Even if he is precahing to the choir on Labour Uncut, Kevin Meagher (who really ought to be looking for a seat, if he is not already) writes:
Given we’re constantly told we live in an age of evidence-based policy-making, the reaction to the so-called Trojan Horse case in Birmingham owes more to Medieval peasant superstition.
Given we’re constantly told we live in an age of evidence-based policy-making, the reaction to the so-called Trojan Horse case in Birmingham owes more to Medieval peasant superstition.
What
has warranted the blanket media coverage of recent weeks? No organised
conspiracy to ‘Islamify’ state schools in Birmingham has been uncovered. No
evidence of criminality has been produced. No charges are pending.
All
that has happened so far, despite almost daily media attention and a series of
top-level investigations, is that a handful of schools in one if the poorest
parts of the city are to be placed in special measures at the behest of schools
inspectors.
Yes,
there are suspicions about what might have gone on, however much of the
reporting has been little more than conjecture – more heat than light –
blackening the reputation of Birmingham’s Muslim community in the process.
But
that didn’t stop yesterday’s Observer. With no substantive news from
Birmingham to report, the paper fell back on the old tactic of producing an
opinion poll which showed:
“70%
[of the public] said the taxpayer should not be funding the promotion of
religion in schools, 60% said such schools promoted division and segregation,
and 41% said they were contrary to the promotion of a multicultural society.”
Of
course it’s worth pointing out, for the avoidance of doubt, that parents who
want to send their children to faith schools are still taxpayers. Just as it’s
worth noting that none of the schools involved in the Trojan Horse ‘scandal’
are, in fact, faith schools at all.
Nevertheless,
shadow education secretary, Tristram Hunt, was enjoined to comment. He thought
the case “raised
questions” about “how we manage potential tensions” around “faith,
multiculturalism and state education”.
Underneath the angst about ‘hardliners’ or
‘extremists’ trying to take over Birmingham schools is a lazy and, frankly,
racist, assumption that immigrants who have come to these shores in the past
few decades will eschew their religion and culture to join home-grown Brits in
trudging aimlessly around shopping malls on a Sunday afternoon. It has not come
to fruition so far, nor will it. Why on earth should we expect Muslims not to
think and act like Muslims?
This
is the real significance of what is going on in Birmingham. The UK now has a
resident Muslim population of three million. They aren’t prepared to stay
hidden on the margins any longer. They want to retain their religious views and
practices and part of that demand now extends to the schooling of their
children.
Yet,
if the price of more Muslim schools is a reduction in kids making long trips
back to family members in Pakistan to avoid becoming ‘Westernised’, or if it
weakens the influence of back street madrasses, then this is progress.
What
Muslim community leaders in Birmingham are guilty of is trying to get
faith schools by the backdoor – and on the cheap. By packing the governing
bodies of non-faith schools, they are avoiding digging into their pockets like
Catholics and Anglicans do. They fork out ten per cent of the capital costs of
their voluntary-aided church schools.
Yet
the situation in Birmingham conveniently serves as a proxy for those who would
like to abolish all ‘faith schools’. So we are quickly diverted into talking
about the apparent perniciousness Church of England and Catholic schools (which
account for the vast majority of faith schools). They are, we are frequently
told by people with no experience of them, hotbeds of division, fermenting
religious tension and using religious adherence to control their admissions
policy.
Piffle,
of course, but lots of non-faith schools have tough admissions criteria. At
Tristram Hunt’s alma mater, University School in Hampstead, the
admissions policy was coughing up a hefty £6,000 a term.
Indeed,
the concept of gender segregation is also well-rooted in our schools system. As
Harriet Harman, a former pupil of the illustrious St. Paul’s School for Girls
in London (£7,000 a term),
could testify.
But
behind the situation in Birmingham and the hoary old bluster about faith
schooling lies something else: For a large and noisy chunk of the liberal-left,
the religious are simply all mad and wicked.
Well,
that’s not quite true. If a vicar opens a food bank or an Archbishop berates a
minister over the bedroom tax then they are tolerable; in a “useful idiot” sort
of way. But that’s as far as it goes.
Religion
can have no role, either as a voice in the public sphere, nor can its adherents
get involved in the business of providing public services. They are inherently
divisive and their values are inimical to those of ‘enlightened’ secularists.
Again,
words are misused. I am a secularist too. I don’t see any need for a
Sharia-compliant air pollution strategy or, for that matter, a Catholic
transport strategy (although this might well involve renationalising the
railways for the Common Good).
Yet,
supporting peoples’ religious freedoms is what pluralism and tolerance – two of
our much-vaunted British values – are all about. Alas, the faux liberal-left
simply thinks everyone should behave and think like them. Of course, in this
respect, they are not liberal at all.
Personally,
I dislike the practice of Halal and Kosher slaughter of animals, but I
recognise this is incredibly important to Muslims and Jews and respecting their
religious practices should outweigh the circumstances in which animals bred for
the plate arrive on it.
There
are some reasonable and workable red lines we can apply to Muslim schooling
and, when the hysteria in Birmingham abates, perhaps we will return to them.
(Just as the Department for Education ‘expect[s]
to see’ evolution, not Creationism taught in science lessons in evangelical
Christian schools).
Unfortunately,
the fact remains that religious freedom is a cause the liberal-left simply
doesn’t want to champion. But if you don’t believe in it, then you don’t
believe in freedom at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment