Richard Watson, Sean O’Neil & Steve Bird

MULTICULTURALISM HAS FAILED US:

IT’S TIME FOR MUSCULAR LIBERALISM, SAYS
CAMERON

In: The Times, Saturday, February 5th, 2011, page 3

David Cameron will declare today that multiculturalism has failed in

Britain as he vows to confront Islamist extremists living here who reject
Western values.
The Prime Minister will say that years of “hands-off tolerance” have
encouraged different cultures to live separate lives and left the country fearful of
standing up to the racism of minorities.
Muslim groups “showered with public money” for offering a gateway to
their communities will see their funding cut unless they promote democracy,
equality before the law and the rights of women and those of other faiths, he
will say.
They will also be banned from university campuses and prisons.
“Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and
much more active muscular liberalism,” Mr Cameron will say in a speech to the
annual Munich Security Conference of world leaders.
His landmark speech, the first of his premiership on extremism, marks a
significant shift in the Government’s dealings with the Muslim groups, and is
guaranteed to spark controversy.
He is due to speak only hours before 2,000 police officers try to prevent
clashes in Luton between anti-fascist groups and the English Defence League,
which is opposed to what it calls the “Islamisation” of Britain.
The EDL demonstration today has been promoted with the slogan “Back
where it all began” and features pictures of supporters wearing balaclavas. There
is also a possibility that other far-right groups from European neighbours could
be travelling to the march.
Mr Cameron will say that he wants to “turn the page on the failed policies
of the past”, which he characterises as government standing neutral between
different values.
“A genuinely liberal country does much more,” he will say, actively
promoting freedoms of speech, worship and the rule of law.
“It says to its citizens, this is what us defines as a society. To belong here is
to believe in these things.”
 In an advanced text, the Prime Minister is careful too distinguish between
the religion of Islam and the political ideology of Islamist extremism. “The
ideology of extremism is the problem. Islam, emphatically, is not.”
However, he will court controversy by saying that even Muslims who
reject violence should be regarded as extremist if they espouse hostility towards
Western democracy and liberal values.
He will justify his stance by arguing that the backgrounds of convicted
terrorists in Britain have shown that many were initially influenced by “non-
violent extremists, and then took those radical beliefs to the next level by
embracing violence.”
Europe needs to “wake up” to the terrorists threat within, he will say. “Each
of us in our own countries must be unambiguous and hard-nosed about this
defence of our liberty.”
Mr Cameron’s speech signals a new approach to the plethora of Muslim
community groups that have dealings with central and local government and, in
particular, to the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), an umbrella group with 500
affiliates that styles itself as a national, representative body.
The MCB has been extensively criticised for having fundamentalist bodies
among its members and has had a fluctuating relationship with government for
several years.
Tony Blair each leaders after the 7/7 attacks as the voice of mainstream
Muslims, but Ruth Kelly, who became his Communities Secretary, tried to
isolate the MCB and encouraged groups that openly rejected an Islamist agenda.
Mr Cameron’s speech is also likely to lead to a rethink of the
Government’s “Prevent” strategy, under which public money has been given to
non-violent Islamist groups to encourage them to challenge the al-Qaeda
ideology at a grassroots level. In Opposition, Mr Cameron questioned why
Prevent led to taxpayers’ money being given to the Cordoba Foundation, which
he described as “a front for the Muslim Brotherhood” that had “close
connections to people with extremist views” including an academic, who is
Britain’s representative for Hamas.
The Prime Minister will not spell out today, however, whether the
Government will seek to go ahead with the Conservative manifesto pledge to
proscribe the hardline group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT), which advocates the creation
of Islamist states and is active in Muslim communities and on university
campuses.
The Labour Government kept HuT under constant review but never found
sufficient evidence to ban it under anti-terrorism legislation.
Baroness Warsi, the Muslim co-chairman of the Tory party, recently
complained that the phrase “extremist” was bandied about too liberally.
Downing Street said that she had been shown Mr Cameron’s speech.
 In Luton, thousands of far-right protesters are expected to clash with anti-
fascists groups as Bedfordshire Police tries to prevent running battles between
the rival groups.
Nearly 2,000 officers in riot gear, many from other forces, have been
drafted in to tackle what is expected to be the English Defence League’s biggest
demonstration yet.
About 4,000 members of the EDL, which is opposed to what it sees as the
Islamisation of Britain, will march to town centre at lunchtime.
Just 300 yards away a counter-protest of Unite Against Fascism supporters
will also be holding a static demonstration. The EDL rally is understood to have
agitated the town’s large Muslim community.

 Rosemary Bennett

‘REMEMBER RAY HONEYFORD? HE WAS RIGHT ALL

ALONG’

In: The Times, Saturday, February 5th, 2011, page 3

It is almost 30 years ago since Ray Honeyford, an unknown headmaster

from Bradford, suggested that his mainly Asian pupils might benefit from
learning English, hearing a bit about English history and being told what Britain
is all about.
For his opinions, Mr Honeyford, below, lost his job, was hounded by the
media and was even investigated by the Government. His crime was to
challenge the dominant philosophy behind all race relations of the time –
multiculturalism. That meant that no single culture or set of values should be
promoted above any other, that all were equal, should be respected and
encouraged.
Now, of course, many of those who would have been then first to condemn
Mr Honeyford at the time wholeheartedly agree with him, including Trevor
Philips, head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Tony Blair.
The latest convert is David Cameron, who says today that multiculturalism has
encouraged “different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and
the mainstream”.
Multiculturalism hailed from the 1970s and was a response to a growing
number of immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean and the Indian continent.
British politeness and respect for others’ feelings conspired with more left-
wing notions of shame for the country’s colonial past and a rejection of its
traditional values. Schoolchildren performed non-religious Christmas plays and
local authorities threw Winterval festivals. Support for some form of
multiculturalism might have continued for quite some time were it not for the
7/7 attacks.
It was clear then that extreme views had been allowed to ferment all over
the country. There were British people who hated Britain so much that they
would blow themselves up to make the point. But almost six years on, little
progress have been made. There is suspicion that extremism still flourishes in
many communities. Multiculturalism is out of fashion, but nothing has emerged
to fill the void. That is the Prime Minister’s challenge.