This stuff is what actually reduces the quality of life of the average person. Why waste time and money putting this sort of draconian and technically infeasible law through when they're doing nothing about petty (or increasingly less petty) crime?
The problem is that certain groups are not allowed to be offended because people are afraid of the backlash. So instead they target only the harmless groups.
Go outside and offend a black person or a muslim.
vs
Go outside and offend a white person or christian.
And you'll see.
Labour will need to be pressured into democratic measures that might not be in its best interest as a party.
Having a system with political parties at all is the crux of the issue and we can't move forward without addressing that. We are tribal in nature, and if you give people the slightest excuse to form smaller groups they'll fight other groups forever.
(Think about it: do you know the names or faces of any of the Rotherham victims? Are they doing the campaigning? Or is it people using them to grind an axe which has little to do with the actual crimes?)
What is the actual reason for not giving Muhammad Qassem Sawalha, a person with no UK criminal convictions, the rights of any other resident? Are we saying that local authorities should screen people for political views before offering them housing as they are statutorily required to?
> Are they doing the campaigning?
Yes they are
https://youtube.com/watch?v=zRuK5wPd_Fc
And they are saying that the reason why their cases were not investigated was institutional nervousness around race, contrary to what you believe about the situation.
> Are we saying that local authorities should screen people for political views before offering them housing as they are statutorily required to?
Hamas is a designated terrorist organisation in the UK. We should not be offering housing to those connected to terrorist organisations. We should be deporting them.
The Home Office doesn't seem to care either about child exploitation in Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford, if it is committed by a protected group. [2]
One could suggest that before implementing dragnet surveillance on the public, that the UK government could first investigate what is happening in public view, but is not talked about because it is politically inconvenient.
[1] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hamas-chief-lives-london-... [2] https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/what-i-told-oxford