On Jason Arday

Lewis Iwu, Purpose Union Founding Partner, writes about the late Jason Arday and the state we are in.

The death of Jason Arday is awful. Just awful.

Over the past few days I’ve spoken with friends from the black community. Most accept that Jason Arday made some mistakes. Almost all recognise that the reporting around him was wildly disproportionate, especially when you consider how there was comparatively little coverage of serious allegations against Oxbridge academics recently.

I was also struck by one commentator who insisted this tragedy should not be politicised. I understand where that sentiment is coming from; however, as I highlighted on social media, race and the wider argument over diversity and inclusion is a core part of this series of events. This terrible outcome is very political.

As it stands, a battle is underway to frame the narrative emerging from this death. Several commentators are claiming that Jason was a victim of DEI. This is wrong. Instead, the right questions that should emerge from this tragedy are: how do we build a culture of care at our institutions? How do we introduce proportionality into how these stories are covered and acknowledge that there are people and their families involved? Three observations about where we are.

First, this series of events was not DEI's fault. Blaming this approach for an individual's or an institution's mistakes is like arguing for the abolition of secondary education because of a single case of malpractice in a few schools. Some voices will use edge cases to represent the whole, and progressives need to remind the public effectively and consistently that the vast majority of this work is good for the economy and is common sense.

Second, we sorely lack spaces for honest, good-faith debate, and it shows. The public discourse on this issue has been abysmal. Social media is awash with accounts outbidding each other to have the most offensive take. In fact, the venom now attached to debates in our digital sphere is so strong that many people with important perspectives completely avoid it. Workplaces are often too afraid to curate these discussions in a structured way.

Something has gone badly wrong with our capacity for sensible debate paired with empathy. I've made this point for over a decade, but I truly think it is one of the most pressing challenges in our country.

Third, institutions must be braver. There is a real and growing risk that whenever a woman, a disabled person, a person of colour or someone else from a marginalised group is appointed to a senior or public role, detractors will lazily and maliciously label them a “DEI hire”. That narrative can’t be challenged with silence. Organisations must move from being on the defensive to aggressively making the best possible case for inclusion and protecting the people who may face attacks just for earning a seat at the table.

The question is: can this terrible set of circumstances become an inflexion point? We really need it to be.