society. The first step to addressing this problem is for government commissions and departments to acknowledge the identity and existence of the English racial group. This involves recognising them as being ‘English’ and not foisting on them some other identity such as White-British, which includes a wide assortment of ethnic groups. The inclusion of ‘English’ on all ethnic monitoring forms is essential to this recognition. The Trust had hoped that the Judicial Review would assist in speeding the process of recognition.

Tony Linsell, Chairman – for an on behalf of the Ethnic English Trust

 

The Ethnic English Trust is a company limited by guarantee. It is a not-for-profit organisation.
Application for charitable status is pending.