Remove “Irish” as a racial group on ethnic monitoring forms

One in ten people in this country have an Irish grandparent, and one quarter of our population have Irish ancestors, with probably a similar sort of proportion of Irish people who have British ancestors. There has been a constant ebb and flow between our 2 countries for at least the last thousand years – both good and bad.  The countries are different political entities, but as a people the British and the Irish are no more different than the English and the Welsh or the Welsh and the Scottish.  We are the same people, but different tribes, with shared histories, families, cultures and (of course) rivalries.

Either the Irish are British – in which case they're on a par with English, Welsh and Scottish who should have their own nationalities on forms, or they're foreign – in which case they're on a par with French, Italians and Americans (none of whom get their own ethnicity on forms).

Why is this idea important?

One in ten people in this country have an Irish grandparent, and one quarter of our population have Irish ancestors, with probably a similar sort of proportion of Irish people who have British ancestors. There has been a constant ebb and flow between our 2 countries for at least the last thousand years – both good and bad.  The countries are different political entities, but as a people the British and the Irish are no more different than the English and the Welsh or the Welsh and the Scottish.  We are the same people, but different tribes, with shared histories, families, cultures and (of course) rivalries.

Either the Irish are British – in which case they're on a par with English, Welsh and Scottish who should have their own nationalities on forms, or they're foreign – in which case they're on a par with French, Italians and Americans (none of whom get their own ethnicity on forms).

A referendum over elements of offensive ethnic cultures

In light of the growing demand from the electorates in many countries to outlaw cultural or religious practices that the majority find offensive, discourteous or innapropiate in a western culture, this discussion should be placed in the hands of the electorate to vote on rather than leaving it to MP's at westminster. We live in a multicultural society where allowances are made to accomadate different cultures BUT there should be a limit of that tired old phrase, freedom of expression. Society does NOT allow total and absolute freedom of expression to anyone as we all have to adhere to the preferences of the majority in any western society.  That used to be the principal of democratic states however a very small minority within Britain as well as Europe have used our generosity in F of E to use it for a radical cause celebre.

I suggest that where contentious issues like full face covering in public, polygamy, forced marriages and practices like the mutilation of female genitalia are tacitly condoned under so called F of E rights, it is beholden on the UK government to get off the fence and strike down anti-social or illegal practices.  Additionally if there are already some laws that cover parts of these issues, we the people need to see those laws actually be imlemented.

To this end it would seem a refendum should be held on these cultural issues that 66% of the country finds offensive, and leave the choice of laws that are needed to rectify this unsatisfactory situation to be decided by the electorate as a whole. MP's at westminster do not carry the moral high ground here as its the man & woman in the street that is most affected by these alien practices.

Why is this idea important?

In light of the growing demand from the electorates in many countries to outlaw cultural or religious practices that the majority find offensive, discourteous or innapropiate in a western culture, this discussion should be placed in the hands of the electorate to vote on rather than leaving it to MP's at westminster. We live in a multicultural society where allowances are made to accomadate different cultures BUT there should be a limit of that tired old phrase, freedom of expression. Society does NOT allow total and absolute freedom of expression to anyone as we all have to adhere to the preferences of the majority in any western society.  That used to be the principal of democratic states however a very small minority within Britain as well as Europe have used our generosity in F of E to use it for a radical cause celebre.

I suggest that where contentious issues like full face covering in public, polygamy, forced marriages and practices like the mutilation of female genitalia are tacitly condoned under so called F of E rights, it is beholden on the UK government to get off the fence and strike down anti-social or illegal practices.  Additionally if there are already some laws that cover parts of these issues, we the people need to see those laws actually be imlemented.

To this end it would seem a refendum should be held on these cultural issues that 66% of the country finds offensive, and leave the choice of laws that are needed to rectify this unsatisfactory situation to be decided by the electorate as a whole. MP's at westminster do not carry the moral high ground here as its the man & woman in the street that is most affected by these alien practices.

Ban Positive Discrimination

Positive Discrimination is the concept that someone should be prioritised for a job or position based on their race, class or status over others who applied or wish to gain the job or position. This should be banned and actively discouraged.

Why is this idea important?

Positive Discrimination is the concept that someone should be prioritised for a job or position based on their race, class or status over others who applied or wish to gain the job or position. This should be banned and actively discouraged.