The toppling of the Edward Colston statue in Bristol was “less significant” than people have suggested and will have little bearing on the fight against inequality, the city’s directly elected mayor has said

       Marvin Rees suggested that pulling down the slaver’s much-reviled monument equated to “performance activism”.

       He spoke out after four white protestors were found not guilty of criminal damage for their roles in yanking the statue off its plinth and dumping it in the city’s harbour during anti-racism protests in June 2020.

       Jake Skuse, Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford and Sage Willoughby were all acquitted by a jury on Wednesday.

       “What are we talking about today [as a result of that verdict]?” said Rees. “We’re not talking about structural racism. We're talking about what happened to four people. Now, I'm not against them. Hopefully they will have a good life. But…the fate of those four individuals has very little bearing on the real job I've got of supporting the city's prosperity and making sure that we're much more inclusive and equal.”

       Recommended Government accused of ‘subverting rule of law’ in Colston statue case Toppling Colston statue ‘like trying to edit Wikipedia entry’, says Boris Johnson Rees-Mogg defends jury system as Tory MPs raise concerns following Colston trial

       Speaking to The Independent, the 49-year-old Bristolian defended himself and the council he leads against ongoing criticism for not taking the monument down sooner. To have done so, he said, would have eaten away at both his time and ability to act on more pressing issues.

       “If I, as a black mayor in a racially fractured context, make my priority taking down a statue, then what happens to my politics for the next five years?” he asked. “All I do is talk about black politics, right? All my political capital to take action on housing, employment, transport, all those policy areas that actually make a substantive difference to people’s live – it disappears. Because all I do is talk about the statute controversy. That's all you know me for. You wouldn't know me for affordable housing, for climate change, for migration, none of that.”

       Asked if he found it frustrating that such an argument wasn’t accepted by protestors, he said: “I don’t, because we see it all the time, you know? I've referred to in the past as performance activism.”

       He added: “No one is saying the statue should have stayed there. It is an affront to people like me and my family who may well have been owned by Colston, I come from Jamaicans. I'm not arguing for the presence of the statute but I am saying, in a world of finite resources and time, [you have to] prioritise what you do to tackle racism.”

       He declined to be drawn on whether four black protestors would have been cleared of criminal damage in the same circumstances. “All I’ll say is I'm not confident they would have had the same experience,” he said.

       But asked if Bristol was a more divided city as a result of yesterday’s verdict, Rees was emphatic.

       “Listen, I grew up in a city in the 80s where I had people chasing me down street calling me n*****, trying to put me in hospital, beat me up,” he said. “If people are saying it’s more divided now than it ever has been – I mean, what world are they in?”