Commission
for Racial Equality
RACE
CONVENTION 2006 – A Catalyst For Change
“Sleepwalking to Segregation”
or
“Strength
through Diversity”?
On the 29th and 30th
November, the Commission for Racial Equality held its
2006 Race Convention to
mark the CRE’s 30th anniversary, to review the position today, and
to look forwards. I attended, together with Roger King and Samidha Garg, for
the Union.
Before
the convention opened it hit the news as London Mayor Livingstone publicly
refused to attend, urged others not to do so and endorsed a letter written by
his Equalities Advisor, Lee Jasper, to all the speakers at the event asking
them to “boycott”.
Livingstone’s
adviser accused the CRE of fuelling “general hostility” towards black and
ethnic minority people by “attacking the principle of multiculturalism”.
Livingstone had recently also accused Trevor Phillips of “being so right-wing
he is likely soon to be joining the BNP”
This
row has its origins in the argument concerning “diversity” and “integration”.
One perspective on positive community relations– with which Livingstone
identifies - encourages a model in which very diverse cultures are specifically
maintained and protected through a range of social policies, the task being to
educate different communities about the others and to encourage mutual
“tolerance” and respect. Trevor Phillips has famously and increasingly
identified such an approach to multi-culturalism as “sleep-walking to
segregation”, and has encouraged social policy which leads to integration into
a new and changing culture which adapts and encompasses aspects of all cultures
– as they relate to the demands and life style of 21st century
Britain. This “integrationist” approach is what Livingstone identifies as
“right-wing”.
Clearly
this diversity of view has direct relevance for the Union in terms of our
Equalities policies – and, in my view, for our own Equalities structures. It is
most immediately relevant to our debates concerning Faith Schools – or, as we
should correctly define them Religious Schools. A general report of the
Convention is available on the CRE website. Here, I want to focus on the
question of “Faith" or Religious schools.
I
raised the question of Religious Schools in both plenary sessions and in a
workshop “break out” session – and I was not alone in this. In fact, the
question emerged so frequently that one or two delegates complained that the
Convention was becoming obsessed with the issue.
Ruth Kelly maintained, without
explanation – apparently as statement of faith in itself! – that “Faith Schools
are agencies of cohesion”. She suggested they might “twin” with schools of
“other faiths”. It did not appear that she gave much thought to the schools outside
of the religious sector, which may not wish to “twin” on the basis of religion
of any sort. In a further plenary session, on “Race & Faith in today’s
Britain”, when challenged directly by the Chair, Jon Snow, about “Faith
Schools”, two religious leaders gave quite frank answers. He challenged them
because of what he referred to as previous “equivocal” answers on the rationale
of “Faith Schools”, and relations between religions.
Rt Rev Dr Thomas Butler, Bishop of
Southwark & Chair of the “Inter-Faith Network”
“…if you believe that it is good
for a person’s eternal soul, then you must try to persuade them – therefore we
want everyone to convert”
Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra, Chair of the
Muslim Council of Britain’s Inter-Faith Relations Committee (NB not the
Inter-Faith Network)
“Islam is a proselytising faith. I
believe that Islam is the way chosen by God for humanity. Mohammed is his final
messenger”
A questioner from the floor asked
why the religious leaders ignored the views of those with no faith, and the
view of the majority of people against “Faith Schools”. The responses referred
to the positive ethos of faith schools, codes of morality etc.
Another questioner asked the
speakers to consider a further extension of their view, and to give their
thoughts on faith hospitals. The question was heavy with irony, which
unfortunately was missed by those replying who pointed out that the catholic
Church already had a hand in the provision of hospitals and that the Hospice
movement had its origins in Christian organisations. Anil Bhanot, General
Secretary of the Hindu Council UK said
that the development of Faith Hospitals was an idea which needed further
consideration.
These ideas were further debated
in a workshop “break –out” group which was opened with a debate between Ted
Cantle, Associate director of the Improvement and Development Agency – and
respected author of the reports into the year 2000 ‘disturbances’ in the north
of England , and Ludi Simpson, reader in Social Statistics Manchester
University. .Cantle argued that further geographical, social
and cultural segregation is dangerous and damaging to social cohesion
generally. Simpson argued that such “diversity” is a natural and positive
phenomenon in an advanced society.
I believe that the Union need to
explore all these issues very thoroughly, and without the invective illustrated
by Mayor Livingston’s team. The work of the “Faith Schools” Working Party and
the Equality Audit Working Party are important in this regard.
I have included below part of CRE
Chairperson Trevor Phillips’ opening speech that I think is relevant to the
issues raised here.
“The
CRE has, over the past two years drawn repeated attention to the risk of
increased polarisation and segregation in our society. We have not done this
for the sake of it, but because we truly believe that this is the great threat
to a truly diverse, multiethnic society.
As
a nation we are becoming more ethnically segregated by residence; and
inequality is being amplified by our separate lives. Let me repeat that: this
is not just about being nice to each other - separation increases inequality.
It is true that some areas are more integrated, but only in the sense that if I
join an all-white tennis club it is more integrated.
The
real crisis lies in the areas which the middle-class minorities are leaving
behind; areas which are becoming more and more ethnically concentrated and
exclusive. The public education system - which should be teaching our children
to live together - appears to be doing the very opposite. For example, of the
Russell Group universities, 9 last year could not count more than 30 African
Caribbean students in their ranks.
We
know that there is a mix of reasons why segregation takes place, and this is
not the choice or fault of ethnic minority communities. There are social,
cultural and historical reasons. And there is the need for protection. For Jews
who came a hundred years ago, Asians who came forty years ago and even the
Eastern Europeans arriving now, all of whom may be subject to abuse and violent
assault by a minority of their neighbours, there is safety in numbers.
But
whatever the reasons we are seeing the emergence of separate and isolated
communities.
MORI
asked people if they had met anyone of a different ethnicity to themselves in
the past year, and if so where.
The
most common encounter, cited by 62% is in a shop; and I think we can guess
what's going on there. Far fewer - 49% - work with people of a different
ethnicity - which means that a majority of people work in all-white, all-Asian
or all-Black workplaces.
But
most disappointing is that though there is clearly the opportunity to make
meaningful relationships across the lines of race and religion 70% of us, more
than two out of three hardly ever choose to meet someone of a different
ethnicity in our own homes.
Even
amongst ethnic minority communities there are some substantial differences.
Four fifths of black people mix monthly with someone from a different race in a
home environment; but only 58% of Asians and 27% of whites can say the same
thing.
Not
only do we live and work separately; we play separately.
About
half of black Britons mix with people of different races through hobbies and
sports, a low enough number given that most black people live in mixed areas;
but just a third of Asians spend their leisure time with non-Asians, and only
30% of whites mix during sports or hobbies.
This
isn't just, let me emphasise, a social or cultural issue. Studies for the DCLG
found that higher segregation is associated with lower employment, lower
earnings, lower education participation and higher levels of deprivation.
And
if we are to confront the threat from the far right it is here that we will win
or lose. Our latest findings show clearly that the secret of good relations
between different races is face to face contact. But it's not just meeting that
matters - it's the quality of interaction that counts.
Our
survey shows that people who mix socially are simply more racially tolerant.
People
were asked if they agreed that we should do more to learn about the systems and
cultures of different ethnic groups. There was a clear difference of view
between those who mix socially and those who don't. Amongst those who mix
socially away from school or college 71% said yes, we should learn more about
each other. Amongst those who don't mix socially that figure was just 58%.
That
is why we support and fund efforts to bring people together across the lines of
race and religion, such as our successful summer camp pilot for young people
this year, the or Young Brits at Art competition, the results of which you can
see on the walls here.
But
we are trying to achieve this against a background of extraordinarily rapid and
unsettling change, not just in the social and economic environment but in the
very composition of the British people.
For
the first time, more than half of all ethnic minority Britons are British-born.
But even more significant is the astonishing rise in the numbers of mixed race
Britons. In 2001 they numbered 674,000. New projections based on the census
suggest that this number will grow to 950,000 in 2010, and 1.24m in 2020. By
the end of that decade they are almost certain to overtake those of Indian
origin to become the single largest minority group in the country.
I
welcome this, but as with all the changes we face it is not an uncomplicated
prospect. The mixed race Britons are young, and they show the highest
employment rates of any minority group.
But
they also exhibit the highest rates of lone parenthood and family breakdown, in
some cases three times the average. They suffer the highest rates of drug
treatment. We don't yet know why this should be so, though many people talk now
of identity stripping - children who grow up marooned between communities.
In talking about change I could equally have cited the rising levels of failure
amongst white young men in education and employment; or the task of integrating
the new workers from Eastern Europe, as new issues for us to discuss this week
and to tackle in the months and years ahead.”
Report
by Bill Greenshields, Junior Vice-President