Leading article: Mercer is wrong, but not a racist

You might expect a liberal newspaper such as this one to condemn Patrick Mercer, the Conservative former homeland security spokesman, as a racist. But we do not. Mr Mercer was sacked by David Cameron, the Leader of the Opposition, for saying that, in the Army, he "came across a lot of ethnic minority soldiers who were idle and useless but who used racism as cover for their misdemeanours". His point was that the race card could be played by the potential victims of racism as well as by its potential beneficiaries. It was a comment that offended many, including Nirpal Dhaliwal. It certainly betrayed a less than highly developed sense of the needs of the modern political trade. Yet it was not as straightforwardly unacceptable as Mr Cameron's summary response implied.

Mr Mercer cited his own experience in order to make an argument against the need for a "trade union" for black soldiers to campaign against racism in the Army. We disagree with him, but his argument deserves to be answered, not dismissed. He said: "There is a degree of colour-blindness among the vast majority of soldiers. I never came across a piece of nastiness inside the battalion that was based exclusively on racism."

He was not saying, therefore, that ethnic minority soldiers are more idle and useless than whites, but that some of them sometimes blame their failure to do well on racism rather than their own shortcomings. This is undoubtedly the case, although it needs to be balanced by a better understanding of the extent to which British institutions such as the Army are plagued by racist attitudes.

Mr Mercer also boasts a record of actions that speak louder than words. As a colonel he promoted black soldiers, many of whom were quick to come to his defence last week. Indeed, his record contrasts rather unflatteringly with that of his party leader, none of whose senior colleagues or advisers belongs to an ethnic minority. In a sane world, therefore, it might have been enough for Mr Mercer to apologise for an unfortunate choice of words, and for Mr Cameron to explain how his party would deal with racism in the Army. Instead, Mr Cameron's reaction bore a hint of manufactured indignation and macho symbolism. The Conservative leader was particularly proud of the fact that it took him only five minutes to read Mr Mercer's comments and decide that they were unacceptable.

Mr Cameron's decision should be understood in the context of recent Conservative history. His predecessor William Hague was justly humiliated when he failed to repudiate John Townend, a Tory MP who said that immigration undermined "homogenous Anglo-Saxon society". And Mr Cameron had, in effect, no choice, given the strategic course on which he has embarked, of shifting his party decisively into the political centre.

That is a pity. Because there is an important theme that links Mr Mercer's comments with two other stories in the news last week. One was the suggestion made by Lord Levy's rabbi that the chief suspect in the cash-for-honours inquiry is a victim of anti-Semitism. The other was the case of the closed-circuit television footage of a police officer repeatedly punching a young black woman outside a Sheffield nightclub, in which it has been suggested the victim's race was a factor.

In each case, the point that Mr Mercer was trying, however clumsily, to make about the Army has some application. The idea that Lord Levy has been questioned by the Metropolitan Police investigating the alleged sale of peerages because he is Jewish is unsustainable. As Geoffrey Wheatcroft argues in these pages, it is possible that there is anti-Semitism in the police force, but the treatment of Lord Levy is not evidence of it. When Rabbi Yitzchak Schochet says: "I do not play the anti-Semitic card," that is precisely what he is doing. If the press has been noticeably gleeful over the humbling of Lord Levy, and correspondingly sympathetic to Ruth Turner, arrested in a pre-dawn raid, the prejudices on display are those against rich prime ministerial tennis partners and in favour of single young women.

There may be more historical reason for the unproven allegation that Toni Comer, the Sheffield nightclubber, suffered worse treatment on account of her race than a white person in similar circumstances. There has been ample evidence in the past that the police have tended to treat black people differently from white. But since the Macpherson inquiry into the Stephen Lawrence murder, and its finding of "institutional racism", attitudes and procedures in the police have been transformed. It is unfair to the police, and particularly to the officer concerned, to suggest without evidence that Ms Comer's race was a factor in what was anyway a disturbing enough incident.

In each case, the soldiers under Mr Mercer's command who complained about their lack of advancement, Lord Levy and Ms Comer, the race card may well be a distraction from the real question of whether or not they have been treated badly. To play the card in individual cases such as these can be to divert attention from the real and serious problem of racism that continues to blight British society.

Only last weekend, the Government published a version of the study, first reported in this newspaper, that found pervasive racist attitudes are responsible for the harsher discipline meted out to black pupils in Britain's schools. The police and the Army are wrestling with their own versions of the same problem. Part of the significance of Mr Mercer's interview that led to his sacking was that he acknowledged the existence of racism in the armed forces. "That's the way it is in the Army," he said, even if he did not condone it and did not think it was a general excuse for the failure of individual ethnic minority soldiers to be promoted.

You might not expect The Independent on Sunday to agree with him, but he is right in the sense that allegations of racism should be decided case by case - and where they are well-founded, punished severely. Reaching for racism as an excuse of first resort undermines the serious work that still needs to be done to make Britain a genuinely equal-opportunity, colour-blind society.

Interesting? Click here to explore further