IA Sample 6 - This IA scored 24/25.

It achieved the top mark band for all 3 criteria.

To what extent did the Race Relations Act (RRA) of December 1965 reduce racial discrimination in Britain?

Section A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources

This investigation explores the research question “To what extent did the Race Relations Act of December 1965 reduce
racial discrimination in Britain?”

A source relevant to this research question is the first Race Relations Board Annual Report printed by the British House
of Commons on 26 April 1967, which provides data analysis and assessment of the Act’s effectiveness in its first two
years. Another relevant source is a journal article written by historian Simon Peplow entitled "The 'Linchpin for Success'?
The Problematic Establishment of the 1965 Race Relations Act and its Conciliation Board.", published in the
journal Contemporary British History in 2017, which details the historiography of the impact of the Act.

First Race Relations Board Annual Report published by the United Kingdom House of Commons in April 1967

A value of the origin is that it is a contemporary official government document, written in April 1967, and offers
eyewitness testimony and data collected by the Board itself and verified by the House of Commons. A value of the
purpose is that it was written to inform the government on whether or not the act was a success, so provides
assessment. A value of the content is that it includes contemporary qualitative and quantitative evidence of the Act’s
impact.

A limitation of the origin is that the report was published by the Race Relations Board itself and its authors may have had
an interest in presenting data that showed their work to be effective. Indeed, the Board was under scrutiny and
therefore pressure from the government to prove its worth. A limitation of the purpose is that it may be subjective as it
intends to present the Board in the best possible manner. A limitation of the content is that it contains not just raw data,
but the Board’s analysis of that data, which creates an opportunity for bias and exaggeration.

Simon Peplow, writing in the journal article "The 'Linchpin for Success'? The Problematic Establishment of the 1965
Race Relations Act and its Conciliation Board" in the journal Contemporary British History (2017)

A value of the origin is that it was written by a professional historian, an expert in this period in modern British history,
and has the benefit of 50 years of hindsight. A value of the purpose is that Peplow is a specialist in “Race, Ethnicity, and
Migration in Modern Britain”, and the article intends to offer an analysis of different perspectives on the success of the
Act. As an academic article it may also attempt to be objective. A value of the content is that it draws on a considerable
amount of data and historiography and offers insight into different perspectives.

A limitation of the origin of Peplow’s paper is that Peplow has strong liberal political views, seen from his twitter
page, on which he posts and retweets accusations of racism within British parliament. His views may shape his analysis
and affect his ability to give a balanced account. A limitation of the purpose is that the article attempts to undermine the
argument that the Act was a success, and a limitation of the content is the omission of evidence that suggests otherwise,
such as the founding of the UCPA.

Section B: Investigation

The Race Relations Act (RRA) 8 December 1965 was legislation passed by the Labour Party with the purpose of
reducing racial discrimination in Britain. After the Second World War there had been a significant increase in migration
from Commonwealth countries, which led to interracial resentment and tension. The Notting Hill Race Riots erupted in
August and September 1958 and highlighted the hostility 'non-whites' faced in British society. It could be argued that the
RRA was itself an achievement in overcoming strong opposition from the Conservative party and the public, shifted
government and media opinion, and formed the basis for further race relations legislation. However, historian Simon
Peplow argues that the Act was wholly unsuccessful as it failed to remove the “colour bar”, led to further alienation of
immigrants, and Section 6 of the Act actually incited racial discrimination.

The mere passing of the Act represented a success due to the level of opposition at the time. In 1950, Labour politician
Reginald Sorensen proposed a Private Member’s Bill to make racial discrimination illegal failed to pass. Labour politician
Fenner Brockway then proposed nine separate race relations bills from 1956 onwards, none of which were accepted by
parliament. Mr. Ronald Bell, a Conservative politician in opposition to race relations legislation, called Brockway’s 1957
proposal “a wholly deplorable measure”. Attitudes in the media were negative; an article in the Manchester Guardian
argued that Sorensen’s proposal had “almost no chance of making progress”. In the 1965 general election, Conservartive
politician Peter Griffiths ran on the slogan “If you want a nigger neighbour, vote Labour” for the Smethwick seat. It is
thus a remarkable accomplishment that the Act was passed at all. As Peplow argues, the “chaotic” development and
passing of the Bill and creation of the Board reveals the committed attempts of the opponents to impede such
legislation. The passing of the Act made a firm statement that racist language such as Griffiths’ racist slogan was
unacceptable, and from December 1965 onwards, punishable by law.

It could also be argued that the RRA of 1965 succeeded in reducing racial discrimination in government and the media.
From his appointment as Chairman of the Race Relations Board (RRB) on 15 February 1966, Liberal politician Mark
Bonham-Carter pushed Home Secretary Frank Soskice to strengthen the Act. In December 1967, Home Secretary Roy
Jenkins called for the Home Affairs Committee to consider a new, stronger Race Relations Bill. The shift in parliamentary
support led to a corresponding change in the attitude of the media. On December 18th 1966, journalist Anthony Howard
wrote an article named Crossman May Fight Jenkins on Race Laws for the Observer, which supported Jenkins “for a
strengthening of the Race Relations Act”. On 10 April 1965, a reporter for The Guardian wrote that the Act was valuable
because it “[gave] statutory expression to the strong moral disapproval of racial prejudice”. This shift is further
represented through Hugh Fraser, former anti-legislation politician, openly declaring his move to support further
legislation. Social scientist Michael Banton maintains that the 1965 Act did affect meaningful change in societal
attitudes. An increase in political activism is evident in the founding of the Universal Coloured People's Association
(UCPA) in June 1967, Britain’s first black power organisation. According to historian Steven Fielding, the Act constituted
“the first legal challenge to white prejudice”, and it “established the first legal expectation of racial tolerance” in Britain.

In addition, the Act created a foundation for further legislation. In December 1966, Labour MP Maurice Orbach
proposed that the Act be extended to cover “employment, housing and refine the definition of incitement to racial
hatred”. The founding of the Race Relations Board in 1966 led MP Paul B. Rose to comment “It seems that we have now
got some guts injected into that Act, although the teeth need sharpening”. The establishment of the RRB was crucial to
strengthening the Act, and it led to the prosecution of 85 people between 1966 and 1967. In April 1967, the organisation
Political and Economic Planning (PEP) released a report that surveyed the progress made thus far, and its findings
“strengthen[ed] the hand of the pro-legislation sector”, by providing evidence for extensions. The follow up was the
Race Relations Act of 1968, which covered employment and housing, and it increased the power of the RRB. In 1976, a
further Act was passed covering ‘indirect discrimination’ and giving ‘all races’ access to industrial tribunals.

However, it could also be argued that the Act was unsuccessful because it actually heightened racial tensions in Britain
and created greater barriers for immigrants wishing to enter the UK. British Home Secretary Frank Soskice referred to
the concurrent immigration legislation as a “package deal”. The 1965 White Paper led to the Kenyan Asians Bill in 1968
and the Immigration Act of 1971 which all restricted the immigration of particular ‘race groups’. Indeed, as displayed
in The Picture Post on 2 July 1949, public sentiment was that the ‘solution’ to racial discrimination was to ‘halt the
immigration of coloured people’. The Post declared: “Why import a social problem where one did not previously exist?”.
The 1965 White Paper, a bill that put restrictions on Commonwealth immigration, could be seen as negating the RRA of
1965 as it details immigration as a problem from the basepoint of race. According to historians Robert Miles and Annie
Phizacklea, the RRA was rendered a failure by “racist immigration legislation''.

The RRA 1965 was also unsuccessful as the language used in Section 6 actually incited further racial discrimination, and
led to more black than white people being prosecuted. Historian Gavin Schaffer argues that the Act did not reduce racial
discrimination, but rather forced people to ‘rephrase’ their racist ideas. Michael Abdul Malik, a black power activist also
known as Michael X, was convicted under the Act in 1967. Indeed, of the first six people to be prosecuted under the Act,
five were black; a surprising figure considering 'non-whites' made up merely 2% of Britain’s population in 1967. Indeed,
Enoch Powell was not convicted for his notorious “Rivers of Blood” speech in April 1968, in which he stated “In this
country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man”. Peplow called the speech
the epitome of “incitement to racial hatred”. The ambiguity of Section 6 was one of the most prominent shortcomings of
the 1965 RRA.

In addition, the “colour bar” continued to exist after the 1965 Act was passed. Restrictions to housing continued for
'non-whites' in Britain, black people were prevented from buying or renting houses in particular areas in order to
maintain property prices. Segregation was practiced in government social housing; non-whites were placed in separate
areas to avoid potential "racist hostility". In April 1967, the PEP released a report which included interviews with West
Indians, Pakistanis and Indians, 36% of whom claimed personal experience of racism in the workplace. Of the 150 British
employers interviewed, 37 did not employ any 'non-whites', and four had open policies against employing 'non-whites'.
The report concluded that “there [was], without any doubt, substantial discrimination in Britain against coloured
immigrants in employment, in housing, and in the provision of services”.

Overall, although it was a major step towards outlawing racial discrimination in Britain, it seems clear that the Race
Relations Act of December 1965 had significant limitations. The RRB lacked real authority and power, and Section 6
inadvertently incited further racial discrimination. It also failed to combat the most obvious areas of discrimination;
housing and employment and was somewhat negated by the tightening of immigration controls on ‘people of colour’.

Section C: Reflection

In undertaking my research, I utilised methods used by historians, and had to acknowledge and address the challenges
they face in their research. I investigated a range of primary sources to gain an understanding of contemporary opinion
in conjunction with the work of historians. I cross-referenced the statistical data from the First Report of the Race
Relations Board with a debate in the House of Lords concerning the progress of the Race Relations Act to corroborate
information, as historians do. An obstacle with government sources from the time was the need to evaluate their origin
and purpose, indeed the Act was politically polarising. Fenner Brockway of the Labour party presented data to support
the effectiveness of the Act with statistics from the RRB, whereas Conservative politician Ronald Bell sought to disparage
the Act by citing the Act itself, labeling Clauses 1, 2, and 3 as “artificial”. In both sources there was a vested interest in
providing biased evidence. I researched the opinions of left-wing politicians such as Brockway and right-wing politicians
such as Lord Milverton to gain a better understanding of perspectives at the time.

Moreover, the historiography concerning the success of the 1965 Act was conflicting and the role of selectivity in
the historian’s methodology was made clear to me. How the 1967 PEP Report was used played a role in this
contradiction. Historians with more liberal political views on race tended to be more critical of the Act, and rely on the
PEP report as key evidence. The context of the historian may also be an obstacle to writing an objective account. Liberal
historian Simon Peplow, for example, deems the Act as a failure however historian Steven Fielding is critical of the
current Labour and Liberal parties in Britain today and argues that the Act was a success. Moreover, the racism my
family has experienced in their lives meant that I had a tendency to be more critical of the impact of the Act in the long
term.

Due to the fallibility of eye-witness accounts, it was challenging to research potentially racially motivated crimes that
that would be evidence of the limitations of the Act. There was limited ‘anecdotal’ evidence from both victims and
perpetrators, but this meant that inferences had to be made in terms of the effects on the wider community. Finding
evidence of the ‘black voice’ from the time was another challenge, because of the lack of representation of non-whites
in the British media at the time. Indeed, this meant that I, as historians have done, was reliant on the given black
testimonies in the 1967 PEP Report.
Works cited

Aziz, Shaista. "Simon Peplow." Twitter. Last modified July 23, 2019. Accessed September 12, 2019.
https://twitter.com/simpep?lang=en.

Bell, Ronald. "Racial Discrimination Bill." Hansard. Last modified May 10, 1957. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-
hansard/commons/1957/may/10/racial-discrimination-bill.

Bourne, Jenny. "The Race Relations Act 1965 - Blessing or Curse?" Institute of Race Relations. Last modified November
13, 2015. Accessed April 10, 2019. http://www.irr.org.uk/news/the-race-relations-act-1965-blessing-or-curse/.

Brockway, Fenner. "A Plan for Integration." The Guardian (Britain), March 8, 1965, 10. PDF.

Brockway, Fenner. "Race Relations Legislations." In Hansard. 1966. Accessed May 2, 2019.
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1966/jun/14/race-relations-
legislation#S5LV0275P0_19660614_HOL_8.

Brown, Jennifer. "An Early History of British Race Relations Legislation." House of Commons Library. Last modified July 9,
2018. Accessed August 31, 2019. https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8360.

Burrell, Ian. "Black Is Fined for Race Slur on Police Insult Police." Independent, July 27, 1999. Accessed September 1,
2019. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/black-is-fined-for-race-slur-on-police-insult-police-1108921.html.

Cambridge University Press. "Colour Bar." Cambridge Dictionary. Accessed September 1, 2019.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/colour-bar.

Carson, John. "A Matter of Policy: The Lessons of Recent British Race Relations Legislation." The North American
Conference on British Studies 8, no. 2 (Summer 1976): 154-77. https://doi.org/10.2307/4048390.

"Contemporary British History." Contemporary British History 25, no. 4 (December 2011): 2.
http://images.tandf.co.uk/common/jcovers/originals/F/FCBH_25_04_COVER.pdf.

Cousins, Emily. "The Notting Hill Riots (1958)." Blackpast. Last modified June 8, 2010. Accessed May 3, 2019.
https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/notting-hill-riots-1958/.

"Discrimination and Race Relations Policy." The National Archives.

Eddo-Lodge, Reni. Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People about Race. Exp. ed. London, Great Britain: Bloomsbury,
2018.

Fielding, Steven. "Austerity as a political issue is virtually dead. Only Labour activists talk about it. It's like they live in a
permanent 2017." Twitter. September 15, 2019. https://twitter.com/polprofsteve?lang=en.

Geddes, Andrew. Politics of Immigration and Race. Hove, England: Baseline Book, 1996.

The Guardian. "Government and Race Relations." April 10, 1965, 8. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/docview/185047557?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo.

Hammond Perry, Kenetta. London Is the Place for Me: Black Britons, Citizenship and the Politics of Race. Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press, 2015.

Hansard, Economic and Social Rights, H.R. 2018-Volume 645, at 1 (Colo. July 19, 2018) (UK Parliament).

Hansard, Economic and Social Rights Debate in Commons Chamber, H.R. Doc. (July 19, 2018).
Hepple, B. A. "Race Relations Act 1965." The Modern Law Review 29, no. 3 (1966): 306-14.
http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/stable/1093572.

House of Lords Official Report. Report no. Vol. 283, No. 156. London, England: Hansard, 1967.

Howard, Anthony. "Crossman May Fight Jenkins on Race Laws." The Observer (Britain), December 18, 1966, 7. PDF.

Layton-Henry, Zig. The Politics of Immigration. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 1992.

Lester, Anthony. "The Politics of the Race Relations Act 1976." In From Legislation to Integration?, 24-39. Migration,
Minorities and Citizenship. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. e-book.

Lester, Anthony, Lord. "Race Relations Act 1965: Lord Lester of Herne Hill." Interview. YouTube. Last modified April 21,
2016. Accessed March 13, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv8CBM1pGAw.

Longaker, Richard P. "The Race Relations Act of 1965: An Evaluation of the Incitement Provision." Institute of Race
Relations 11, no. 2 (October 1, 1969). https://doi.org/10.1177%2F030639686901100201.

McGlashan, Colin. "Four More Face Race Charges." The Observer, October 1, 1967, 6. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/docview/475856608?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo.

Miles, Robert, and Annie Phizacklea. Racism and Political Action. Sydney, Australia: Law Book Co of Australasia, 1979.

The Observer. "Back Page: The Bill That Lost the Race." May 30, 1965, 40. https://search-proquest-
com.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/docview/475768937/pageviewPDF/E65A0BDBEC0A473FPQ/1?accountid=25070.

Orbach, Maurice. "Race Relations Act 1965 (Amendment) Bill." In Hansard. 1966. Accessed May 2, 2019.
https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1966/dec/16/race-relations-act-1965-amendment-bill.

Peplow, Simon. "The 'Linchpin for Success'? The Problematic Establishment of the 1965 Race Relations Act and its
Conciliation Board." Contemporary British History 31, no. 3 (2017).
https://doi-org.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/10.1080/13619462.2016.1261697.

Peppard, Nadine. "The Age of Innocence: Race Relations before 1965." Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 14, nos.
1-2 (June 30, 2010): 45-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.1987.9976027.

Political Correspondent. "Fines for Racial Discrimination: Private Member's Bill." The Manchester Guardian, April 5, 1951,
2. https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/docview/479164181?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo.

Powell, Enoch. "Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' Speech." The Telegraph (London, England), November 6, 2007. Accessed
March 24, 2019. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html.

"Race, Ethnicity, and Migration in Modern Britain." Warwick University. Last modified October 10, 2018. Accessed May
18, 2019. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/students/modules/hi2d4/.

"Race Relations Act 1965: 50 Years." UK Parliament. Accessed April 10, 2019.
https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LIF-2016-0005#fullreport.

Rose, Paul B. "Race Relations Bill." Hansard. Last modified April 23, 1968.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/1968-04-23/debates/a7bab9b3-9009-4102-aa9c-d5f34f8f1dfc/
RaceRelationsBill?highlight=%22support%20of%20the%20opposition%27%20%22#contribution-84ade120-59e4-44a1-
8e93-7fe0b98a8e04.

Sandbrook, Dominic. White Heat: A History of Britain in the Swinging Sixties. London: Abacus, 2006.

Schaffer, Gavin. "Legislating against Hatred: Meaning and Motive in Section Six of the Race Relations Act of 1965." 20th
Century British History 25, no. 2 (June 1, 2014): 251-75.
https://doi-org.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/10.1093/tcbh/hws053.
Simmons, Natalie. "Making a New Life in 1960s Britain." Operation Black Vote. Last modified March 25, 2011. Accessed
March 21, 2019. https://www.obv.org.uk/news-blogs/making-new-life-1960s-britain.

Sivanandan, Ambalavaner. "From Resistance to Rebellion: Asian and Afro-Caribbean Struggles in Britain." Race and
Class 23, nos. 2-3 (October 1981): 111-52.
https://doi-org.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/10.1177%2F030639688102300202.

Smith, K. PEP Report - Section II - Employment. London, England: Political and Economic Planning, 1967.

Sooben, Philip N. "The Origins of the Race Relations Act." The University of Warwick.
https://web.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/CRER_RC/publications/pdfs/Research%20Papers%20in%20Ethnic%20Relations/RP
%20No.12.pdf.

Soskice, Frank. "Race Relations Act 1965 (Amendment) Bill." In Hansard. UK Parliament. Last modified December 16,
1966. Accessed May 2, 2019. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1966/dec/16/race-relations-act-
1965-amendment-bill.

Telegraph Media Group. "Enoch Powell's 'Rivers of Blood' Speech." The Telegraph. Last modified December 12, 2007.
Accessed May 3, 2019. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643826/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html.

UK Parliament. "First Report of the Race Relations Board." www.parliament.uk. Accessed May 18, 2019.
https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/private-lives/relationships/collections1/race-
relations-act-1965/first-report-of-the-race-relations-board-/.

Walston, Henry. "Racial Discrimination Bill Hl." Hansard. Last modified May 14, 1962.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/1962-05-14/debates/2b291509-8ca6-4441-a5e9-e6fc0d1bd7b1/
RacialDiscriminationBillHl?highlight=%22race%20relations%22%20bill#contribution-dd5d62c2-fc95-4130-8bd8-
b9e663a99d4d.

Warwick University. "Race, Ethnicity, and Migration in Modern Britain." Warwick. Last modified September 6, 2019.
Accessed September 12, 2019. https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/history/students/modules/hi2d4/.

Watkins, Alan. "Political Commentag." The Spectator, April 16, 1965, 5.

Yemm, Rachel. "Immigration, Race and Local Media: Smethwick and the 1964 General Election." British Contemporary
History 33, no. 1 (October 22, 2018): 98-122.
https://doi-org.ezproxy2.londonlibrary.co.uk/10.1080/13619462.2018.1535973.