DEMOCRACY is a jolly fine thing and it should certainly teach politicians humility in the face of the electorate. Nevertheless, I think Stanley Henig is a good man, of intelligence and courage and I'm deeply sorry he lost his council seat in such circumstances of personal vilification last week.

All of us, but perhaps most of all those who resort to unpleasant individual abuse as part of their political campaigning should pay a great deal of attention to key messages of the recent Stephen Lawrence report by Sir William Macpherson who defines racism as 'conduct, words or practices which disadvantage or advantage people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin' and points out that in its more subtle form it is as damaging as in its overt form'. Macpherson then recommends that the definition of a racist incident should be: 'A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person'.

I was horrified by a leaflet which came through my door last week because I immediately felt that it carried connotations of racism and fascism shamefully reviling a member of a minority community in this city. The phrase in the MBI leaflet 'Remember! A vote for Labour is a vote for Henig' implies revulsion, isolation, scapegoats, humiliates and invites prejudice.

I think we all agree that this has been the experience of Jewish people over the centuries and I am sure we could agree that knowledge and direct or indirect experience of the Holocaust is likely to play a large part in how many Jewish people view themselves and society. Therefore it seems to me that reviling, isolating, scapegoating, humiliating and inviting prejudice is likely to have a far greater resonance for someone who is Jewish, is likely to cause far greater harm and distress and disadvantage to someone whose race has so recently experienced the utter devastation to which discrimination can lead than others who have been more fortunate.

I also take great exception to the peremptory tone of the slogan. The use of 'Remember!' is a piece of propaganda reminiscent of fascist politics. Of course the use of a name is probably only meant to identify the former leader of the council. However identity is a complex matter and personal abuse is an attack upon the whole person. Again, Macpherson is instructive in his views on 'institutional racism' which 'can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness.

Even if the deeply unpleasant words of the MBI are based on nothing more than ignorance it is arguable that in this context in relation to this person they have meaning for that person (and for those who know them well) and for those who may be prejudiced against them which goes way beyond what was intended and brings them into the realms where they perhaps did not mean to go. I think that there are real lessons for all of us in all of this and it was not without a sense of irony that I remarked to Mal Hussein the other night that we should be developing a more sensitive and sophisticated understanding of racism.

This is certainly not sour grapes about the local election. The people have decided and now it's time to move on but it seems to me that an open-minded debate would be useful about the ways we understand and handle racism in all its subtleties and complexity. Perhaps the least we might achieve could be for those tempted to bring personalities into politics to pause to consider the effects and unintended consequences on those personalities they seek to revile and on the few deeply misguided individuals among us who might read such attacks as support for their racist views?

Hilton Dawson MP

House of Commons

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.