Does anyone have faith that the Met will change?

Twenty three years have passed since the MacPherson inquiry published its findings, and the two words which undoubtedly had the most impact, were “institutionally racist”, a description which was applied to the Metropolitan Police. There are some who suggest that some limited progress has been made since the findings were made public, but others convincingly point out that there is still a long way to go. I feel that it is an oversimplification to focus in on “institutional” racism, as such a phenomenon cannot exist in a vacuum, and takes its oxygen from the wider value system of society itself. We are all implicated, some remotely, others with more immediacy, as our institutions all depend on our support, whether active or passive. So if real, lasting change is to be achieved this must be at the level of society itself. A narrowly focused finger-pointing exercise at the expense of just a single institution, whether it be the Met, or something else, just won’t do it. That is exactly why we find ourselves where we are today, still pretending that we are addressing the core problem, rather than recognizing that what we are actually dealing with is merely a symptom of a much deeper malaise.

I would say there’s more chance of digging a hole in the Thames than the Met changing.
Coming from south London I saw too much of their shinanigans with my own family and others around me.
And it’s only got worse and worse.

NanaDana

Twenty three years have passed since the MacPherson inquiry published its findings, and the two words which undoubtedly had the most impact, were “institutionally racist”, a description which was applied to the Metropolitan Police. There are some who suggest that some limited progress has been made since the findings were made public, but others convincingly point out that there is still a long way to go. I feel that it is an oversimplification to focus in on “institutional” racism, as such a phenomenon cannot exist in a vacuum, and takes its oxygen from the wider value system of society itself. We are all implicated, some remotely, others with more immediacy, as our institutions all depend on our support, whether active or passive. So if real, lasting change is to be achieved this must be at the level of society itself. A narrowly focused finger-pointing exercise at the expense of just a single institution, whether it be the Met, or something else, just won’t do it. That is exactly why we find ourselves where we are today, still pretending that we are addressing the core problem, rather than recognizing that what we are actually dealing with is merely a symptom of a much deeper malaise.

Good post

Racism may be less now in the Met but what about corruption,
Sexism and all round horribleness?

What ever makes you think racism is less Oreo

At one time there was talk about bringing in a new Commissioner who wasn't from the UK, say from the US or Australia, or even someone not from a police background.

This could be worth revisiting - you don't need someone who gets the 'culture' of an organisation, and in the case of The Met that might be a good thing.

The met should be split up. It could be managed better if under two chief constables each responsible for their smaller force.
Racism and misogyny are
easier to hide in large organisations. The met is not working in its present state and I don't think much will change .

It's even longer since the Scarman report into the riots - 1981 to be precise. Here's a summary (taken from Wikipedia because I was unable to download the actual report)

cording to the Scarman report, the riots were a spontaneous outburst of built-up resentment sparked by particular incidents. Lord Scarman stated that "complex political, social and economic factors" created a "disposition towards violent protest". The Scarman report highlighted problems of racial disadvantage and inner city decline, warning that "urgent action" was needed to prevent racial disadvantage becoming an "endemic, ineradicable disease threatening the very survival of our society".[1]

Scarman found unquestionable evidence of the disproportionate and indiscriminate use of 'stop and search' powers by the police against black people.[7][better source needed] The report details the use of arbitrary roadblocks, the stopping and searching of pedestrians and mass detention (943 stops, 118 arrests and 75 charges). Operation Swamp 81 was conducted by the police without any consultation with the community or the home-beat officers.[8] Liaison arrangements between police, community and local authority had collapsed before the riots and according to the Scarman report, the local community mistrusted the police and their methods of policing. Scarman recommended changes in training and law enforcement, and the recruitment of more ethnic minorities into the police force. According to the report "institutional racism" did not exist, but positive discrimination to tackle racial disadvantage was "a price worth paying".

And then there was the Stephen Lawrence report (1993 murder)

There is no chance whatever of a perfect “Met” because there will always be a minority who will be judged as out of control, or negligent, they are human. Dealing with out of control criminals who deliberately provoke them and a general public that are mostly hostile must be awful.

Why would anyone want the job.

AGAA4

The met should be split up. It could be managed better if under two chief constables each responsible for their smaller force.
Racism and misogyny are
easier to hide in large organisations. The met is not working in its present state and I don't think much will change .

That sounds like a better solution AGAA4 smaller forces will be easier to manage and as you say not so easy to hide the wrongdoers. It is a cause for concern that other officers whilst not participating appear to condone racism, misogyny, , homophobia etc.

Over a long time maybe.

Faith? Not a lot. The job can certainly attract the wrong type of people. It hasn't helped that police numbers were cut down drastically - then was recruitment, training and supervision up to scratch - I doubt it.

Faith that it will change? No.
Too many men supporting too many men!

I think the situation is so serious now that they will HAVE to do something - though whether it will be successful or not I am not so sure. Vetting potential applicants needs to be much more rigorous - and it is crazy that when serious allegations are made the police themselves do the investigations.

When I worked in a provincial solicitors in West Sussex, my boss always said that there were a disproportionate number of allegations of domestic abuse from women who were married to policemen. So it seems this sort of criminality has always been a feature of the police force - and perhaps the nature of the job appeals to men who like to throw their weight around. That is why proper vetting and independent scrutiny is essential.