I have blogged several times about my astonishment at why our collapsing, supposedly cash-strapped NHS keeps on hiring ever more DIE (Diversity, Inclusion and Equality) staff.
I haven’t been able to find out how many of these (in my humble opinion) totally useless individuals are employed by the NHS (please note I did not write ‘work in the NHS’). I suspect that in the NHS England’s approximately 217 trusts there must be somewhere around 500 DIE staff costing us in the region of £100 million a year including their salaries, pensions, offices and frontline staff’s time they use up in seminars about the joys of diversity and LGBT++++ and other similarly important subjects.
However, I think I have managed to discover the cause of this DIE disease afflicting our NHS. It would seem that it is linked to something called the ‘Public Sector Equality Duty’ (PSED) produced by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC):
The PSED requires that: ‘in England, all public bodies should have published their equality information by 30 March 2023.They should have also published equality objectives, which should be specific, measurable and timely’. Furthermore, the Equality and Human Rights Commission warns that: ‘we will monitor compliance with the PSED specific duty requirements.’
The aim of this initiative is apparently to provide ‘services that are more appropriate to the user, and services that are more effective and cost-effective.’ And the EHRC claims ‘this can lead to increased satisfaction with public services.’
I won’t comment on whether most people have experienced ‘increased satisfaction with public services’ since the EHRC conjured up its wonderful PSED.
This policy may be well meaning. But it has led to the proliferation of a whole new species of public-sector employees – DIE managers and team leads and principal officers and others of their ilk and their assistants – being recruited to meet the demands of the PSED.
Here are some short extracts from three of the most recent DIE job ads posted by the NHS.
At Kettering Hospital Trust the £58,972 – £68,525 a year Senior Diversity and Inclusion Specialist: ‘will work as part of the Organisational Development (OD) and Equality Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) team and the key strategic lead for EDI, whilst also working operationally to support colleagues and leaders from across the Group to embed EDI in all aspects of service delivery. You will be the organisational lead for the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), associated action plans and a key influencer within our Health Inequalities work. You will lead a broad range of projects and developments as part of the Group’s ambition to be an inclusive employer where staff are empowered to make a difference. ‘
Let us hope that the medical staff at Kettering Hospital Trust taking part in the ‘broad range of projects’ to improve diversity, inclusion and equality also manage to find some time to look after the hospital’s patients.
At the Lincoln Community Health Services Trust: ‘The EDI assistant (£22,816 – £24,336 a year) provides a professional and high-quality customer focused service to the managers, staff, staff networks and other stakeholders. Providing support in the monitoring and administration of all aspects of the equality, diversity and inclusion agenda.’
Included in this vital individual’s work will be: ‘Set up meetings, facilitate arrangements for EDI celebration weeks and days (to include Black History Month, LGBT+ History Month, Carers week and International Women’s Day – list not inclusive, manage the Cultural Intelligence programme process, ordering and issuing relevant correspondence, responsible for maintaining stock control (CQ licences), as well as the Reverse Mentoring Programme admin – liaising between mentor/mentees.’
Quite what celebrating Black History Month, LGBT+ History and International Women’s Day have to do with getting ambulances to emergencies on time, cutting waiting lists and improving patient care escapes me for the moment.
Then there’s the East London NHS Foundation Trust which is hiring an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion People Participation Lead on £35,392 – £42,618 a year:
‘The post holder will work strategically across Trust services with a focus on Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion in order to develop and implement a strategy that supports the broad participation agenda. They will project manage a variety of work streams that underpin the Trust participation agenda, ensuring that practice in each locality is coordinated and supports and responds to the Trust’s corporate social inclusion strategies.’
‘They will provide strong leadership, advice and practical project work within EDI in the development of a culture that is socially inclusive, valves (sic) participation and diversity. Supporting and maintaining effective communication, contributing to the training needs of staff in this aspect of their work. The post holder will need to develop relationships with a wide range of stakeholders.’
‘Our mission is to make a positive difference to people’s lives by improving the quality of life for all we serve. Our values are: We Care, We Respect, We are Inclusive – so we are looking for people who live and breathe these qualities when supporting service users and carers, and in their relationships with colleagues in the Trust and our partner organisations.’
Some more old-fashioned readers might still believe that hiring people with a few decent medical skills could be more important to a member of the public having a heart attack or suffering from Stage 4 cancer than dreaming up well-paid non-jobs for ‘people who live and breathe these qualities’ of care, respect and inclusion.
So it seems that a bunch of useless bureaucrats at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), with plenty of time on their hands, invented this Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) to make it look like they were doing some work. Of course, as part of the woke-ification of Britain, some of these DIE creatures would have been hired anyway. But the EHRC’s PSED has accelerated and increased the plague of DIE nonentities and has ended up costing the NHS tens of millions of pounds a year and probably similar amounts of our money throughout other government departments.
There seem to be an increasing number of newspaper articles attacking the cost and practicality of Britain’s ‘Net Zero’ policies.
In the Sunday Times, Dominic Lawson exposed the idiocy of the way the UK’s CO2 emissions were calculated. If the UK produces oil and gas from the North Sea, these count as UK CO2 emissions. But if the UK buys oil and gas from Qatar or Saudi Arabia or wherever and ships it to the UK using dirty diesel-using ships, this counts as CO2 emissions from the countries selling us the oil and gas. So, closing down our oil and gas industries helps the UK government become ‘a green energy superpower’ and ‘win the race to Net Zero’ even though this will destroy 50,000 to 100,000 UK jobs and lose billions in tax revenues. And given that Sir Kneeler Keir ‘Just Stop Oil’ Starmer’s Labour party is run by middle-class North London virtue-signalling activists, rather than the workers its was supposed to represent, It’s likely that the next Labour government will wreck our economy so they can boast of their green energy ‘triumphs’. The world truly has gone mad
There were two articles in Monday’s DailyTelegraph. One from Ross Clark exposing the lunacy of trying to replace cheap efficient gas boilers with ludicrously expensive and largely useless heat pumps. And there was one by Andrew Orlowski titled ‘Green zealots want to downgrade Britain in pursuit of ideology’ in which he criticises the vast amount of British taxpayers’ money which will be wasted trying to find supposedly ‘green technologies’ to replace cheap, efficient and reliable coal, oil and gas
I had an article in The Daily Sceptic, based on one of my blogs, in which I show that the price a country pays for its energy is directly linked to the source of that energy. The more coal, oil and gas a country uses, the cheaper its energy. The more wind and solar a country uses, the more expensive its energy. The title of the piece is ‘Sir Keir Starmer’s Plans to Turn Britain into a ‘Green Energy Superpower’ will Bankrupt Households and Cripple the Economy’. You might find it amusing to look at the readers’ comments on my article: https://dailysceptic.org/2023/06/05/sir-keir-starmers-plans-to-turn-britain-into-a-green-energy-superpower-will-bankrupt-households-and-cripple-the-economy/
What we’re not getting, in spite of the increasing number or articles questioning the wisdom of the rush to Net Zero, are any articles daring to suggest that the whole idea of anthropogenic Climate Change is a load of nonsense.
Last year, I started making a 30-second TV ad to promote my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS on GB News. But the company which vets TV ads for several TV stations rejected my ad claiming it breached Advertising Standards Authority rules by ‘spreading disinformation’.
I have recently watched a little Talk TV while in my gym and suspect that Julia Hartley-Brewer and Mike Graham know that anthropogenic Climate Change is nonsense. Possibly some of the presenters on GB News also think this. But I also suspect that none of them dares say this as they’re terrified of Ofcom doing a ‘Mark Steyn’ on them – fining the station for supposedly spreading disinformation.
In my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS I quoted an announcement from the U.S. magazine Scientific American in April 2021:
This is complete madness. Scientific American, and the ‘major news outlets’ the announcement mentions, should be focused on examining existing scientific theories and suggesting new ones. But instead they have all become propagandists for one single narrative – that we have a ‘Climate Emergency’ because evil humans are destroying the planet with our CO2 emissions.
It’s this propagandising and decision that there is only one acceptable narrative about climate which mean we never get any articles or media figures daring to suggest that the whole anthropogenic Climate Change cult is utter garbage with absolutely no scientific basis.
I’ve been trying to write an article for a South Korean newspaper to help promote the Korean version of my climate book:
I think around 1,000 copies were published there and about 700 copies have been sold. So the issue is to shift the last 300 copies.
South Korea has some of the lowest household energy prices in the world:
(left-click on image, then left-click again to see more clearly)
At 9 US cents per kilowatt-hour (KWh), South Korea is only slightly more expensive than India (7 cents/KWh), China (8 cents/KWh) and much cheaper than the USA (18 cents/KWh), Singapore (22 cents/KWh), Britain (47 cents/KWh) and Germany (52 cents/KWh).
What I was trying to do was establish if there was a link between a country’s energy costs and the source of that energy – coal, oil, gas nuclear, wind, solar etc. The first thing that leapt out from the figures was that in general (there are some exceptions such as Germany) the more coal a country used for its energy, the cheaper that energy was. For example:
India energy cost 7 cents/KWh, 57% of energy from coal
China energy cost 8 cents/KWh, 55% of energy from coal
South Korea energy cost 9 cents/KWh, 24% of energy from coal
USA energy cost 18 cents/KWh, 11% of energy from coal
Britain energy cost 47 cents/KWh, 3% of energy from coal
Germany energy cost 52 cents/KWh, 17% of energy from coal
There many other analyses one could do. For example, you could compare how much nuclear energy a country uses with its energy cost. France with energy costs of 21 cents/KWh gets 36% of its power from nuclear, whereas neighbours Britain (47 cents/KWh) only has 6% nuclear and Germany (52 cents/KWh) is at just 5% from nuclear and is closing down the last of its nuclear power stations in the next few years. But I don’t have the space to do these analyses in a short blog.
The renewables farce
Another issue the figures suggested was that the more renewables – solar and wind – a country used, the higher its energy costs in spite of our lying politicians claiming that renewables such as solar and wind will give us a cheap energy future:
India energy cost 7 cents/KWh, 3% of energy from solar and wind
China energy cost 8 cents/KWh, 6% of energy from solar and wind
South Korea energy cost 9 cents/KWh, 2% of energy from solar and wind
USA energy cost 18 cents/KWh, 6% from solar and wind
Britain energy cost 47 cents/KWh, 10% of energy from solar and wind
Germany energy cost 52 cents/KWh, 13% from solar and wind
Just fantasy figures?
But the situation with supposed clean energy such as solar and wind may be much worse than the above figures suggest. Why? Because we’re not actually paying the full cost of unreliable, intermittent and expensive solar and wind. Instead our rulers are hiding the full cost from us by giving massive subsidies from general taxation to solar and wind projects. For example, in the 5 years from 2016 to 2021, the British government was reported as paying £8.7 billion in subsidies to renewable energy companies. That’s £1.74 billion a year – a cost that should have appeared on our electricity bills were there no subsidies from general taxation.
Moreover, the costs for ‘green energy’ don’t include the cost of keeping gas, oil or even coal plants available to be fired up on days when there is no sun or too little or too much wind.
The United States approved a $430 billion new green energy subsidy package in the summer labelled the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), offering tax breaks for components used in renewable energy technologies on condition they are made in North America.
We even see a similar situation in South Korea where the government has now announced its Green New Deal, which includes KRW 8 trillion for green projects. This will also help hide the true cost of supposedly ‘green energy’.
The two energy worlds
Looking at the figures, there appear to be two quite distinct energy worlds. There’s the real world in which countries which burn a lot of coal and use very little wind and solar have eye-wateringly low energy prices of just a few cents/KWh and staggering growth rates as industry and jobs naturally gravitate towards countries with low energy costs. Then there’s the energy fantasy land where massive taxpayer subsidies and hiding the true costs allow lying/stupid (delete as appropriate) politicians to claim that the transition from fossil fuels to supposed ‘clean energy’ like wind and solar will give their countries cheap, reliable energy security.
As for Keir ‘Just Stop Oil’ Starmer’s boast that he’s going to make Britain a ‘clean energy superpower’ – the figures from many countries show this is complete nonsense. All he’s going to do is crush the UK economy and bankrupt Britain.
My ignorant opinion is that if the useless Tories were to dump ‘Net Zero’ and admit that the whole man-made climate cult is a load of nonsense, they’d win the next election. But hey, what do I know?
First I thought I’d let you know about the latest ‘reader review of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS on Amazon, The review title is “What if David Craig is just making a few bob by being contrarian?“ and the review is “The usual non-scientific garbage”.
A couple of things to say about this. The first is that the reviewer is not a “Verified purchase”. That means he/she/it didn’t actually buy the book. And given the lack of insight as to why my book is “The usual non-scientific garbage”, it rather looks like the reviewer hasn’t even read it. All they’re trying to do is sabotage me by discouraging other people from buying it. It would never occur to me to go on Amazon and write negative reviews of all the books peddling the climate catastrophist nonsense. But I guess the eco-loons don’t have any moral standards.
Secondly, when I mentioned writing the book to my agent, he said I was wasting my time as no publisher would dare publish it and no bookshop would dare stock it out of fear of the Twitter and social media cyber-pitchfork-wielding mob. So I had to invest several months of my time and over £1,000 of my own money producing the book with no guarantee of ever being able to recoup that money through book sales. As for “making a few bob”, I get about £0.75 for each book sold. So if it was money I was wanting, I could probably have earned more money stacking shelves at my local supermarket than I got from the 3 months and £1,000 I spent writing and producing the book.
Thirdly, as for the accusation of the book being “The usual non-scientific garbage”. Here’s just one small example of the way I wrote the book. First is an article from the climate-catastrophist New York Times in 2016 claiming that the 101.1 million acres of forest burnt in 2015 were “the most on record”:
And here is the report from the US Forestry Service completely debunking the New York Times claim of “the most on record” by showing that much larger areas of forest were lost in wildfires during the scorching hot 1920s and 1930s when atmospheric CO2 levels were much lower than they are now:
I fail to see how this, and many other well-documented examples like this from my book, can be “The usual non-scientific garbage”.
Why you can’t get a doctor’s appointment
With so much heat and noise being made about immigration, I thought it might be useful to look at the facts. In the last 11 years of the Blair/Brown New Labour government, the UK population officially rose from 58.64 million to 62.76 million – a rise of 4.12 million. In the first 11 years of fake Conservative government, the official figures show that the UK population rose from 62.76 million to 67.28 million – a rise of 4.52 million:
As the UK birth rate is around 1.754 births per woman – far below the replacement birth rate of 2.1 births per woman, we can only assume that the actual rate of immigration to the UK was higher than the 4.12 million under 11 years of New Labour and than the 4.52 million under the first 11 years of the fake Conservatives. Moreover, I think we all know that there are perhaps a million or more wonderful people living in our country than the official statistics show.
There has been a very significant rise in the number of GPs in the UK from 39,098 in 2000 to 54,502 by 2021 – a 39% increase:
This is more than the population increase of just 15%. However, these GPs are working on average fewer hours so that the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) number of GPs has risen much slower than the actual number being paid by us:
This makes it difficult to calculate how many more patients there are per FTE GP due to New Labour’s and the fake Conservatives’ policies of mass, open-borders immigration which have increased the UK population by more than 8.64 million since 1999.
What we can do is look at the overall number of doctors (including hospital doctors) per 1,000 of population in the main OECD countries:
(left-click on image, then left-click again to see more clearly)
This shows that the UK has 2.8 doctors for every 1,000 people. The average across 33 OECD countries is 3.0. Austria has 5.1 doctors for every 1,000 people. Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, and Switzerland all have more than 4 doctors for every 1,000 people.
Moreover, we can suspect that those who come to our country from the world’s most backward, worst hell-holes without ever having contributed anything to our country will be more likely to avail themselves of all the free stuff like free healthcare than the average Brit. So the number of people per doctor probably doesn’t reflect the greater use of medical services by migrants compared to ordinary British taxpayers.
And with net migration into the UK set to exceed 600,000 a year legal migrants and another 45,000 to 50,000 illegal migrants a year, whatever government we elect, doctor appointments for law-abiding British taxpayers are going to become as rare as rocking-horse poo.
But I didn’t understand a word of Wikipedia’s description so gave up.
Max Horkheimer’s quote seems to be in line with another theory of how Marxism will conquer the West – the idea of “a long march through the institutions” cutting our links to the Judeo-Christian values which form the basis for most Western societies:
Just from recent news stories we can see that it is woke, rather than Marxism, which has won. Though I suppose woke is a form of Marxism. For example, whether in politics, academia, the media, schools and even business, there is only one permitted viewpoint.
Here are just a few taboos which we are no longer permitted to mention:
there are only two genders
uncontrolled Third-world immigration may not benefit the advanced West
man-made climate change is a load of unscientific cult-like nonsense
all white people aren’t all guilty of conscious or subconscious racism
colonialism might actually have brought some benefits to Africa
it is white people’s racism and not Black communities’ own cultural issues which causes Blacks to fall behind Whites, Indians, Chinese and, in fact, every other racial group you can think of
consanguineous marriage causes higher risks of physical abnormalities and reduced intelligence and so should be made illegal
there may be physical (for example, insulin tolerance) and other (IQ?) differences between races
and so much more
Moreover, we can see daily examples of how all our institutions have been captured by the same woke ideology. Academics expressing ‘difficult’ views are cancelled, shunned and often fired. The ludicrously misnamed ‘civil service’ has declared open warfare on any politicians daring to challenge wokeism. They went after Priti ‘Useless’ Patel; they got Dominic Raab; and now they’re trying to bring down Suella Braverman. Over at the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) trans-activists have launched a campaign to have the Chairwoman fired probably due to her views about ‘biological sex’. Apparently EHRC employees have filed a dossier of 40 (boringly predictable) complaints about her alleged ‘bullying’ and harassment’. The Royal Air Force has started rejecting qualified white male applicants instead preferring less qualified applicants from ethnic and sexual minorities. And our mainstream media are afraid to question any of the woke diktats mentioned above.
In addition, our life is gradually turning into a version of the Soviet Union – cold, dark, miserable, grey and totally controlled by government komissars. The obsession with Net Zero to fight totally imaginary anthropogenic climate change will impoverish 99% of us while our rulers enjoy all life’s luxuries. You all know what’s coming for us ‘useless eaters’:
15-minute cities restricting us to a small area near our homes
personal carbon budgets limiting what we can buy, how much we can heat our homes and how much we can travel
possibly new government regulations on how much space each person should be allowed in order to ‘solve the housing crisis’ perhaps including swingeing penalties on older people deemed to be occupying homes that the authorities judge are ‘too large’ for them
Zil Lanes on roads, airports etc for the lucky 1% as they jet around the world lecturing the rest of us on the need to keep cutting our CO2 emissions
and so much more
How this has been allowed to happen is a subject for someone much smarter than myself. But I note that almost every person in power today – in politics, business and academia – attends Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum (WEF) meetings in Davos. Moreover, the 73 pages of WEF Young Leaders shows us who will be running our lives in 10 to 15 years. Here’s a link:
This link gives you access to the 73 pages of the smiling, happy, privileged people who are moving seemingly effortlessly into top positions in politics, academia, media and business and so will be controlling your lives in the near future.
Current leaders who are also alumni of the WEF Young Leaders programme include Saint Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand, the vertically-challenged Emperor Emmanuel ‘Napoleon’ Macron of France and Leo Varadkar former Taoiseach of Ireland. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg is also a WEF Young Leaders programme alumni.
I’m not suggesting some evil, James-Bond-villain conspiracy, with Klaus Schwab as the cat-stroking mastermind, to take over the world. But I am suggesting that with our current rulers and our future rulers (often WEF alumni) there is a shared mindset that we useless eaters need to be restricted and controlled; that concepts such as communities, countries, borders and patriotism need to be destroyed mainly through mass immigration; and that the world would be best governed by unelected and unaccountable internationalist organisations rather than elected national governments.
Anyway, I have to go now. But hopefully there are a few issues here worth considering.
I guess you’ve all seen the story. Sir Kneeler “I don’t know what a woman is” Starmer has pledged to make Britain into a “clean energy superpower” when Labour boot out the useless pretend Conservatives at the next election. This is part of Labour’s “Green Prosperity” plan for what pathetically little is left of the British economy. There is so much one could say about how cretinous this is that you could almost write a book about it. Oh, I already did:
So, here I’ll just highlight two of the most absurd issues with Labour’s “Green Prosperity” plans:
Absurdity 1: This will improve the UK’s energy security
In the Sunday Times report on this a Labour source is quoted as saying: “We are against the granting of new licences for oil and gas in the North Sea ……. They undermine our energy security”. So, Labour are claiming that the UK’s energy security will be undermined by Britain producing its own oil and gas and our energy security will be strengthened by relying on unreliable, often unfriendly, despotic foreign regimes for our energy supply. Good grief! Surely I don’t need to explain the stupidity of this statement?
Absurdity 2: More renewable energy means higher energy costs
Labour claims that using oil and gas rather than renewables “will do nothing to cut bills”. Well, here are two possibly relevant charts:
The first shows the percentage of renewable energy by country:
(left-click on images then left-click again to see more clearly)
The second shows the energy costs by country:
Hopefully you’ll see that apart from a few exceptions the more supposedly renewable energy a country uses, the higher are its energy costs and the more fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas a country uses, the lower are its energy costs.
Labour’s plans won’t bring Britain “Green Prosperity”. They will only bring “Green Bankruptcy” as British companies will be unable to compete with foreign rivals due to the UK’s high energy costs.
The Western world has truly gone mad and our leaders truly are idiots and liars.
And what is perhaps more worrying is that we don’t have a single mainstream-media journalist with either the intelligence or courage to expose the Net Zero, renewable energy farce for the nonsense it clearly is. After all, it only took me a couple of minutes to Google charts for percentage renewable energy by country and energy costs by country. Why did no journalist do this?
Hopefully readers will be aware of the Mamas and Papas 1965 song “California Dreaming” (link at the end of this blog). Back then this was the image many of us had when thinking about California:
And there was also “California Girls” by the Beach Boys, also released in 1965:
The nightmare begins
But since 2011, California has been ruled by Democrat governors – first Jerry Brown from 2011 to 2019 and then Gavin Newsom from 2019 to today. Then the problems started – rising drug addiction; crime out of control; homelessness at 10 times the level of the USA average; streets awash with makeshift camps, drugs and human excrement. Here’s a list of the worst garbage on San Francisco’s streets:
(left-click on image , then left-click again to see more clearly)
At the top of the list is broken glass. Human excrement comes a close second.
And here’s what many streets in Los Angeles and San Francisco now look like:
Moreover, since Governor Gavin Newsom took office in 2019, companies have increasingly left violent, crime-, drug- and homelessness-plagued California and every year more are relocating to states like Republican-run Texas or Republican-run Florida. In 2019, 11 of 22 companies exiting California relocated to Texas; 19 out of 37 in 2020 and 26 out of 49 in 2021. And for each of the last 3 years more than 130,000 employed, tax-paying workers have left the state reducing the amount of income tax revenue by around $8bn.
In addition, now that Governor Gavin Newsom has banned oil extraction in the state in order to save the planet from non-existent anthropogenic climate change, California has been forced to buy energy from nearby states and California has some of the highest energy costs in America.
The situation in San Francisco, for example, is so bad you could write a book about it. In fact somebody just did – “San Fransicko: Why progressives ruin cities” by Michael Shellenberger:
The Left marches boldly onwards
Undeterred by the total catastrophe they have caused the once great state of California, the progressive left have come up with yet another genius idea – pay reparations for slavery to California’s African Americans. California’s Reparations Commission has determined that slavery, as opposed to disastrous policies advanced by the political establishment for decades, is the real reason for present-day black poverty in the state. In just a few weeks, the legislature that created the task force will take up the commission’s proposal, which calls for payments to black residents of upwards of $1.2 million each. The Reparations Commission claims it wants to provide the public with an accurate record of slavery in California and get California to issue a formal apology for what the task force calls the state’s “perpetration of gross human rights violations and crimes against humanity on African slaves and their descendants”.
A noble aim indeed. Perhaps I can help?
Maybe I can help “provide the public with an accurate record of slavery in California“? California joined the Union as a free state in 1850, with a state Constitution that expressly outlawed slavery. This didn’t mean there was no slavery in California. It’s estimated that perhaps 1,000 African Americans were taken to California by their owners and there are (I believe) three documented examples of African/American slaves being offered for sale. But the progressives are using these three cases to ‘prove’ that slavery was widespread in California. But hey, who cares about the truth when you’re on a virtue-signalling crusade using other people’s money?
The real slavery scandal in California was actually against Native Americans and not African Americans, Between 1846 and 1855, the Native population decreased by two-thirds and in order to craft California’s own code of labour, the Act for the Government and Protection of Indians was passed in 1850 which “legally” curtailed the rights of the Indigenous. Within this Act, Native children could be obtained for indenture, convicted Native Americans could be hired out of jail and Indians could not testify for or against whites. This legalized a form of slavery, of forced labour in California. An estimated 24,000 to 27,000 Californian Natives were taken as forced labourers by settlers including 4,000 to 7,000 children.
But today’s Democrats clearly realise that there aren’t many votes to be bought in the Native American community by giving them the reparations money. So, much better to throw $1.2 million at each of the state’s African Americans to buy their votes.
It seems that California’s African Americans, very few of whose ancestors ever experienced slavery in California, can expect handout of $1.2m each from California’s remarkably generous but dwindling number of taxpayers.
I wonder if I should move to California and self-identify as a transgender African American. After all, maybe in Gavin Newsom’s woke, virtue-signalling Californian paradise I could get $1.2m for each of my genders – my birth gender and my self-identified gender?
And here are the Mamas and Papas to distract us from Governor Gavin Newsom’s latest idiocy:
Hopefully you’ve all seen the story that Sir “Mr Ed” Ed Davey, leader of the Labdums, has claimed in an interview on LBC that “the science is settled – women can have a penis”.
You or I might have thought that a woman looked something like this:
But it would seem that Mr Ed believes this is how the average woman actually looks:
So, now you know. On the two most important issues facing what pathetically little is left of Western civilisation – whether humans are causing catastrophic Climate Change and whether women can have an Ed Davey – the science is settled.
Human activity is definitely causing Climate Change or Climate Emergency or Climate Crisis or Climate Breakdown or whatever it’s called this month. And can women have an Ed Davey? Of course they can. After all, when a great thinker like Mr Ed tells us “the science is settled”, it must be true.
How lucky we are to have such people of great wisdom, like Sir “Mr Ed” Ed Davey leading our once great country.
Oh, and thanks to a reader for pointing out that this latest idiocy from Mr Ed happened on the same day as a talented maths teacher was banned from teaching for allegedly ‘misgendering’ a schoolchild and for believing the ridiculously old-fashioned idea that there are only two genders.
Who do you trust about the supposed “Climate Crisis”?
Ignorant nobodies like myself?
Or reliable experts like the BBC?
And all the mainstream media?
Perhaps Neil Oliver can help you decide?
Though personally I’m a little annoyed with Mr Oliver. I sent him a copy of my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS when it was first published in June 2021 and in the almost two years since then he has not thought to interview me about the book. But I guess he hasn’t even looked at it – if he had, he would be much more knowledgeable about the climate scam than he appears to be.
It’s now apparently acceptable to accuse the Royal Family of being ‘terribly white’ or ‘too white’ or whatever. In fact, it’s not only acceptable, but saying this makes one a courageous, outspoken hero for the BBC and the progressive left. So, I assume it would also be acceptable for me to suggest that our beloved NHS may be ‘terribly brown’ or ‘too brown’.
Let me explain. I have written several blogs about our collapsing NHS’s seeming obsession with hiring DIE (Diversity, Inclusion and Equality) managers. The apparent purpose of these wonderful people is (to quote just one of many similar job ads): “ensuring our workforce reflects the communities and patients we serve in order that we can meet the needs of our diverse communities”.
So, let’s do a quick check on how well current NHS staffing: “reflects the communities and patients we serve”.
Of the NHS’s 1.3 million employees, 74.3% are white compared to 80.7% of the working-age population and 87.1% of the total population; 12.5% are Asian compared to 10.1% of the working-age population and 6.9% of the total population; and 7.4% are Black compared to only 4.4% of the working-age population and 3.0% of the total population.
Between 2009 and 2022, the percentage of NHS staff who were white went down from 84.1% to 74.3% and the percentage of NHS staff who were Asian shot up from 7.3% to 12.5% – the biggest increase out of all ethnic groups
The first conclusion is that the NHS actually has a greater percentage of employees from ethnic minorities (25.6%) than in the working-age population (20.2%) and than in the general population. So, if the NHS is going to reflect the communities it serves, as it claims it wants to do, then clearly the NHS should employ more White people and fewer Asians and Blacks.
But, you say, aren’t most of the NHS ethnic minorities doing the more menial jobs while evil, ghastly white supremacists take all the top, best-paid jobs?
Well, here are the figures:
For professionally qualified clinical staff, only 68.7% were white compared to 80.7% of the working-age population and 87.1% of the total population; 15.9% were Asian compared to 10.1% of the working-age population and 6.9% of the total population; and 8.0% were black compared to only 4.4% of the working-age population and 3.0% of the total population.
Let’s just do one more category – qualified doctors: a mere 50.1% were White compared to 80.7% of the working-age population and 87.1% of the total population; an impressive 32.0% were Asian compared to 10.1% of the working-age population and 6.9% of the total population; and 5.9% were Black compared to only 4.4% of the working-age population and 3.0% of the total population.
All these figures and many more are available in glorious technicolour charts on the Government website at:
In summary, among all staff and in particular medical staff, Whites are under-represented, Asians are hugely over-represented and Blacks also score well compared to their part of the working age and general population.
Given the under-representation of Whites compared to their share of the working age population and general population and the over-representation of Asians and Blacks, some people might find it somewhat mysterious that the NHS spends an estimated £100 million a year on over 800 DIE (Diversity, Inclusion and Equality) specialists and is currently busy hiring even more of these probably unnecessary people on salaries that our struggling NHS can possibly ill afford.
Coming back to the politically-incorrect question that nobody nowadays would dare ask for fear of being branded a ‘racist’: “Is the NHS terribly brown?” or “Is the NHS too brown?” – the official figures from the UK Government suggest the answer can only be “yes”.
David Craig, on June 9th, 2023
