Author: Editorial
Publication: The Times, UK
Date: May 13, 2002
Introduction: Hain should not withdraw
his remarks about Muslims
When James Callaghan was home Secretary
he told the Cabinet that Peter Hain's campaign for recial equality was
so extreme it might lay him open to prosecution for conspiracy. Thirty-two-years
later Mr Hain is a Labour Minister and has laid himself open to an entirely
different attack. He is being asked by leading members of the Muslim community
to withdraw remarks about Muslim immigrants who, he said, "can be very
isolationist in their own behavior and their own customs". He should not
bow to the clamour for contrition.
Their are many good reason why senior
politicians should be very careful in what they say about ethnic minorities
and their beliefs. It would be extremely arrogant of western democrats
to believe that they have nothing to learn from traditional religions and
that very new social customs and ideas are unquestionably superior to the
wisdom of centuries. It would also be wholly unacceptable for the price
of seeking refugee or fortune in this country to be the total abandonment
of identity and community. Equally, it is important to ensure that minority
groups do not feel beleaguered that they retreat further into themselves.
Providing that these dangers are
kept in mind, however, mainstream politicians talk publicly about immigration
policy and avoid disagreeing with the view or attitudes of any members
of an ethnic minority Peter Hain's history as a fearless campaigner against
apartheid and a founder member of the Anti-Nazi League makes him a particulate
issues, as it is not credible to suggest that he is animated by prejudice.
Britain is enriched economically
and culturally by immigration. Immigrants accepted into this country should
be welcomed and treated with the greatest respect. Ten indigenous populations
must do all it can to reduce racial prejudice and to help those who come
here to settle and play their full part in British life. Sadly this has
not always been the case and members of ethnic groups have often faced
discrimination and rejection. Efforts to overcome this remain vital and
should not automatically be dismissed as "political correctness gone mad".
At the same time, those who chose
to come here and accept the rights of citizenship take upon themselves
the responsibility to help to support and maintain the basic British values
and institution that make this as attractive place to reside. Most immigrants
to Britain, Muslims included, have made a success of integration-learning
English, brining up children confident in their British identity, succeeding
in the professions and commerce, making a mark in public life. Yet there
remains a minority who seem intent only on preserving their difference
rather than trying constructively to build upon them. It is this small
grouping to which Mr Hain refers.
The Cantle report into last summer's
riots in Oldham. Burnely and Bradford expressed concern that different
ethnic groups in those places were living separate and parallel lives which
did not touch each other in any way. Part of the reason for this is, without
doubt, prejudice against immigrants but part is the fault of local Muslim
leadership, which retains power by keeping Muslims separate and cut off
from the mainstream. This helps to breed resentment and extremism. It also
impoverishes members of the Muslim community economically, politically
and socially.
Muslim hold strong beliefs and like
any citizens have the right for these to be shown understanding and tolerance.
British Muslims should not, however, be over-sensitive when a minister
argues that some need to integrate their way of life further with the country
in which they have chosen to live.
