The statement Boris should have made: I will not thow a good man to the wolves

Yesterday evening we discussed the events that led up to the sad resignation of James McGrath as a senior aide to Boris Johnson.  Boris' statement reacting to James' resignation included these words:

"James is not a racist.  I know that.  He shares my passionate belief that racism is vile, repulsive and has no place in modern Britain. But his response to a silly and hostile suggestion put to him by Marc Wadsworth, allowed doubts to be raised about that commitment... James's remark was taken out of context and distorted, but he recognises the need for crystal clarity on a vital issue like this.  We both agree that he could not stay on as my political adviser without providing ammunition for those who wish to deliberately misrepresent our clear and unambiguous opposition to any racist tendencies."

In other words: James is not a racist but I'm not prepared to risk standing up to the people who suggest that he is.  In a very strong blog Iain Dale has accused Boris Johnson of a failure of backbone over the affair.  Those of us who know James McGrath are seriously angered by this episode. Comments on our previous post on this have been virtually unanimous in their opposition to the resignation.

Here's a quick draft of an alternative statement that Boris could and should have issued - perhaps on camera, supported by one of the ethnically diverse appointments that he has made:

"You will have seen internet coverage of remarks made by one of my advisers, James McGrath.  I ask you to look at the context of the remarks and judge whether the author of the piece - a Labour activist - is a fair-minded person or someone with a political agenda.  I know James and I know him not to be a racist.  He wouldn't be part of my team if he didn't share my belief that London is greater because of its diversity.  He wouldn't be part of my team if he wasn't committed to my agenda of building a London where every citizen is respected regardless of race, religion and sexuality.  There have, of course, been calls from some quarters for me to sack James but I will not.  To do so would only encourage more malicious and vexatious allegations against my staff and other public figures.  In these cases it becomes not about what somebody has said, but about how the media think somebody, somewhere could wrongly perceive what they said. Racism is still a real problem in too much of society but we devalue real incidents of racism when we over-react to unfortunate uses of words.  I want to put an end to the gotcha style of journalism that is always determined to think the worst of people.  Most Londoners are fair-minded and want to think the best of people.  My administration won't be bullied by the politically correct.  Our priorities are fighting crime, improving educational opportunity and affordable housing.  James will continue to help me in those tasks.  I will not throw a good man to the wolves."

Comments

[michael mcgough]

We need leaders not appeasers.

[Erasmus]

As someone who believes that it was entirely right for Patrick Mercer to go after his comments on racist abuse in the armed forces - I have to say that James McGrath has nothing to apologise for let alone resign for.

All Mercer lost was an unpaid junior position on the front bench, but McGrath has been deprived of his living. What an injustice.

[Letters From A Tory]

I couldn't agree more. Everyone in politics is so bloody obsessed with appeasement that no-one is willing to draw a line in the sand and say what is acceptable and what is not. These remarks were incredibly harmless but as soon as some lunatic pressure group or journalist starts kicking up a fuss, those at the top of the political tree refuse to shout them down.

This is totally unacceptable and indicative of a much wider problem of political correctness and the inability of anyone involved in politics to make a comment without someone claiming to be offended by it.

What a joke.

[mardy]

I don't think readers have been unanimous. I would say the respojse has been about fifty fifty.

On incompetence and lack of experience grounds if not on the actual issue.

[CCHQ Spy]

You obviously can't count Mardy.

[Common Sense]

Boris had a first-class opportunity to turn this episode to his advantage and make some serious ideological gains for Conservatism - but he blew it out of an unedifying combination of misjudgement and cowardice.

When will a senior Conservative make a stand against the demented witch hunters of the Race lobby and its Amen corner in the media? McGrath said nothing racist and supporting him would have sent a clear signal that the era of neurotic collapse over all matters ethnic is now at an end.

DO you know what the really crazy thing is? Boris himself was a victim of the withchunt but Cameron stood by him and he was vindicated by the Mayoral result.

[Glyn Gaskarth]

James McGrath should have declared that we would have a national day of mourning for anyone who leaves the country because Ken Livingstone lost the Mayoral election. Commemorative events could be paid for out of the public purse - afterall its what he would have wanted.

James did nothing wrong. It is impossible to judge this statement as in any way racist. All he said was that people with a predisposition to go should be allowed to. He did not suggest an opinion either way as to whether they should.

The fact he has been sacked is disgusting.

[John Glen]

James is a decent man and I am very saddened to read what has happened to him. He has worked very hard for the party for seven years, often being shunted around different roles to suit those above him;loyally taking on whatever he was asked to do to the best of his ability without complaint or concern for his own status. The reality is that the pursuit of power and "smooth" media has overruled loyalty, common sense and standing up for a good man who at worst made one ambiguous comment. A clarification and robust defence would have dealt with it adequately. This incident demonstrates the cruel truth of how modern politics is a very unforgiving and unfair business where the fear of "bad press" in the short term seems to override every other consideration. Anyone can be sacrificed - no matter how unblemished their record. I hope the Party finds a role for James in the future.

[passing leftie]

Johnson was stupid to employ him, and stupid in the manner he removed him - doubly poor judgment at a very early stage.

Either he should have backed him and said he did nothing wrong, or sacked him because of his racist comments.

I've take CH at its word that we should look to Boris Johnson's rule in London as a precursor of what a Cameron government might look like, and this shows a frightening level of incompetence.

[mardy]

I think I can count CCHQ Spy.

I have certainly counted the number of times you have backed the Editors' stance on here. A more suspicious person might say ...

[Chantelle Osili]

As I said on 'The Latest' site, I am tired of race being used to score points in politics. Ethnic minorities are not stupid, we don't believe everybody and anybody who cries 'racist'! In fact, to do so when it is so clearly untrue is insulting.

I am not a pawn in a game; I am a person, and yes, I am black. This does not mean that I need other people to tell me what is and isn't 'racist' in the hope that I will or will not support somebody. Racism is by definition an intention. Without intent, even the most unsavoury words are not racist, and our cause is demeaned when innocent people are called racist to serve a political agenda.

I worked with James McGrath on the Boris campaign team. He was brilliant, a really lovely person, and I have never met anybody less likely to be racist.

During the mayoral campaign, I defended Boris against similar claims many times. Why could he not do the same for James?

[F T P Topcliff]

McGrath has let Boris and the whole party down. Unintentionally, for sure, and not in a way that means he could never be of use to the party again. But the rules of the game should be well understood by everyone now. The whole Cameron project recognises that it requires less effort by our Party to win under the rules than it does to change them - however much they offend our sensibilities.

It's a fact. Get over it and go out and win.

[Old Hack]

Editor:

The last thing that Boris needs now is a row.

You know that what appears on this site can be used as ammunition by our opponents, particularly when it is penned by you.

McGrath should have engaged brain before opening gob. He clearly did not. He has paid a high price to be sure, but there is more at stake here.

Do you really want to fuel a media row over this issue after all the progress we've made, moreover in the wake of your misjudgment over 42 days?

Please don't compound McGrath's indiscretion with one of your own. Let the likes of Ray Lewis and others in Boris' team get on with altering perceptions of what the Conservatives are and what they stand for.

There is much still to be gained in London. I don't want to hear of this row on Radio 4.

[YMT]

PC wins again, he shouldn't have been let go, its ridiculous. Boris must fight against these morons using words such as racism, discrimination as weapons against politicians and everyone else in fact!

[Albert Shanker]

Will you also complain about the 'gotcha' journalism of the Evening Standard then?

[Andrew Ian Dodge]

Not a good precedent for Boris' tenure that is for sure. Are there are any right-of-centre politicians in the UK with an ounce of courage (besides DD) to stand up for what they believe in? Its pathetic.

[Iain]

"PC wins again"

Yes, the real racist comment came from Darcus Howe, who, apart from writing for a racially designated newspaper, the Voice, was the one to suggest the Afro Caribbeans have a collective political allegiance ( that's pretty racist stuff ) and so couldn't tolerate having Boris as Mayor. But one must ask how McGrath was supposed to respond if not to say, if they don't like it they can leave, was he supposed to say we must block the airports and deny them the right to leave? And anyway if I remember correctly, the same comments as McGrath's have been directed at the indigenous people fleeing this multicultural paradise from left wingers, then the BBC didn't get on its high horse. What does that say of the BBC?

[Donal Blaney]

Hear, hear Tim and Iain. BoJo got this badly wrong. If I am generous I can understand appeasing your enemies in the last days of an election campaign (ok, I have to be really generous to do that) but not 8 weeks into a 4 year term!

[Dave Hill]

Two things Tories might like to bear in mind. One, even if we agree for the sake of argument that McGrath has been terribly unlucky and misused, language recalling the "go back to your own country" rhetoric of 1970s racists can sound very unpleasant to the people who found themselves on the wrong end of it. Two, the fact that McGrath failed to anticipate that using the phrase he did might prove a hostage fortune will cause some to wonder if Tories have yet mastered the social etiquette of multi-ethnic Britain. I don't say it's fair, but it's reality. You might quarrel with Cameron's or Johnson's response to it, but you'd be naive to deny it.

[Alan S]

I hope The Guardian is a more sensitive employer to you Dave if you ever use an unfortunate, out of character remark.

[comstock]

I like this site, even though I don't agree with most of what it says.

But this man has used the language of the BNP/Powell and, whether he meant it or not, that is why he has to go....

[Iain]

Dave Hill, but it was Darcus Howe who suggested they would go back to their own country.

From the BBC's report....

"I pointed out to him a critical comment of
Voice columnist Darcus Howe that the election of 'Boris Johnson, a right-wing Conservative, might just trigger off a mass exodus of older Caribbean migrants back to our homelands'.

"He retorted: 'Well, let them go if they don't like it here.' McGrath dismissed Mr Howe as 'shrill'." "

The real problem here is the identity politics of the cultural Marxists, that advances ethnic minority agendas, which would be considered racist if a white person should ask for the same. In this you have to look no further than this issue, where we have 'The Voice', a racially designated newspaper for Afro Caribbean’s, yet reverse the situation and you would have cries of racism.

At some point someone is going to have to face down these cultural Marxists, for we won't be able to live in peace until someone does.

[john]

I was angry at first over "the loss of a good man" and "Boris' lack of backbone".
But the more I think about it , the more I think it was right for McGrath to go, or at least to get a public rebuke from Boris.
I share the man's views on the matter, but while I would happily utter the "offending" words in private, I wouldn't dream of saying the same to a race-warrior, realising the likely cosequences.
Hopefully, lesson learned again and one is: totally ignore anything uttered by the odious Darcous Howe

[Libertarian]

So why was McGrath giving this off the record briefing? Surely, Munira Mirza, the Cultural Adviser, would have been the logical choice.

As I suggested on the earlier thread, I get the impression that Team Boris lacks the necessary PR management experience and processes.

McGrath screwed up and paid the price. I blame Nick Boles and Guto Harri rather than Boris.

[Andrew Lilico]

cornstock: > this man has used the language of the BNP/Powell and, whether he meant it or not, that is why he has to go<

Has he? In what way? If you said "If Chelsea hire Scolari, then all my mates are going to go to support Fulham instead" and I reply "Well, let them go if they want to", under what possible construction could that be an improper remark? Someone said "If Johnson becomes Mayor, some people might leave London", to which McGrath replied "Well, let them go if they they don't like it here." In what way is that "the language of the BNP"?

[Common Sense]

"...if Tories have yet mastered the social etiquette of multi-ethnic Britain."

You just don't get it, do you Dave? We despise what you euphemistically call the 'social etiquette'. We call it political correctness. What you are witnessing is a dispute between those who believe that Boris should start that process of changing it now and those who prefer to wait until Cameron is PM.

[Simon Newman]

Livingstone is a bad, bad man, but his loyalty towards egregiously misbehaving underlings was a source of strength. It made him look strong, and it inspired loyalty among his people, knowing he wouldn't stab them in the back.

Cameron and now Boris's disloyalty towards their underlings (for sins much less than those of Livingstone's) has the reverse effect. It makes them look weak, and it damages confidence. Maybe they think back to John Major's failure to fire Lamont over the ERM. Well, Major's problem was that he was personally at fault - he was the one who should have taken responsibility and resigned.

[jailhouselawyer]

COMMENT OVERWRITTEN.

[passing leftie]

Posted by: Iain | June 23, 2008 at 12:08
The real problem here is the identity politics of the cultural Marxists, that advances ethnic minority agendas, which would be considered racist if a white person should ask for the same. In this you have to look no further than this issue, where we have 'The Voice', a racially designated newspaper for Afro Caribbean’s, yet reverse the situation and you would have cries of racism.

If you fail to understand why the existence of the Voice is not racist and The Voice of Freedom is, then you woefully unqualified to discuss racism. You don't even understand what it is.

[Dave Hill]

Commonsense: Yes I do "get it" and it's you who doesn't. "Political correctness " is the euphemism here, not "social etiquette", and I'm perfectly aware of what right-wingers mean by it - deriding and ridiculing things like the anxieties "go back to your own country" rhetoric stirs in those people at whom it is directed. Leaving aside the specific rights and wrongs of the McGrath affair, you Tories have a choice about all this. You can recognise and respect the anxieties I refer to and or you can rubbish them. It's for you to decide which course to take but don't kid yourselves that it's all a matter of simple "common sense". Your leader isn't.

[Common Sense]

'racism' as defined by Passing Leftie is an objectively anti-British construct.

PS - Having said that, the nonsense written by 'jailhouse lawyer' is actually racist, as well as being deeply stupid, and should be removed.

[Iain]

" I'm perfectly aware of what right-wingers mean by it - deriding and ridiculing things like the anxieties "go back to your own country" rhetoric stirs in those people at whom it is directed. "

Dave Hill, unlike left wingers....

"hitting out at two of its key backers, David and Simon Reuben. Mr Livingstone apparently suggested at his weekly press briefing that if the brothers were not happy they should go back to their country and see whether they could do better under the ayatollahs."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article744045.ece

[Cassilis]

There are two issues here:

(1) What James said and what, if anything, it reveals about his character and politics.

(2) The political climate we live in and the wider context of his remark.

On (1) I take at face value the claims that James is a decent bloke and not remotely racist. The remark is fairly harmless in that anyone, black, white or green is free to leave London or anywhere else they don't like.

On (2) it was a lazy and ill-conceived thing for someone in his position to have said. The argument that this was somehow an opportunity to 'stand-up to political correctness' is hopelessly naive - well-intentioned but wrong.

I’m sure, in time, the Tories will de-sensitise the debate a little to a point where we can discuss race issues like adults but that can't be done overnight or via one or two high-profile Tories digging their heels in on behalf of a staff member. The reaction in the media this morning proves that. Those that believe Boris has somehow let them down or is capitulating to some left \ liberal agenda clearly don’t understand that – he’s simply a realist who knows that attitudes take time to change.

Were the storm this morning over ‘Boris stands by ‘racist’ aide’ stories then many people here might be happier but the outcome most of them long for would’ve slipped further back on the horizon…

[Sammy Finn]

Another good man is lost to politics for no good reason.
This certainly won't encourage good people to enter politics.

[Common Sense]

Dave - McGrath gave a pretty innocuous responded to a daft and impertinent question. Any 'anxieties' among ordinary elderly West Indians (were there any?) were created by Wadsworth's deliberate misrepresentation of McGrath's words and the leftie race-mongers who joined in the chorus.

As for where Boris and David Cameron stand in the PC v social etiquette debate, you'll have to wait and see, won't you?

I could refer you to various clues, but I'm not in the business of giving you ammo. After all, you're a deeply partisan socialist who spends half his time pretending to be a journalist.

I've got good reason to believe that you'll have plenty to moan about soon - and even more to complain about in year one of a Tory government.

[Benedict White]

I have not met James McGrath, but here he is a decent, kind and honourable man.

The problem is that our opponents aren't.

They will use any means to smear our party.

We need to be much more careful about playing the game.

[T. England]

This is the sort of thing the English Eradicating Labour party would say/do isn't it?! Just proves what many are starting to fear! The Tories are turning left!!

How many Labour MP's (& I can think of two off hand)have been sacked for saying things like, area's of Britain are hidiously white?

That's right! NONE!!

[passing leftie]

Posted by: Common Sense | June 23, 2008 at 13:10

'racism' as defined by Passing Leftie is an objectively anti-British construct.

Do you think the existence of magazines devoted to the issues of particular minority groups is racist? Do you think the Voice of Freedom is racist?

I'm just trying to see how you disagree with "my definition" of racism.

[Common Sense]

PL - I suspect your definition of 'racism' is the classically Orwellian/Marxist one - that it's all to do with power.

[Jack Stone]

Of course Boris was right. This was racism because it presupposed that all black people in London were immigrants. They are not. They are British. Most were born here.To virtually tell them to go home is a nonsense most are home.It was an offensive comment that deserved to be disowned. Well done Boris.

[Jack Stone]

Of course Boris was right. This was racism because it presupposed that all black people in London were immigrants. They are not. They are British. Most were born here.To virtually tell them to go home is a nonsense most are home.It was an offensive comment that deserved to be disowned. Well done Boris.

[London observer]

There are two issues here. Darcus Howe's views are ridiculous and should be treated as such and their absurdity pointed out, but the second issue is why should the loss of one of Boris's backroom boys is such a big issue. It will have no impact at all to the success or failure of Boris's time in office. He isn’t a politician no one has elected him and Boris should be allowed to hire and fire as he pleases.
James is not a gifted political strategist, (many would argue that his one gift was being able to chat to Linton Crosby in antipodean idiom) and his obtuseness to the potential fallout of not clarifying what he said as soon as he said it is proof in point. Hopefully, he will be replaced with someone who is able to use some intelligence in their political communication.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

Britain is a free country. If ANYONE doesn't like it and wants to leave, it's no-one's business to stop them. How is that racist?

Boris should have said something along the lines of

"I am going to take no action against James McGrath because he did nothing wrong. He gave a glib answer to a stupid question. If any person doesn't like London, they're free to leave, whether they're black, white, Asian or whatever. Political correctness was voted out of City Hall on 1 May and that is how it will stay."

What does Darcus Howe do anyway apart from make documentaries and write articles about how badly done to he is? He seems to have amde a career out of having a permanent chip on his shoulder.

I didn't vote Conservative to have Boris take notice of the likes of Darcus Howe.

[Peter Wilson]

Excellent article! I agree fully. But what do you expect from wet Tories such as Cameron (who today agreed with the action) and Johnson? After all, we didn't vote for Pink Boris because we wanted him or expected him to do anything useful; we voted for him because we didn't want Red Ken.

[justin Hinchcliffe]

I think James McGrath's response was blunt, but not racist. That said, we are increasingly forced to take the PC tablets in today's society to please our opponents and those at the Old Nation and No Voice. Darcus Howe is a nasty, odious racist. For that Reason, James should have kept his job.

[Andrew Lilico]

Jack [email protected]:09

>This was racism because it presupposed that all black people in London were immigrants. <

No, it didn't. You are mistaken. Read the exchange again. All McGrath said was "[Concerning those people - some 'older Caribbeans' - that you have suggested might choose to leave if Johnson becomes mayor:] let them go if they don't like it here." He did *not* presuppose that all black people in London are immigrants. You must not have read the exchange properly to make such an incorrect statement.

[Amusedobserver]

Can I ask all those who think Boris was wrong to sack this guy McGrath if they really want their much-heralded Mayor of London (a new dawn for conservatism etc etc)to keep in post a man who - even though he knew he was speaking to a journalist, long-standing Labour party member, and seasoned campaigner on anti-racism and diversity issues - lacked the political nous to not answer the question (reasonably put, in my opinion, and reported as part of quite a wide-ranging interview) by saying something like: It's shocking that someone would suggest such a thing, after all we live in a wonderfully diverse city that has benefited so much from this generation of West Indian immigrants, and here is a list of the kinds of benefits I'm talking about...

Surely our Mayor needs someone who not only knows and understands this is the case, but is also sharp enough to express it when being interviewed. Also, from Wadsworth's follow-up, it seems that he's been given a more than adequate opportunity to explain his position but has refused to do so. This isn't political bravery, it's ineptitude. And that's why Johnson was right to sack him.

[Treacle]

Bad show Boris, we elected you to stand up to pointless knee-jerk PC rubbish like this, and you failed at the first whiff of Grapeshot.

Being forced to debate issues under the terms of reference created by people like Wadsworth is a losing game.

I have no particular brief for McGrath - although he has my complete sympathy in the situation he finds himself in - but this was an opportunity to change the rules of debate and we missed it.

Darcus Howe makes a ridiculous 'Boris eats Babies' remark and the other bloke gets sacked - unbelievable.

Time to stop getting your political advice from 'Team Dave' Boris, they wouldn't recognise a spine if they tripped over it

[passing leftie]

Common Sense:

PL - I suspect your definition of 'racism' is the classically Orwellian/Marxist one - that it's all to do with power.

Are you a politician? Can you answer a straight question?

Do you think the existence of magazines devoted to the issues of particular minority groups is racist? Do you think the Voice of Freedom is racist?

[Bootyboomboom]

Tories always run away whenever their little antennas detect the liberal mob over the hill.

Just like Mr Mercer, Mr McGrath has made the horrible mistake of thinking he can speak as though he were a free man in a country without censorship, and these poor naive men will always be left undefended against the howling rabble of Leftist bigots.

Every little surrender to PC dismantles this country a little bit more. And still, even now that most of us recognize the threat, we let it continue its course without a fight.

Boris may be mayor of London but the Left still runs the place. Likewise the Tories may find themselves in office after 2010 but as was the case in the Major years, they won't be in power. We have a permanent left-wing government in this country and it has been left to settle for so long that now nobody knows how to begin to remove it.

This episode will be forgotten by next week. But ten years from now, we will no doubt be discussing a similar Tory sacking for a comments which were even less unreasonable.

[Simon Newman]

Cassilis:
"I’m sure, in time, the Tories will de-sensitise the debate a little to a point where we can discuss race issues like adults..."

What on Earth makes you think that? What evidence is there of any progression towards this happy day of 'de-sensitisation'? From what I can see quite the opposite is happening.

[Sally Roberts]

I think this is clearly not one of Boris's best moments, but he will have learned from it - and what he will have learned is that he needs cool, crafty heads around him and he needs good PR people with plenty of experience - and not to let things go out without running it by those "wise heads" first! As I said earlier, regrettably James had to go - Boris fired him for his lack of experience and not for "being racist" (which he was not). James said nothing with which most of us would disagree but he did not realise that he was dealing with very clever Socialists who would twist his words to suit their objectives.
Let's draw a line in the sand, get behind Boris and move on!

[michael mcgough]

I'd like to see this tested in an employment court.

[passing leftie]

Just like Mr Mercer, Mr McGrath has made the horrible mistake of thinking he can speak as though he were a free man in a country without censorship, and these poor naive men will always be left undefended against the howling rabble of Leftist bigots.

Bigot he may be, but left wing? I don't think Johnson would appreciate that label. Nobody forced anybody to do anything. Johnson simply didn't stand by somebody who shares his own views.

[NorthLondoner]

I disagree.

Everyime a Labour Minister or MP or whatever says something offensive or stupid, we hear that dreadful word "context". It's a flipping excuse for saying something you simply should not have said.

If you can't keep your cool when a Labour activist is getting up your nose, don't go in for high profile politics.

I've no doubt that McGrath is a thoroughly good bloke, but Boris has done the right thing.

[West Londoner]

Boris Johnson's actions are wrong and very short-termist.

Regardless of James McGrath's abilities as a political go-fer, throwing him to the wolves shows that Johnson has no backbone to take on the race relations industry in London.

Wadworth's accusations are feeble in the extreme. If you read his dull article he even complained about James' use of the word "sunshine" (for God's sake!!).

The race relations lobby want to stiffle and control political debate, they are not interested in stamping out genuine racism, they are only interested in politically-motivated thought crime. They seek to define life and politics through a repellant, post-Marxist, race-obessed critique and use it to destroy rivals. They portray black people as victims of whites, encouraging racial divide. For those readers who wonder how a society moves slowly towards McCarthyism
or the Salem witch-trials, this is how.

As for Boris, I worry. If as a party we only elect people who have been surrounded by privilege all their lives, then when the going gets tough, they don't know what to do. Has Boris acted in this way because he feels guilty about his own casually racist remarks? or because he feels content to let others lay down their careers for him.

Either way, it shows him in a poor light.

One-term Boris looms into view.

[Amusedobserver]

West Londoner, what does post-Marxist mean? Does no one read and interpret Marx anymore?

[anthony scholefield]

So you think' London is greater because of its diversity'.
Assuming this is not mere appeasement of the race warriors wallpaper what do you actually mean by this piece of nonsense and how does it fit in with say the diversity of multi national states such as the USSR Yugoslavia the Habsburg and Turkish empires etc.
Moreover it implies that London should also become even more diverse-bring in more Papua New Guineans Japanese Mongolians etc who are in short supply here or do you beleive that the present numbers of non-natives both legal and illegal is magically correct in numbers and constituents.
The truth is that diversity weakens social capital as the recent US authors of Bowling Alone have had unwillingly to admit so diversity makes us all worse off.
Incidentally it is estimated that a large part of the Nordic countries economic success is based on their high unity and social capital

[bill kramer]

william hague would never have allowed this to have happened.

[Brian Moore]

James departure from his position with Boris is a blow to the people of London and the right to say what you feel (without offending others) - His comment has enabled lesser people to lead a witch hunt against him.

The real loser here is the freedom of speech.

I wish James the best as he should never have been forced to resign

Brian Moore
Newcastle

[wendy mann]

i believe that from the perspective of being from the right of the tory party such a commentary from one of its members would not appear to be racist, since that racism is inherent and embedded.

to take an extreme view point - just as adolf hitler would not have seen his holocaust of the jewish people as racist but merely a normal attitude to have amongst his friends and colleagues.

unfortunately the commentary is inherently racist, since the discussion is about an immigrant group who have never been viewed as being british or as being an integrated part of the social environment. there has never been an acceptance by the conservative or the labour groups a limited tolerance maybe but thats all.

it is rather like boris johnson, who seems to go out on a limb to disassociate himself from his islamic roots, his muslim background is denigrated by his ignorance of the nuances of koran and islamic teaching.

what he is unable to do is unlink islam and the way some muslims may behave , and yet he and others here have no difficulty in having that delinkage with jewish, christian, hindu acts of violence by their religious zealots.

all boris has done is to further expose the real face of the conservatives and more importantly reinforces the perception that he has surrounded himself with right wing bigots.

[Jack Stone]

Read these posts and you realise why the party has difficulty in attracting people from ethnic minorities to vote for it or join the party.
I don`t care what anyone says there is an under current of racism in the party and with its supporters.Its time it stopped!

[John Girling]

What Boris Johnstone should have said was that he entirely agreed with McGrath, as most of the indigenour population do

[liberal11]

i'm not a tory nor never will be, but im inlined to agree with u that james gave nothing more than a sarcastic answer to a stupid question. which is ironic given on question time boris refused to properly apologise for his own comments, but defended them as in the context of the piece.

what really turns me off in all ur tripe about PC. there wasn't any secret society here enforcing political correctness boris did it, will u guys stop blaming the "PC bregade" and give credit where its due, boris sacked him nobody else. furhter more if u were to say something offensive such as the tory candidate who recently said he supported the appartite regime in rodeshia the PC brigade doesnt come out to get you, what you've said IS socially unacceptable, racist,and based on ideas that we now understand to be wrong. again no PC brigade forced cameron to disown the candidate but cameron did.

it seems to me that racists often hide behind this imaginary PC conspiracy to explain societies and their own discomfort with their views.

and common sense if u want to write a newspaper for white people only, nobody is stopping you. otherwise get over the voice.

[jarod]

Everytime I'm tempted to go back to the party I've always supported, Dave screws it up. Boris, you're a wuss. You should have stood up to that plonker of a leader and stood by your instincts and your principles. But no, Call me Dave steps in, kisses the arse of political correctness, and condemns a decent man to oblivion. I hate Labour, but I cannot bring myself to vote for "Love me" Cameron. The man has no backbone, no principles, and under this prat, you may as well vote Liberal Democrat, it's the same thing.

[stephen hoffman]

he made a racist comment , quite rightly he's been punished for it . Mercer did not make a racist comment and shouldn't have ben fired.

[Buckinghamshire Tory]

Like many other Tories I am disapointed in the actions of Boris Johnson. The disapointment must be all the greater for the party workers, activists and sympathisers who worked to get Boris elected. Surely, they did not canvas and campaign to see the Conservative Mayor play into the with hunts of the “race-relation” industry?

Some argue that this was mainy a strategic move. To prove beyond all doubt that Boris is no racist. That may be a noble cause, but these people will never be appeased. Discovering “racism” where no-one though it lurked is the bread and butter of these people. It is their line of business so to speak. Thus, I beleive, Boris have made a tactical misjudgement. By these actions, he has stated that he will not stand by his co-workers in the face of such fradulent and malicious allegations.
This might endear him to the Guardianista crowd that will never vote for him anyway, but it will disapoint the ordinary voters who decided to put their trust in him, because they were tired of Ken Livingstone and his mates from Socialist Action.

We have to stand up against these people at one time or another. Why not now, when the Labour party is weak and dispirited?
Like Ronald Reagan said, “If not us, who? If not now, when?”

[jailhouselawyer]

I hope that Darcus Howe sues for libel for this comment by Justin Hinchcliffe @ 14.17 "Darcus Howe is a nasty, odious racist".

Is Tim Montgomerie colour blind in that he cannot see when someone who represents the Blues in Tottenham libels a blackman?

[Terry]

"...supported by one of the ethnically diverse appointments that he has made:"

Come on, use our language properly - do you mean a black person? How can a person be an "EDA"? Say so if that's what you mean.

[Jonathan Hoffman]

Dave Hill

Double standards or what?

You never once criticised Livingstone for his antisemitic remarks.

[Charles Wilson]

Boris reserves the right to make gaffes, but that's not on for his lowly underlings. And of course he can take outside employment that pays more than his day job but they can't. Lazy. Greedy. Hypocrite.

[London Tory]

What happens if a member of the Shadow Cabinet, Gove or Osborne for instance, were overheard making a similarly anodyne remark ? Would they be sacked too ? Of course not.

I do find it strange that a Party that gives such prominence, credence and dare one say it, safe seats, to ex Labour so called A Listers [Maidstone, Corby, Ealing Southall etc], should so callously disregard a GENUINELY loyal servant to our cause.

A stupid, stupid own goal.

[Sean Fear]

"I hope that Darcus Howe sues for libel for this comment by Justin Hinchcliffe @ 14.17 "Darcus Howe is a nasty, odious racist".

I don't always agree with Justin but he's hit the nail on the head there.

There is something in what Dave Hill says, but I'd express it differently. We can accept that our opponents define what one can and can't say on these issues - in which case we have to fire people like Mcgrath. Our else, we can try to shift the terms of debate in our favour, and be willing to take flak from left wing organisations.