Despite the angst, diversity is basically working in Britain

December 14, 2012 1:17 pm

Today, Ed Miliband called for a comprehensive integration strategy. Let me write it for him:

“Each local authority must demonstrate that it is helping local citizens access opportunities for work, education, social support and life. Alongside this, local authorities should demonstrate that they are working in partnership to combat hatred and antagonism where it exists.”

That’s it. And this is the problem with the whole area. The reality is that it is a patchwork of local challenges rather than a singular national challenge. It worries me when national politicians say things like:

“There is another idea we should also reject: the belief that people can simply live side by side in their own communities, respecting each other but living separate lives, protected from hatreds but never building a common bond – never learning to appreciate one another.”

This language has become part of Labour’s discourse over the last couple of years but actually it is troubling. It is perfectly respectable to get on with your life while remaining respectful of others without any need to form ‘common bonds’ with your neighbours. It is starting to creep into the territory of telling people how to live their lives. This is always where notions of the ‘common good’ end up: at best irritating, at worst, intrusive.

We all network and bond in a series of ways. It is the ability to carry multiple allegiances and accommodate many ‘identities’ that is so fundamental to life. It’s who we are. It is definitive of us as a species; we can’t help ourselves. Where people are working to build community ties, such as those providing care and support to the elderly, that is to be warmly encouraged – and supported. That’s different from lecturing people about the relationships they should form.

Despite the angst, diversity is basically working in Britain. We are skeptical about immigration but largely comfortable with diversity. The census shows, for example, that we are now overwhelmingly comfortable with mixed-race marriage. The majority favour gay marriage and that will grow even further over time given the attitudes of younger cohorts. The same goes for ethnic diversity and, probably, immigration too. The changes that this country is experiencing have barely even begun and it is heading in one direction whatever the short term anxieties.

There are two main types of community where antagonism overshadows interaction: communities that have experienced very rapid demographic change and those that have experienced rapid and negative economic change. A few places fall into both categories. A national politician’s job is surely to help those communities adapt their economies, housing and public services to the change? At the local level politicians should want to intervene more readily where mutual misunderstanding is creating tension but there is little that can be done from national level other than provide support.

Essentially, as a national politician you can marshal resources, build institutions and insist that local actors have some answers to the challenges they face. That’s it. Humanity will do the rest. No need for lengthy ‘comprehensive integration strategies’. Yesterday, I spent the day with an expert visitor at the school of which I am Chairman of Governors. At the end of day the visitor commented on how caring the students were of each other and how the staff also displayed a deep care for the students. It has never been something we have deliberately prioritised. It happened because we are building an institution in which they are safe to explore their humanity. Create the right foundation, build the right institutions, enhance people’s capabilities and the social thing happens – in a whole myriad of ways.

The disappointing thing about Ed Milband’s speech today is the yawning gap where an analysis of the importance of institutions in fostering social cohesion should sit. He mentioned that a key moment in his father’s life had been when he learned English at Acton Technical College. In his conference speech, he referenced the forgotten 50%. Yet, in neither speech has he noted the contribution that Community Colleges make to integration and opportunity. Labour’s university-educated elite don’t seem to have any awareness of the massive contribution that these institutions make to integration – they teach English to 100,000s a year. Community colleges – which are far from perfect but make an enormous contribution nonetheless – are seemingly invisible to Labour.

It is in colleges that English will be taught and learnt. Then those students may then go on to acquire a skill, a set of A Levels, move into an apprenticeship and even study for a degree or a professional qualification such as teaching. If you are constantly focused on behaviours, relationships and culture, it’s easy to miss real institutions of potential change.

And today, instead of initiating a conversation about institutions and power, Miliband was instead having a conversation about culture and behaviour. Instead of focusing on what national politicians can reasonably be expected to do, we are focusing on the areas where their influence is minimal. The Big Society failed for precisely this reason.

We can talk about Britishness, culture and ‘common bonds’ until the cows come home. Unless there is a solid and realistic agenda to go along with it then it’s interesting but no more than that. Meanwhile, underneath all this, there was a decisive move to reassess Labour’s opposition to the immigration cap. If the test is ‘what works’ then, again, let me provide a shortcut: the immigration cap doesn’t.

‘One nation Labour’ can go in one of two directions. It can either be about building institutions that enhance human capacities and take on imbalances of power. Alternatively, it can be a series of moral injunctions and imperatives. We’ve been there before and the reality of Government just takes over. Just ask David Cameron. And Gordon Brown. And Tony Blair. And John Major. And every other leader who has gone down the road of ‘virtue’.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

    But surely the fact that he was coming up with practical and realistic suggestions for measures which – as you point out – will be delivered largely by public institutions, means that Ed would agree with you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Homfray/510980099 Mike Homfray

    But surely the fact that he was coming up with practical and realistic suggestions for measures which – as you point out – will be delivered largely by public institutions, means that Ed would agree with you?

    • http://twitter.com/anthonypainter Anthony Painter

      I don’t know- would he? Wasn’t clear from the speech…. The point is that you have to articulate the value of institutions that deliver. And also appreciate that it is through institutions that you are going to have the biggest impact. The big society failed in this regard. This integration approach risks going the same way.

  • Amber_Star

    It is starting to creep into the territory of telling people how to live their lives. This is always where notions of the ‘common good’ end up: at best irritating, at worst, intrusive.
    ———————–
    Social democrats promote society. Tories promote the family unit. Liberals promote ‘each to his own’ individualism. If the Labour Party doesn’t promote the ‘common good’, society & neighbourliness, then what is the point of Labour?

    • http://twitter.com/anthonypainter Anthony Painter

      What do you mean by the ‘common good’? Define it and then I can answer.

  • Martinay

    Anthony; you are over-interpreting Ed. The quote you give shows him rejecting an idea: the idea of separate development (there’s a word for that in Afrikaans).

    I don’t believe Ed is suggesting much more than that – just reject the idea and work out for yourself how to lead your life in your community – and with your community.

  • Martinay

    Anthony; you are over-interpreting Ed. The quote you give shows him rejecting an idea: the idea of separate development (there’s a word for that in Afrikaans).

    I don’t believe Ed is suggesting much more than that – just reject the idea and work out for yourself how to lead your life in your community – and with your community.

    • robertcp

      Martinay, I do not think that the quote from Ed had anything to do with apartheid. He is rejecting something totally reasonable to me.

      • Martinay

        Are you saying you believe that separate development is totally reasonable? Or are you saying Ed is totally reasonable?

        • robertcp

          My point is that I do not see much of a problem with “the belief that people can simply live side by side in their own communities, respecting each other but living separate lives, protected from hatreds but never building a common bond”. Obviously, apartheid did not involve respect and often involved hatred.

          • Martinay

            You may be right that there is little need for bonds in the short-term. But eventually, the absence of bonds will be exploited for political or ideological or economic purposes and benefits.

      • Martinay

        Are you saying you believe that separate development is totally reasonable? Or are you saying Ed is totally reasonable?

      • Martinay

        Are you saying you believe that separate development is totally reasonable? Or are you saying Ed is totally reasonable?

      • Martinay

        Are you saying you believe that separate development is totally reasonable? Or are you saying Ed is totally reasonable?

  • Pingback: What are they saying about immigration and integration? « 171bus

Latest

  • Comment The Living Wage has to be more than a photo op

    The Living Wage has to be more than a photo op

    The referendum on Scottish independence casts its shadow over every aspect of Scottish public life these days. This is understandable, the debate on whether Scotland should remain in Union with partners in England, Northern Ireland and Wales is a huge one, but the way it pervades every matter at Holyrood is doing a disservice to the people of Scotland. Yesterday I led a debate on behalf on Scottish Labour in support of the living wage, and specifically on extending it […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Who made my clothes?

    Who made my clothes?

    By Stella Creasy MP and Alison McGovern MP It’s been a long four years in opposition, and each year we’ve seen the country decline further for the lack of a Labour Government. But whether speaking up about legal loan sharks, the misuse of zero hours contracts or promoting the economic case for the living wage, we both believe that there are campaigns worth fighting, even if, from opposition, progress is many times harder, and very much slower. That’s why we […]

    Read more →
  • Featured 5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    Yesterday’s story of a new Labour media management team, seemingly in the mould of Alastair Campbell’s famously effective rapid-response unit, and headed by Michael Dugher, should be welcome news to us all. A well-run operation can make a huge difference, and in an election as close as 2015 looks set to be, that difference could be Miliband or Cameron in Number 10. But for it to be truly helpful, it needs to get some things right. 1. Be rapid This may sound […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should politicians do God?

    Should politicians do God?

    Easter is traditionally a time when Christians reflect on their faith, and there is no reason why politicians shouldn’t do so too. But this year David Cameron forsook his usual Easter message for a much stronger and more personal foray into the religious arena. He urged Britain to be more confident of its status as a Christian country; he spoke of the strength of his own faith; he said that we should be “frankly more evangelical about the faith that […]

    Read more →
  • News Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    We reported recently that the Chilcot Report is now not due to be published until 2015, causing worries among Labour strategists that it could harm the Party’s chances at the general election. However, according to the Mail today, its release date could now be held back until after polling day next year. The article states: “Whitehall sources suggest that with an election due in May 2015, it will be deemed too politically difficult to publish it until after voters have […]

    Read more →