Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): The Government's approach to social cohesion has been challenged today in a new report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Immigration and Social Cohesion in the UK, by Mary Hickman, Helen Crowley and Nick Mai of London Metropolitan University, questions 'the idea that we need a fixed notion of Britishness and British values'
In debates about social cohesion policies, we conclude that there needs to be a shift away from:
• the link frequently made between social cohesion and terrorism to one that links social cohesion and social transformations;
• the assumption that transnational ties weaken a sense of belonging to Britain – we found no evidence of this at all – to one that recognises that it’s possible to have diasporic ties without this being at the expense of belonging to Britain;
• a set account of what Britishness entails to, the provision of safe, secure and convenient neighbourhoods and good public services for everyone.
We found that it is new immigrants and the long-term settled, minority ethnic population who express strong attachments to Britain in terms of appreciation of the values of democracy, free speech and tolerance. The greatest criticisms of the Government came from the long-term settled, majority ethnic group. They were most critical of government handling of and the practices of the welfare state (largely because the welfare state fi gures prominently in accounts of what they appreciated about Britain) and the pursuance of war in Iraq. Nevertheless, for most of this group, Britain was a taken-for-granted home. A generation of young second and third-generation, long-term settled, minority ethnic people, mostly Asian, were also critical, mostly about cases of discrimination and injustice. This stems, not from their disengagement from Britain, but from their sense of belonging to Britain.
