Warsi makes first big speech on community cohesion

Sayeeda Warsi has spoken to a Guardian conference on race equality this morning.  It's a good speech and this is a particularly encouraging section:

"A key question is to what degree political parties should engage with people and organisations who have extremist or separatist views.  My view is clear.  Of course we should be willing to engage with individuals and groups who don't share our philosophy – including disillusioned and alienated young men who are vulnerable to Al Qaeda. But engagement doesn't mean partnership. This Government clearly believes in partnership with national organisations that claim to represent communities. This is wrong – firstly because it’s patronising to suggest that diverse communities can be represented by single homogenous groups. It suggests that individuals – particularly women – within those communities aren’t capable of representing themselves. And this approach is wrong because some such groups often hold ambiguous views on cohesion and integration. And as a responsible government, engagement must involve what diplomats call ‘a robust exchange of views’, in which the Government asserts without apology or concession, that the attitudes of certain groups are hindering a cohesive Britain.  The next Conservative Government will take instead a fresh, new and more localist approach – listening to individual voices and ideas, particularly from women and young people, and devolving power through local government to the grassroots."

That is critical.  We should be open to dialogue with nearly all groups within Britain but extremist groups - often highly unrepresentative - should not have a special place in government consultation mechanisms and should not receive public funding.

Listed below are other key highlights from her speech.  Download a PDF of Sayeeda Warsi's full remarks.

On her mission to free Gillian Gibbons: "I hope that as Muslims and as Parliamentarians in a democracy, we helped represent to the Sudanese government and people a very simple and very important principle.  That you can be a Muslim and believe in democracy and the rule of law. We wanted, in a small way, to show the people of Sudan that Muslim politicians can have different values to those responsible, for instance, for what is happening in Darfur."  This is the one disappointment of the speech.  There could, and should, have been much stronger criticism of the Khartoum regime.

Islam and democracy: "None of the world’s religions – not Judaism or Christianity or Islam, not Hinduism or Sikhism or Confucianism – none of the world’s religions are incompatible with democracy, unless they choose to make themselves so.  A religion can make itself incompatible with democracy in two ways – either by demanding the exclusion of other cultures from the public space, or by voluntarily excluding itself from the public space."

We must be proud of Britain's religious diversity: "It distresses me when I see a minority of people who claim to represent my own faith, Islam, arguing that Britain should be an Islamic state, either wholly or partly, or those who support opting-out of British law rather than demanding equal treatment under the law. When Nazir Ahmed and I went to Sudan last week we were proud to do so as members of a House of Parliament which has bishops and the Chief Rabbi as fellow members. We do not want to belong to a political system which only gives room to one faith – even if that faith is our own."

Some cultural practices are wrongly being given religious meaning: "There are people in Saudi Arabia who say women driving cars is unIslamic. In Somalia some say Muslim girls should be circumcised. That’s not the Islam I know.  But there are ideas we get here in Britain which are just as wrong.  Take forced marriages. Islam is unambiguous in its condemnation of forced marriage – it’s not a religious requirement, it’s a cultural outrage and Muslims reject it. Or take honour killings, I even find this label offensive because there is nothing honourable about these murders and perpetrators of such crimes should not be allowed to hide behind any faith."

The veil issue: "If a woman wants to wear the face veil in her private life she should be free to do so. But she should be free to do so, as she is free to wear any other dress she feels appropriate. No one has a right to insist that she should wear the veil in her private life – just as no-one has a right to insist she should not.  And of course schools must be allowed to set their own rules on dress. And of course security or health and safety can mean it’s necessary to ask a woman to remove a face veil, provided it’s done sensitively – for example by a woman in a private space. And we shouldn’t be scared to say this."

A way forward for community relations: "First, cohesion must be local: problems and solutions are found in local circumstances, as much as in far-away national and international events.  Second, cohesion requires understanding: because what is perfectly innocent in one context – a teddy bear in a classroom, for instance – can cause offence in another. There can be no special pleading for different groups, and of course tolerance means learning to live with people and opinions you don’t like – but for tolerance to work, there must be real sensitivity to how different groups see the world, and to how we use language.  And third, cohesion requires responsibility, and discernment: because there will always be hardliners or one sort or another, the sort of people for whom compromise and empathy and understanding are signs of weakness not signs of strength."

Brown is wrong on multiculturalism: "Multiculturalism has been manipulated to entrench the right to difference, a divisive concept, at the expense of the right to equal treatment despite difference, a unifying concept.  And the fact that cohesion is local, means Labour get it wrong when they go in the other direction too. After years of promoting top-down multiculturalism, Gordon Brown is now promoting top-down unity.  Of course, localism has to be in the context of a national consciousness – and that’s why I want us to reverse the failed state multicultural approach and ensure there is sufficient English language teaching for new arrivals, and proper teaching of English history for our children so that they have a deep understanding of our great institutions and how they came to be as they are."

Comments

[George Hinton]

Good points made, so must presume that these are not the words or scribblings of Warsi herself, but a speech written by "Head Office" to ensure that the right message gets disseminated.

Which begs the question, why bother with the messenger.

[abc]

"Which begs the question, why bother with the messenger."

because she is capable of winning people over, unlike the wingnuts you get posting here

[James Burdett]

It is disappointing that the first comment resorts to bashing Sayeeda Warsi. Too many people have made up their minds about her and refuse to deviate from that prejudged opinion. I have yet to hear anything that she has said that is at all problematic, well unless you read it through the prism of the media who have a curious knack of deciding for her what she intended to mean.

[Teck]

Why does George Hinton presume that those "are not the words or scribblings of Warsi herself, but a speech written by 'Head Office' to ensure that the right message gets disseminated"?

What evidence does he have to indicate that?

[Editor]

Perhaps we should move off George Hinton's unsubstantiated remark and focus on what Baroness Warsi actually said!?

[Machiavelli's Understudy]

"I hope that as Muslims and as Parliamentarians in a democracy..."

Slightly stretching her 'credibility' there, Sayeeda, isn't she? Or hasn't anybody told her yet that she's an unelected peer?

[Bradford Lad]

I have read Baroness Warsi's speech and although she makes some good points I feel she appears not to recognise some fundamentals. For example she says:
She is "pleased that the Conservative Party is working hard to engage with minority communities".
Why no comment on the even more important need to engage with the majority community at the same time. Without doubt the Conservative Party is failing on this latter point, especially on these community issues.
Further, does Baroness Warsi appreciate the vast changes to our towns which excessively high levels of immigration have caused and the problems which have resulted, with none of the three main parties being willing to articulate these? Branding people in the host population who have taken their votes elsewhere as 'extremists' will solve no problems. These people are not extremists, they are worried and even scared at what is happening.
I would like Baroness Warsi include this perspective in her comments.
There is so much humbug in the politics of race relations and immigration that the only people whom the politicians are likely to listen to are those from ethnic minorities, who cannot be called 'racist' so easily.

[James Burdett]

Machiavelli's Understudy - The House of Lords was still a House of Parliament the last time I looked so she is a Parliamentarian. Heeding the Editor's advice this is a very substantial speech which identifies the issues and even goes as far as to suggest that you will not eradicate extremism in total but that you can make it a marginal concern that is less credible within the communities they feed off of. I think also she is 100% right about religions and compatibility with democracy. I look forward to hearing some fleshed out solutions to the issues she has raised.

[Adam]

"But there are ideas we get here in Britain which are just as wrong. Take forced marriages. Islam is unambiguous in its condemnation of forced marriage – it’s not a religious requirement, it’s a cultural outrage and Muslims reject it."

This is primarily a problem for the Pakistani muslims and indian Sikhs as well as some african cultures - its not specifice to one religion and implying it is shows a lack of understanding of the issue.

[activist]

Sayeeda is a Parliamentarian. She's a working peer and sits in the Lords as a member of the Shadow Cabinet. Of course all the most important offices are for the Commons, but both parties have junior frontbenchers in the Upper House. We do have a bicameral Parliament.

Her speech sounds encouraging.

[Teck]

Bradford Lad, one of the difficulties faced by earnest politicians of whatever racial or religious background is the balance they have to tread in order to gain support from where they emanate to where they are looking towards. In some cases that may constitute dishonesty of conscience, but it seems to be the necessity.

If you are actually from Bradford, you will have heard how decent Asian folks who seek mainstream acceptance are castigated as coconuts.

It is difficult to win, and win all the time.

[Looking Up]

It was not centrally office written because I saw her drafting parts of it last night at a dinner she hosted for East Ham Conservatives and what an absolute delight she was to see and hear. They scored a coup in getting her last night

[601]

Clearly some posters here have made their minds up about Warsi, nothing she says will be enough. What a shame.

[David Sergeant]

"But engagement doesn't mean partnership. This Government clearly believes in partnership with national organisations that claim to represent communities. This is wrong"

This is an application of Conservatism.

However, I would make the point that by suggesting the "national representatives" are not wholly the abitrators of what is required for community relations Sayeeda and the Conservative party can expect BBC programmes attacking them with plenty of air space for "national representatives".

I suspect that some of the childish nonsense attacking Sayeeda is written by such people. They want to keep their jobs.

[Blueboy]

Oh! I was so enojying Sayeeda's comments, until the end....the teaching of 'English' history, is perhaps a freudian slip...we need to promote and encourage Britishness, which is much more compatable with our ethnic minorities as it does not have a racial core....Britain symbolises the coming together of different groups and people into one diverse nation greatly benefiting from each other...So please, let us teach proper 'British' history, and a better understanding of the multiethnic dimension within our nation

[Ash Faulkner]

A very good speech. I do sense that Warsi is something of a populist, which does annoy me sometimes, but she made very good points here. She's also a credit to our party with regards to her involvement in the teddy bear case.

[Richard Carey]

A very good speech. I do sense that Warsi is something of a populist, which does annoy me sometimes

Populist? I've never really understood this line of criticism against anyone, really. Happening to be where the majority of the people are cannot always be a bad thing in a representative democracy, surely?!

[Patsy Sergeant]

No actually 'Blueboy' we NEED English history, ON WHICH TO BASE British multi-ethnic history. The fact that there has been a proposal for a History Museum, reported in either yesterday's or today's newspapers, - an English History Museum, which would seem to show that the need for an English History Museum - as they have a German History Museum, apparently, in Berlin.

[Patrick Ratnaraja]

"pleased that the Conservative Party is working hard to engage with minority communities".

I strongly disagree with this. I am conservative and a Tamil. The Conservative has completely ignored my community. I have written to so many MPs and part officials only to be ignored.

How can you say that the party is working hard to engage with all communities.

I do understand that the party is working really hard to engage with the Muslim community and certainly not with all communities.

[Teck Khong]

It is churlish and uncharitable not be proud of Baroness Warsi, but hopefully that's the nature of politics rather than a character judgement of Sayeeda. And this discussion thread is more positive than previous ones on Sayeeda's performance.

Congratulations on your speech on social cohesion and thank you for your help in Gillian Gibbons' ordeal, Sayeeda!

[Tooting Conservative]

This IS a very good speech - indeeed demonstrating why Sayeeda Warsi is in the Shadow Cabinet. Her points about the self appointed community leaders for instance are evidently true, need to be said and because they are being said by a Muslim woman will be read by a much wider audience than from AN Other.

I suspect that over time Sayeeda will become very popular within the party. The Sayeeda bashing that goes on is unedifying and will make all good Tories (along with her plainly sensible views as demonstrated in this speech) rally round her.

[Teck Khong]

Typo ommission in last posting "...helping end Gillian Gibbons' ordeal"

[Teck Khong]

omission! (sorry for mistakes; must go to bed after being on overnight police duties yesterday!)

[Annabel Herriott]

I know Sayeeda, Mr. Hinton, and I do assure you that she is more than capable of writing her OWN speech. A successful lawyer specialising in the criminal side of law, setting up her own practice - whats the matter with you? - Jealous?

[John Moss]

This is an excellent speech because it is tactically astute as well as politically astute.

Imagine the hand-wringing of the liberal-left if a WASP Tory MP or Lord had made these comments? The R word would have been alluded to if not actually said and we would be back in another bout of Tories against the minorities.

I also know Sayeeda having worked with her on the Cities TaskForce and she is absolutely dead set against those who want to promologate intolerance behind the veil - pardon the pun - of their faith.

Those who support the extremist interpretation of their faith are homophobic, racist, sexist and barbaric to animals. We should have the courage to say so and Sayeeda deserves credit for setting an example.

[Rod Sellers]

I read the speech - all Motherhood and Apple Pie and a touch of anti- americanism thrown in. The issue is simply 'When in Rome - fit in' As a pushy young employee I always remember being told by my boss "You will fit in with our methods young man - we will not fit in with yours !" It is a Muslim problem - no other incoming culture demands as much accomodation.

[Sally Roberts]

I congratulate Sayeeda on a well thought out and brave speech and yes, Annabel I agree with you although I don't know Sayeeda - I am quite sure she wrote it herself!

[toyboy]

A very thoughtful and sensible speech. An asset to the party.

[greg]

Richard - 20:54. There is a difference between "Populist" and "Popular". There is nothing about Populism that says it has to appeal to a majority of the country, however much its applicants may try to claim that status.

[James Maskell]

It is a very Cameroon-esque speech. All very fluffy and Im sure Central Office would have been heavily involved given the audience. It seems to me that the speech is supposed to balance the two sides here and in some parts it does give a confused message, for example "tolerance means learning to live with people and opinions you don’t like – but for tolerance to work, there must be real sensitivity to how different groups see the world, and to how we use language".