Sorry, I won't be applying to be head of the CRE

New Labour loves managerial anti-racism, with numbers and targets, which gives a good impression while nothing changes

I would be lying if I said I was not tempted, for at least 10 minutes. The job for chair of the Commission for Racial Equality was advertised this week – salary £100,000. The vacancy arose when the liked and respected Gurbux Singh resigned after he was found guilty of abusing police officers at a Lord's cricket match. He had imbibed too much alcohol courtesy of his generous corporate hosts. Such invitations are now common perks for these jobs.

The Confederation of British Industry and big businesses such as BT, British Gas, the BBC and other media giants love to be seen endorsing diversity and the work of the CRE. Countless festive dinners celebrate black and Asian achievements (like prize-winning pets at Crufts, we are paraded looking good) and in many ways there has never been such a receptive time for talking (talking, I said) about equality.

You could live very well indeed on this for a while, I thought to myself in the bath, after a number of powerful people had phoned to ask me to consider applying for the CRE job. I could get the dining room I have never had, with a long, hand-carved table to seat a dozen. If I were ever appointed, that is, which I would not be, because this has become a highly politicised and contentious job which needs a faithful New Labourite in place. And, as readers of this column know, I am not known for my loyalty to New Labour and its many hypocrisies.

We are under the rein (yes, I do mean rein) of the authoritarian and populist David Blunkett, who has wicked plans for immigration and asylum (just last week the Lords defeated his moves to obtain the right to make changes to the immigration laws without consulting Parliament). It would be madness to appoint a CRE horse that would kick and neigh and send the carriage sprawling, dislodging and infuriating such a master. So I understand perfectly what kind of person would be most suited for this post, and why that person cannot be me. And so it is not bitter disappointment that leads me to ask questions about the state of the commission, the challenges it faces, the role it is now being made to play, and the type of person who will inherit the plastic throne.

The history of the CRE is worth remembering. In 1966-67 the influential Political and Economic Planning research institute revealed the disgraceful race discrimination faced by "coloured" immigrants in housing, jobs, insurance services and all walks of life, including within trades unions. Discrimination tests were carried out using white and black actors and the indisputable proof was presented to the nation. This was the period of the rise of Powellism, which gained more support after 1968 when Asian holders of British passports from Kenya were forced to arrive here, because of the Africanisation policies of the Kenyan government, and given the impending 1968 Immigration Act. The Act denied non-white holders of British nationality the right of free entry into their own country.

This drama continued over the following years – more proof of continuing race discrimination, popular support for vociferous anti-immigration politicians and shameless immigration laws that were passed to placate racists. In 1976, Roy Jenkins set up the CRE. It was much needed and was given some power to tackle race discrimination, to name and shame if necessary. Unfortunately, there were still too many ways to bypass the laws and the government was largely exempt. But through some high-profile cases, the CRE did have some effect on attitudes. The army and navy were transformed because they were found by the CRE to have tolerated the intolerable. But after so many years the commission has made a smaller impact than was hoped for.

Always remember the Lawrence inquiry came out of the relentless pursuit for justice by the parents of Stephen not because the CRE did anything. Nothing ever shakes the establishment too much in this country. Which was and is even more exactly the point. It is never called corruption but what else is it when the Government appoints the head of such a quango? I would love to listen in on the deals struck behind the charade of a fair and open appointment process. They already know the individuals they would be happy to see in place.

Trevor Phillips' name is said to be high on that list. I can see why. He would be very good – smooth-talking, tall-walking, finger-snapping, networking. He would fit perfectly.

Let me be a little less cynical. We do have tough new race relations laws, brought in by Jack Straw, which place an obligation on all public bodies to ensure race equality (New Labour, like the BBC, loves managerial anti-racism, with monitoring forms, numbers, targets – all that tedious stuff that gives such a good impression of noble intent while nothing changes in terms of real power and impact), and this has given the Government some credibility among some black and Asian Britons. But yet again, the act gives no power to the CRE to say or do anything about asylum-seekers and economic migrants.

There are other problems fast arising that make the CRE and its powers appear defunct. The passions and lives of young Muslims are now centre-stage. Most of them don't see the relevance of the commission. The terrorism legislation, which may be necessary but which still needs ruthless scrutiny, is beyond the scope of the CRE, as are the alarming tensions between young Asians of various identities, between Afro-Caribbeans and Africans, the increasing numbers of attacks by non-white Britons on whites and the apartheid that has developed in some northern towns. White racists still prowl the streets and cause fear and mayhem but these days many concentrate on those official scapegoats – asylum-seekers – outside the protection of the CRE.

The landscape is also changing. Our world is no longer divided into black and white, as it once was thought to be. Whiteness is always assumed to be homogeneous, while black people skip around in the gardens of diversity and difference. When are we going to get research into white ethnicities and cultural identities? Or a serious examination of the problems faced by white people in mixed neighbourhoods? I have seen, for example, how young white mothers of mixed-race children are abused and attacked by racist thugs from white and black groups. Unless we take seriously the concerns of ordinary white Britons, especially those on the margins, we push them towards racist parties.

We should give the CRE a dignified burial and create a new, powerful, truly independent, well-resourced Human Rights Commission. People given a raw deal because of their race, sex ,disability, age, religious beliefs or sexual orientation would be protected. The rights of children and asylum-seekers, among others, would be included. The head should be appointed by an all-party group and hopefully they would choose someone like, say, Helena Kennedy, a brave challenger to New Labour's fickle principles. She wrote recently: "The time has come to uncouple the law from the state... Human rights are the privileged ground where we can bring the law back to the common conversation of humankind." Now that would be a job worth doing and paying a huge salary for, which is why the idea will not appear in the Queen's Speech or any Labour or Tory manifestos.

y.alibhai-brown@independent.co.uk