Staff accused Havering Council of being reluctant to consistently call out racism because the borough was perceived to have a number of racist voters, a report has revealed.
After a three-year cover-up, Havering has finally released a 2021 dossier which saw it accused of harbouring a “disturbing” culture of “normalised” racism and sexism.
Even elected councillors were banned from reading it, despite being asked to back public spending on remedial measures.
The version published on Friday (November 29) was redacted, but did reveal some staff felt Havering had a reputation for being “quite racist”, leaving the council afraid to vocally oppose racism.
“Some colleagues reported that there is a perceived chilling effect of [not] being as fulsome as the council might in consistently addressing racism and hate crime for fear of white British community response,” it said.
But, the council wrote: “This is not evidence rather it is assertion.”
After fighting hard to keep the document suppressed, the council published it alongside a taxpayer-funded press release attacking the Romford Recorder.
It falsely accused the Recorder of saying Havering could avoid service cuts if it stopped fighting publication, and claimed the document could “inflame community tensions”.
Conservative councillor David Taylor – who previously questioned the council’s spending on barristers to hide the report – said he found the press release “deeply concerning”.
“It is my belief that it is better to be in the open, no matter how uncomfortable,” he said.
In the press release, council chief executive Andrew Blake-Herbert said: “I won’t shy away from the fact that some of the content in this report does not make for pleasant reading.”
But the redacted version published contained little evidence of the problems it reportedly revealed in 2021.
The Local Government Association (LGA) said in 2021 that it included “potentially racist, sexist and homophobic incidents that have been discussed anecdotally”.
Yet the redacted version released on Friday does not contain the words “sexist”, “sexism”, “homophobia” or “homophobic” at all. Nor does the word “allegation” appear.
Havering claimed to have redacted the document to remove “personal details including job titles and other information which could identify individual staff members”.
But it also appears any specific allegations of racism, sexism, homophobia or disability discrimination may also have been redacted.
One series of questions about possible institutional racism were all just answered with single question marks.
It does say that the council had a “gender pay gap” and faced allegations that its hiring, promotion and pay decisions might be discriminatory, with “work needed to assess if there is an ethnic pay gap”.
“Anecdotally, it has been suggested that bias occurs in some recruitment processes. The senior levels of the organisation are not a very diverse representation, hence why these views may be held,” the report said.
It added: “It would appear potentially as if there are not equal access to opportunities or that individuals with protected characteristics are not applying for progressive roles.”
Havering took “rapid action on cases identified where colleagues have acted in a racist way”, the dossier claimed – but some staff felt its actions were “too piecemeal and dependent on a catalyst”, rather than anti-racism being an “intrinsic” part of the council’s culture.
Havering said it had spent £3,670 trying to cover up the dossier – including two failed court appeals.
“From the relentless campaign the Recorder has run – in what they claimed to be the public interest – it seems they hold little regard for hard-working council workers who keep the borough’s services running for our residents,” Mr Blake-Herbert said.
“Instead, they risk creating potential discord which in turn could inflame community tensions in return for a perceived scoop and some hits on their website.”
He maintained the council has "made great strides in our pledge to become an anti-racism, anti-discrimination and inclusive organisation" since the 2021 review.
Four tribunal judges, on three occasions, have ruled that there was overwhelming public interest in publication of the document, rejecting Havering Council’s arguments to the contrary as lacking any legal merit.
Cllr Taylor said: “I commend the Recorder for their fight to secure the publication of this vital document.
“It is in the public’s interest to understand what is happening inside the town hall and the report goes some way to revealing that.
“Whilst the cost of fighting the publication was, in the end, considered relatively low, I am concerned that Havering Council did not even allow councillors sight of the document until now.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel