NewsRescue
In order to meet diversity recruitment quotas, the Metropolitan Police in London prioritized immutable characteristics valued by DEI consultants over candidates’ relevant skills.
An inspector tasked with evaluating police forces and policing has concluded that, in the pursuit of this ostensibly “noble and right” goal, the Met police have lowered their standards and, in some cases, accepted applicants who could not read or write in English competently. Some of the recruits also had significant criminal histories.
On patrol, there are illiterates.
According to the Guardian, former Met Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick and London Mayor Sadiq Khan reached an agreement in 2021 to ensure that 40% of new recruits were from black and minority communities. This was reportedly made in response to the death of George Floyd and the subsequent BLM riots in the United States.
Previously, the target for representation based on preferred immutable characteristics had been 19% of the overall force. At the time of the agreement, 15.4% of the force was black, Asian, or minority ethnic, or what English authorities refer to as “BAME.”
According to Khan’s administration, the initiative is “generational,” representing “the most significant changes to policing and black communities since the Macpherson report.”
Former Rear Admiral Matt Parr, a submariner turned inspector with His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, told the Telegraph, “Everyone is trying to do the right thing here, and they are all acting from noble motives in general, but the upshot is they are taking too much risk with people, and where they are taking risk — and I would support them in taking risk — they are not managing it properly.”
Parr stated that recruiters are “taking a risk” on minorities with criminal histories, but that this is not the main concern. The greater concern is anecdotal evidence that, in the pursuit of greater diversity, the force appears to have ended up lowering its recruitment standards to onboard officers who are “functionally illiterate in English” — officers who are incapable of properly writing up a crime report.
Parr appears to be concerned about the initiative’s failure thus far, given that he believes it is critical that London, “which will likely be a minority white city in the next decade or so,” not be policed by an overwhelmingly white police force.
According to Parr, having too many members of one racial group on the London police force, regardless of their competence, is “clearly wrong… from a legitimacy point of view, and from an appearances point of view.”
Despite their shared desire to reduce the proportion of white police officers in England’s capital city, Parr believes that lowering standards to achieve that goal will be difficult.
“We risk recruiting the wrong people,” he said, citing reports that the new Met commissioner, Mark Rowley, has expressed a desire to “dial down the requirement to meet those targets.”
In November, the Inspectorate of Constabulary issued a report revealing some of the ways recruiters appear to have dialed down the requirements to meet targets.
Inspectors discovered applicants who had received vetting clearance despite committing robberies, indecent exposure, DUIs, and domestic abuse-related assaults in the past. According to reports, there was little evidence that recruiters considered the seriousness of the offenses.
One applicant who passed the recruiters’ vetting, for example, had previously exposed his genitals to a female victim on multiple occasions, masturbating in front of her in at least one instance.
A previous would-be cop had knocked over and robbed an 80-year-old woman. He was cleared for vetting once more.
According to the inspector’s report, a number of applicants were cleared despite having close ties to organized criminal groups.
Apparently, identity politics has also prevented molesters from being relieved of duty.
According to the inspector’s report, a police officer inappropriately touched a member of the public as well as junior officers. There were numerous complaints in response.
The offending officer then requested to be transferred to a different location. Despite being aware of the allegations, the chief constable at the second location approved the transfer “on the grounds that accepting the transferee would make the force more diverse” — a decision in which the authors of the report suggested “undue weight [was] given to diversity considerations at the expense of an objective assessment of the facts.”
