Met Police’s own review finds that their racist culture is “inevitable”

On Friday 7 November, the Metropolitan Police published an internal review which found that – you guessed it – the culture of the Met police makes racism “inevitable”.

The report, conducted by Dr Shereen Daniels, was titled ’30 Patterns of Harm’. It used internal documents and evidence to draw the conclusion that the Met’s leadership and culture work actively to prevent reform within the organisation.

Examining the institution

The Met commissioned the report in order to measure the impact of its ‘London Race Action Plan’. That’s the name given to the plan to become what it laughably terms an “anti-racist organisation”. In turn, the Race Action Plan forms part of the wider New Met for London plan for generalised police reform.

Dr Daniels’ new review differs from previous reviews and inquests in that it wasn’t triggered by a single scandal. Instead, it’s part of the regular reviews set out in the Race Action Plan. She explained that:

Systemic racism is not a matter of perception. For almost fifty years, reviews of the Metropolitan Police have documented the harm experienced by Black Londoners, officers and staff. 30 Patterns of Harm turns the lens around. It examines the institution itself, showing how the Met’s systems, leadership, governance and culture produce racial harm while protecting the organisation from reform.

Likewise, Dr Daniels also acknowledged the repeated harms inherent in the process of conducting these reviews over and over again. They make Black people recount their trauma, only to see the the Met hold up its hands, downplay the evidence, make a new action plan, and change nothing that matters.

Accountability begins with specificity

She also explained why the review focuses very specifically on anti-Blackness, rather than wider racism, or any of the Met’s many other baked-in bigotries. Dr Daniels stated that:

The decision not to include extensive personal accounts of racism was an ethical one. Repeatedly mining Black people’s experiences of trauma, knowing those testimonies are often disbelieved or softened for comfort, allows institutions like the Met to appear attentive while doing little of substance.

True accountability begins with specificity. When institutions speak in broad terms of “ethnic minorities” or “diversity,” those most harmed disappear from view. This work begins where harm is sharpest, because that is where structural change must start. Anti-Blackness is the clearest indicator of organisational dysfunction. The same systems that sustain racial harm against Black people also enable other forms of harm. Confronting this is not an act of exclusion but a necessary foundation for safety, fairness and justice for everyone.

However, whilst the report focuses on anti-Blackness, it isn’t ignorant of the influence of other factors. Gender, class, colourism, neurodivergence, migration status, age, disability, religion, accent, and language were all included as structural modifiers that influence the ways in which police perpetrate their anti-Blackness.

Maintaining racial harm

Although the Met commissioned 30 Patterns of Harm, Dr Daniels stated that it was wholly independent. This means that the police force had no influence on the methodology or analysis of the report. Likewise, the Met didn’t have a say in approving its damning findings for publication. Dr Daniels went on:

This was a diagnostic inquiry, designed to identify causation rather than assign blame. The evidence underpinning my analysis came from the Met’s internal materials and its public record, including policies, data, transcripts of public meetings, press statements and responses to high-profile racial incidents, cross-checked with previous public-facing reviews and inquiries. Viewed together, these reveal how the organisation’s systems and culture align to maintain, rather than dismantle, the conditions that cause racial harm.

Unlike previous reviews, 30 Patterns also – and quite deliberately – didn’t give recommendations for reform in the Met. The report’s accompanying document explained that it was written not to be skimmed. Instead, it’s intended to slow down the Met’s thinking before it jumped into ‘action’. It stated that recommendations aren’t neutral, but rather form an institutional pattern in which recommendations act as a substitute for change.

Failures of leadership, failures of understanding

On the topic of police leadership failing to understand the weight of the report’s findings, and acting as a barrier to real change, Met commissioner Mark Rowley neatly demonstrated the report’s findings in action. The commissioner, who has repeatedly refused to acknowledge that the Met is institutionally racist, said of the report:

Our expectation is that leaders will drive this change with their teams and they will be held accountable. When it comes to any individual discrimination, including racism, our commitment is clear: we are continuing to deliver the largest corruption clear-out in British policing history to remove those who do not belong.

Working with Black communities and colleagues whose experiences are reflected in Dr Daniels’ report, we will be applying the same resolve to go after the patterns of discrimination that show up in our operational work, and within the organisation by identifying and addressing their root causes.

To read a 126-page report (and a 52-page explainer) stating that the structure of the Met works to prevent anti-racist progress, and then state “our leaders will drive this change” is another level of bigoted ignorance. Anyone capable of shame would wither away on the spot.

Fortunately for him, Mark Rowley is obviously incapable of shame. After all, he actively worked to become head of an organisation that has had its racism called out again and again for over 55 years. And, they’ve had the audacity to keep terrorising Black people through their never-wavering anti-Blackness.

Featured image via Unsplash/John Cameron