2007 Program

Synopsis of presentation: To create a more cohesive Britain, policy makers and practitioners need to improve the life chances of disadvantaged Black and minority ethnic people. Furthermore, we need to help foster meaningful ‘habits of solidarity’ between different communities

Summary of argument: For the West’s major urban centres, ethnic diversity is the reality, whether through immediate presence or sheer inevitability.

We therefore need to reframe the debate away from simply “stopping immigration” to focus on the practical consequences of changing communities and finding positive solutions to the challenges they present.

We need to move beyond theoretical debates about symbolism, identity politics and ‘Britishness’ and turn our attention to the public policy questions around achieving a genuinely integrated society.

We need a renewed emphasis on bread and butter issues – on the disadvantage, poverty and squeezed public services that drive conflict and dissatisfaction among marginalised communities.

As Britain becomes ever more plural, we also need to make an extra effort to ensure its cohesiveness. Tackling inequality and discrimination, while a crucial component part, is not a magic potion that ensures everyone gets along with everyone else.

To this end, Barrow Cadbury supports voluntary groups that help foster ‘habits of solidarity’ between people of different ethnic, religious and social backgrounds.

“Belonging? Social Integration in Canada.”

Until recently, Canadians have not worried about the social integration of newcomers, and have often been puzzled by the intensity of debates elsewhere. Multicultural policies have enjoyed substantial political consensus, and occasional challengers have found little traction in political debates. But cracks in Canadian equanimity seem to be appearing. Do Canadians have reason to be worried? This talk presents recent evidence, using a variety of measures of social integration. The evidence tells a cautiously optimistic story. All is not perfect, to be sure. Canadians are grappling with many of the challenges facing other countries, and much debate centres on the social integration of the second generation. Nevertheless, there is little evidence of enduring fault lines between the “old” and “new” Canadians. Indeed, the deep divisions still seem to be within the ranks of the “old,” as Quebec francophones and Aboriginal Canadians remain less integrated in the country. In contrast, the social trajectories among immigrant communities seem less troubling. So far, at least, Canada seems to coping with the challenges of postmodernity. The bigger challenges stem from its premodern phase.

Robert Whalley will discuss the security challenge from the UK standpoint. He will assess the threat from international terrorism and the response of the UK since 9/11, covering the intelligence, policy and operational dimensions. The ways in which this threat has presented itself and developed in the intervening period, and the recent involvement of UK citizens, are a prime focus of concern. Strategies in response require the greatest care and have met with varying degrees of success. Robert Whalley will discuss some of the issues which he faced in Government when seeking to develop dialogue with leaders of Muslim communities and will look forward to ways in which dialogue, trust and engagement, as central themes of the Colloquium may be further developed.

Denise Helly will speak of the Canadian context: religious minority rights, and Muslim social experience and political participation. She will describe Canada's very distinctive ways of legally protecting religious minorities (hate crimes legislation, multiculturalism Program, Employment Equity programs, etc.), as well as the factors that impair Canadian Muslims' fair participation in society (cultural, ethnic and religious fragmentation, discriminations, modernist lobbies mobilization…).

In our modern, globalised world the movement of capital across the planet is being paralleled by the movement of people. We live in an era of unprecedented social and cultural diversity. One aspect of this new age of difference is the phenomenon of 'plural cities' - cities where no one group holds the demographic majority. This heralds a new dimension to the challenge of multiple identities. Toronto and Vancouver in Canada, and Birmingham and Leicester in the UK, are fast becoming such cities.

Plural societies cannot create national mythologies or a shared identity based on language, ethnicity, or culture. In the case of Canada, our national project is defined by policy, by the things we have chosen to do together. The policies that shape our collective enterprise sometimes begin as an elite project, but they only work when they are appropriated by citizens as their own. Successful governments both wrap themselves in these collective understandings, and find ways to build upon them. Sir John A. Macdonald's "National Policy" of 1879 was a successful election slogan, one that captures our imagination more than a century later, but its core elements were already well established in the policies necessary to create a country that extended across a continent. The second national policy took over in the middle of the last century, as successive governments created a welfare state. In the last 25 years, a third national policy has begun to emerge, one that attempts to unite Canadians in a collective project that puts our continental country and the institutions of the welfare state in the service of individual citizens. While no politician has yet given us an enduring label for this 21st century national policy, its components (1) facilitate agency; (2) privilege real choice about identity; (3) attempt to stabilize multiple, fluid identities; (4) broaden lateral interest-based affiliations rather than totalizing institutions; (5) unbundle programmes and services managed by centralized bureaucracies. In this emerging collective project, "multicultural" applies to all of us, not to designated minorities. The objective is autonomy with mutual obligation for all citizens without asking the state to choose among their multiple overlapping identities as Muslim, female, working class, or francophone. Where the second national policy assumed that in some respects we are all the same, the third assumes that we are all different. Both assumptions should lead to the conclusion that we're all in it together.

Questions of identity, diversity, and pluralism remain at the heart of the Canadian experience. Managing the right balance between integration, social cohesion, and the cherished vibrancy of migrant cultures and religions of first-, second- and even third-generation Canadians, within the country's continuing bilingual framework, is an ongoing challenge for the makers of Canada's multiculturalism policy.

"Social cohesion" envisages pluralism, diversity. In general terms pluralism means the affirmation and acceptance of diversity. The concept is used in a wide range of issues like religion, science and politics. In politics, it is popularly known as political pluralism. Political pluralism is the affirmation of diversity in the interests and beliefs of the citizenry. It is one of the most important features of modern representative democracy. Political pluralism is an effective form of running and governing a heterogeneous country. It allows the accommodation of the diverse aspirations that emerge from the diverse constituencies. However, for pluralism to function and to be successful in defining the common good, all groups or constituents must agree to a minimal consensus regarding shared values. Mutual respect and tolerance become the most important values to keep political pluralism in place. Migrations facilitated by the modern technological revolution have diluted the character of the nation state and introduced new diversities and particularities in several societies. In Third World countries, years of neglect of various cultural communities, at times their brutal suppression, and the failure of the nation state to project to deliver the goods has made pluralism a major source of tension, conflict and violence. Economic globalization has made its contribution to compounding the problem of pluralism. It has led to both homogenization and marginalization. Diversities cannot and must not be suppressed, ignored or bypassed. To do so would give rise to resistance, conflict and withdrawal from the nation state.

Britain is a democracy in which Parliament, elected by the majority, makes laws applicable to all. Respect for the rule of law is a principle on which our nation stands. There have been number inroads into that sovereignty - which effectively render Parliamentary supremacy as largely symbolic. International treaty obligations by our accession to the Treaty of Rome; membership of the EU is derogation from parliamentary sovereignty in practice. Has Europe usurped that supremacy? The effect of that is that laws by Parliament are now not only subject to scrutiny by the Courts but also by the Courts in Europe. I started off by referring to Britain's pluralist society. Is there another threat to Parliamentary democracy by reason, e.g., of claims by members or groups of certain ethnic minorities? Is this a valid, relevant aspect to consider?

I am an inveterate believer in and unrepentant advocate of multi-culturalism. Jenkins' definition has served us well. Why jettison it merely because a section, a small section of the population, thinks differently? You cannot divorce plurality from multiculturalism. Racial and ethnic groups, national minorities, aboriginals, women, sexual minorities and other groups have organized to highlight injustice and demand recognition and accommodation on the basis of their differences. Need to examine how different theories of citizenship address the challenges raised by different forms of pluralism. Any competing "sources of authority"? What are they? Sources of alienation. Sharia law, not a problem, not something that divides people. UK is a mature democracy which respects fundamental rights. Position in Canada different; it has a written constitution. A Charter of fundamental rights is enshrined in the constitution.

In a liberal democracy, the goal of multiculturalism is to incorporate minority cultural and religious groups into mainstream political and legal processes, while creating a genuine sense of social integration and shared values. A majority of citizens and immigrants in Canada identify closely with the values of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the rule of law as determined by a democratically elected government. A minority seems wedded to religious and cultural traditions of authority which bear little resemblance to these values either in theory or in practice. Using the example of dispute resolution in family law, Marion Boyd argues that a commitment to the notion of transformational accommodation is essential if we are to promote the inclusion of minority communities, while still ensuring that the rights and choices of individual members of those communities are protected.

We have to be clear that we are speaking of multiple backgrounds, multiple languages and multiple allegiances when we speak of Muslim communities in Britain. We need to acknowledge that for many people citizenship means little other than physically living in Britain. We also have to acknowledge that international politics will continue to influence people’s attitudes to loyalty and belonging. The challenge then is how to make people feel that they have an emotional investment in this country. People don’t necessarily feel alienated but they often feel that the wider culture, its laws, arts and media are not part of their world. An understanding of aspects of Islam does not mean that we should instate Sharia law in any form. What is needed is a more systematic involvement by the state to show these communities that they are part of wider civil society and have a role in Britain’s future.

The recognition and accommodation of diversity have played a central role in Canadian political history, and have been reflected in policies and programs emphasizing a multicultural image of Canada. However, recent trends in immigration patterns combined with growing inequality and an evolving balance between security and civil liberties are testing the limits of the status quo. This presentation samples a range of approaches in media, the private sector and civil society – both as a result of mandatory employment equity practices and voluntary initiatives – which are helping to strengthen and incrementally build the pluralist nature of Canadian society.