Paul Goodman leads debate on Integration and Cohesion in Britain

Yesterday Paul Goodman held a debate in Westminster Hall on Integration and Cohesion in Britain, focussing on the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims in Britain. As MP for Wycombe Paul Goodman has more Muslim constituents than any other Conservative MP and he has spoken before about the barriers that face Muslims wanting to integrate. Goodman says of the barriers:

They include racism and Islamophobia, lower life chances, intergenerational conflict, the failure of the multiculturalist consensus, foreign policy and, perhaps above all, the impact of ideology. In its most stark form, that ideology is one of terror—hence 9/11 and 7/7. In its less brutal form, it rejects terror in Britain but embraces separation. Separation, of course, inevitably leads to a lack of integration and cohesion and the “parallel lives” of which Cantle [in his 2001 report] warned.

In his speech Paul Goodman asks how we can end the separation that has grown up between Muslims and non-Muslims:

In my view, the origin of such a cure lies in strengthening the unwritten social contract that exists between Muslims and non-Muslims in Britain. Under that contract, non-Muslims are obliged to recognise that Islam is now a permanent presence in Britain, that British Muslims have lower life chances than the non-Muslim majority as a whole, and that those life chances must be raised as part of any programme of social justice. In turn, Muslims are obliged to face up to the fact that Dhiren Barot, Richard Reid and the perpetrators of 7/7 claimed to act in the name of Islam, however unjustified that claim is, and recognise that the separatist ideology that I described earlier must not merely be condemned—it must be actively challenged, confronted and rooted out.

Conservative MPs Mark Field, Patrick Mercer and Michael Gove spoke in the debate, as did Liberal Democrat Andrew Stunell and the Minister, Meg Munn. The full debate can be read here.

Andrew Burkinshaw

Comments

[George Hinton]

Yes, very good and well argued.
However, the UK is a Christian country, we tolerate other religions, as we are not bigots and repressive people. The Muslim faith must therefore, regard itself as on probation and a guest in a foreign country. It must lessen it's more radical and bloodthirsty aspects and learn to accept others. More importantly it must undergo its' own renaissance and reformation, adopting, adapting and assimilating to the 21st Century and to the Western mores of society. Until the Muslim faith is prepared to move forward it will suffer the problems expounded in the article by Paul Goodman.
As Mr Goodman argues, much of the problem regarding the lack of integration is caused by the followers of the Muslim faith adopting a sealed, war-based, inward facing society, at odds with ourselves. A small claque, that insists on flaunting their differences from overall society, will find themselves marginalised and possibly ostracised and regarded as dangerous. As regards 7/7 and 21/7 and 9/11 I have not seen or read or been advised of groups of Christians going around committing suicide as personal bombers. Nor is it apparant, that gangs of English youths and adults roam around the country setting fire to mosques or killing imams and mullahs. This practice has occurred in Pakistan and elsewhere against Christians.
The Muslims do need to move forward, they need to jettison the emotional baggage of the religion, adapting and assimilating to our ways. The chips must be discarded and an effort made to respect this country, its ways, its people, its religion and its freedoms and more importantly its differnces and opportunities.
Failure to do this will maintain the status quo of them and us and may well force a more robust attitude of "if you don't like it then go away".

[Richard]

To be honest I wouldn't have a problem with Muslims keeping themselves to themselves providing a)this isolation didn't foster terrorism and b) they didn't expect changes in the law to be made to accommodate them.

Obviously integration is the preferred
option but it's not something that can be forced without causing antagonism. I suspect it will be something that occurs gradually in the future.

[ToMTom]

To be honest I wouldn't have a problem with Muslims keeping themselves to themselves

You therefore intend to deport Non-Muslims from Bradford, Leeds, Burnley, Oldham, Blackburn, Dewsbury, Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield....etc.......or what ?

[Observer]

Earlier this week, I spoke at a meeting where ignorant Tories jeered at my suggestion that the UK was spinelessly turning a blind eye to the growth of areas of the country governed informally by sharia law

Article

and who were they exactly ?

[Richard]

"You therefore intend to deport Non-Muslims from Bradford, Leeds, Burnley, Oldham, Blackburn, Dewsbury, Leicester, Nottingham, Sheffield....etc.......or what ?"

Eh? Where did I say that?

[Tim Roll-Pickering]

George Hinton: What do you mean by "the UK is a Christian country"? Do you mean crude majoritarianism? And that majority in the census is not as visible on the ground. Or do you mean the established churches? (And they don't even cover the whole of the UK.)

I think you will find a lot of people are more alienated by the sort of talk that reinforces an "us and them" mentality. This country may be formally Christian but it has secular politics and very high numbers of atheists, non Christians and even wee free style Christians. Why should a Muslim be made to feel they are "foreign" when there are many others in this country, including a former Conservative leader (and let us also not forget that the Conservatives and predecessors produced the first non-Christian Prime Minister in the nineteenth century), who do not meet this definition of nationality?

I am reminded of a recent petition on the Downing Street website against the proposed mega mosque here in East London. Whatever the issues for and against it, it is rather disturbing to find the 7th most popular petition on the site (only just behind repealing the Hunting Ban) starts:

"We the Christian population of this great country England..."

So not the problems but a straightforward call for a religious headcount. Indeed well might people use "England" - it helps them forget what the effect of religious headcounting have been in Northern Ireland.

There is a clear need for better Muslim integration. But it needs to be encouraged at both ends. Telling the second or third generation members of a family born in this country that they and their faith is alien is the route to further alienation and the terrible consequences that come with it.

[TomTom]

Richard, you cannot have Muslims "keep themselves to themselves" since in cities like Bradford they predominate in city schools, especially C of E Schools. They have a very high birth rate and represent >50% pupils in city schools.

How do you intend for them to be separate from Non-Muslims ?

[The Real Sporer]

You will never have integration without some degree of subtle persuasion that English culture is superior, otherwise the Muslim immigrants will continue to prefer their at time shockingly primitive world view.

[ToMTom]

I see no reason for it to be "subtle" in our own native land but rather overt and unambiguous...if you cannot be English in England it is hard to see why it would be possible anywhere else

[Rachel Joyce]

I think the problem with this debate is that it all too often focusses on the problems (but not with sufficient academic rigour/ fact) and does not talk about solutions.
I agree we need to do more about Muslim life chances. But that goes 2 ways. IDS's excellent evidence-based look at social exclusion shows that children/ adults of Indian origin do very well indeed at school and in work. Unfortunately muslims have always done worse than Hindus and Sikhs. Until 9/11 and even now, most of the British population will not be able to tell the difference between a muslim of Indian subcontinent origin and a Hindu of Indian subcontinent origin. Therefore racism is very unlikely to be the cause - and "Islamaphobia" was unheard of until recently. Therefore many of the answers will lie in Muslim culture itself, and this is part of the dialogue we need to have with the mainstream & moderate Muslim community. Appeasing extreme Muslims should not even be on the agenda (or any other extreme group).
I was at the debate Melanie Philips (observer) was at. I agree she got a tough ride. What was interesting however is how much the speakers agreed with each other (including Melanie Philips). It was more a matter of emphasis. Melanie I believe got a rough ride from some in the room as she placed most of the emphasis of her talk on extreme muslims, rather than the whole issue of multiculturalism (relevant perhaps to young black gun crime and many other areas). This gave an impression of negativism and fosussing on the extreme rather than the overall policy direction we need to reverse the harmful effects of multiculturalism.

[Hmmmmn]

It's an interesting commentary on this website that posts like this

You will never have integration without some degree of subtle persuasion that English culture is superior, otherwise the Muslim immigrants will continue to prefer their at time shockingly primitive world view.

Posted by: The Real Sporer | April 19, 2007 at 00:31

stay up, while others vanish. Still, good to send out those little dog whistling signals, isn't it?

[TomTom]

Thank you Rachel for clarification

[RodS]

In this debate our status as a freeborn Anglo Saxon/Celtic race with a largely Christian inspired heritage, has been wiped away. We are now simply non-muslims !!And why not. We rolled over and asked for it to happen. Tolerance has become a vice.

[arthur]

quite honestly i'm getting fed up with people pandering to muslims. islamaphobic? no, i have no irrational fear of islam, just a healthy respect for the reality of islam. wherever it appears, trouble appears. i can live with christians, catholics, buddhists, hindus, sikhs, animists, scientologists, athiests, agnostics, even satanists. it's a pity islam cannot... as proved by over 8,000 terror attacks worldwide since 9/11 and the complete inability to accept any form of critism.

[arthur]

ooops... criticism!