Charles Husband and Yunis Alam: Reality behind rhetoric about a diverse society

While those seeking sanctuary from persecution as well as those seeking work have been making West Yorkshire their home for the last two decades or so, German and Jewish migrants first arrived in the 19th century.

Polish, Ukrainian and Italian settlers came after the Second World War and soon after, immigrants from the New Commonwealth countries also arrived, worked, settled and raised their families.

Recent research shows that younger generations of Pakistanis, Indians and Bangladeshis, all speaking with local accents, have strong attachments to their towns and cities, their neighbourhoods, and locales: the places they call home.

However, following the disturbances in Bradford, Burnley and Oldham in 2001, there developed a rapid and strong governmental concern about the future of ethnic relations in Britain.

The language of community cohesion was born and we became accustomed to politicians and “social commentators” referring to the “self-segregation” of Muslim communities and the risks of people living in “parallel cultures”.

Despite the evidence-based critiques of this language, the rhetoric around the marginal status of Muslims in Britain continued to find frequent expression. Fuelled by concerns about Muslim insularity, the government developed an extensive range of interventions aimed at promoting “community cohesion”.

The accompanying political debate, and especially the way in which the policies were framed and targeted, had the effect of confirming the supposedly problematic nature of Muslim communities in our cities. Of course all this was given a heightened significance in the context of the terrorist outrages of 9/11 in New York and George Bush’s declaration of a “War on Terror”.

Consequently, when Britain came to experience its own “home grown” terrorism in 2005, the focus upon the Muslim communities took on a new dimension that was given expression in the hasty creation of counter-terrorist legislation and policy.

Two books based on research funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation throw a critical light on the local situation while also containing data that has relevance beyond our region.

Social cohesion and counter-terrorism. A contradiction? highlights the contradictory consequences of the simultaneous implementation of community cohesion and counter-terrorism policies across West Yorkshire.

The research shows how the hasty introduction of the counter-terrorist measures was met with a wide degree of opposition and concern from councillors and senior managers, as well as from within Muslim communities.

This concern was well founded: the intrusive surveillance of Muslim communities, a central feature of the counter-terrorism policy, had the effect of undermining the trust that was essential to the working of community development.

Local authority staff found it difficult to separate out their activities as community workers when also being positioned as part of an intelligence gathering network.

More generally, the language and politics that surrounded these policies deflected attention from the basic problem of the growing gap between the rich and the poor and the reproduction of significant inequalities in our towns and cities, while also contributing to the popularisation of Islamophobic sentiments so recently noted by Baroness Warsi, the Tory chairman.

The way in which the population and communities of our region experience diversity and coexistence is revealed in a companion book, The Invisible Village. Small world, Big Society.

The focus of this aspect of the research was to create an opportunity for an ordinary yet diverse, and to some extent, representative sample to be heard. The book is presented as a series of monologues, or narratives in which residents talk about the things that matter to them the most.

Despite contemporary rhetoric on and around the problems of faith, integration and national security, the voices in the book suggest everyday cohesion exists. Of course, there are references to “ethnic” tensions, as well as to the ways through which Muslims and Islam are constructed and represented in the public sphere, but these are not the principal themes in their dialogue.

Instead, those interviewed appeared to be more concerned about the state of their local area, the undermining of community structure through cuts and the subsequent decline in access to quality services.

Rather than markers of ethnicity and faith, it is the significance of place and its intersection with personal identity which ties in closely with notions of integration, cohesion and belonging.

For many, concerns about crime and policing, the cost of living, the insecurities arising from the still relevant credit crunch and the banking crisis alongside the perceived failings of politicians are just some of the common elements that contribute toward undermining the quality of civic life and community activity. The Big Society, as an idea, appears to have been a reality long before it was given a name by David Cameron.

In quite concrete terms, these books underline the living ethnic diversity of our region and point to the dangers of hastily developed national policies failing to address real and present concerns.

Charles Husband and Yunis Alam are the authors of new books for the York-based Joseph Rowntree Foundation, launched this week, that look at community cohesion.