Despite the angst, diversity is basically working in Britain

14th December, 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’.

To report anything from the comment section, please e-mail [email protected]
  • 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?

  • 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?

    • 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?

    • 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?

      • 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?

        • 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.

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

Latest

  • Comment Featured Cruddas asks the right questions – I heard them on the doorstep of a swing seat

    Cruddas asks the right questions – I heard them on the doorstep of a swing seat

        How did it come to this? That a Labour Party fighting an arrogant, out-of-touch Tory government who failed on their core economic targets, could go down to a crushing defeat despite carrying a healthy lead in the polls for not just a few weeks, but a few years. The answer, according to Jon Cruddas, makes for painful reading. Labour, the party of work, was deserted by socially conservative working class voters who value family, work and fairness. There […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured The message, the marginals and the media: Cruddas’ home truths explained

    The message, the marginals and the media: Cruddas’ home truths explained

    The result of Jon Cruddas’ independent inquiry into Labour’s general election defeat was published today, with a piece by the author on LabourList. Here are seven key lessons to take away from the report: 1 – Have we heard it all before? Lacking economic credibility, untrusted on welfare and immigration, unable to connect on issues like communities, and lacking a clear purpose. This is not an inquiry bursting with completely undreamt of reasons for Labour’s demise last May – and […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Jon Cruddas: What we can learn from Labour’s crushing election defeat

    Jon Cruddas: What we can learn from Labour’s crushing election defeat

    Today we publish our Independent Inquiry report Labour’s Future. It looks at why we lost the 2015 general election and what’s happened since. It has ten messages and three lessons to learn from defeat. It’s a tough read because it’s about the challenges Labour faces. But its optimistic. We can be ambitious. We have the ability to change and shape our party and build a new election winning coalition. We need the confidence to learn the lessons of defeat and […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Uncategorized Alice Perry’s NEC report: Corbyn, fighting prejudice and listening to voters online

    Alice Perry’s NEC report: Corbyn, fighting prejudice and listening to voters online

    National Executive Committee Report by local government representative Alice Perry Tuesday 17 May 2016 Leader’s Report Jeremy Corbyn spoke about the EU Referendum and the importance of securing membership of the EU to protect jobs, the economy and our rights at work. Jeremy spoke about May’s election results. He praised the various election successes, including the Mayoral election results in London and Bristol. In London hope trumped fear with voters rejecting racist, Tory smears to make history by electing Sadiq Khan. […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Tristram Hunt: Labour must dispel the myth we are anti-English

    Tristram Hunt: Labour must dispel the myth we are anti-English

    There is much to regret about the modern condition of Tory England. And in the 2015 General Election campaign, the Labour Party lamented long about it. But while I encountered little enthusiasm for the Tories on England’s doorsteps, there was even more circumspection towards the Labour Party. Naturally, some of this was about policy. Some of it too, we should be frank, was about leadership. But operating at a deeper and more insidious level was a sense that Labour did […]

    Read more →
x

LabourList Daily Email

Everything Labour. Every weekday morning

Share with your friends










Submit