ISSN: 0965-7762 RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001 1
BulletinRUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY
DECEMBER
No. 328
2001
1 The Denied aFuture Report isavailable fromthe registeredoffice of theSave theChildren Fund,17 Grove Lane,London SE58RD (tel: 0207703; fax: 0207703; email:[email protected];www.savethechildren.org.uk).The SummaryReport of theRomaEducationResearchProject waspublished bythe OpenSociety Institutein April 2001;copies can beobtained fromthe OpenSociety Institutefor EducationalPolicy, H-1051Budapest,Oktober 6 Str,Hungary.
2 In this issue ofthe Bulletin wealso provide thereader with areview ofanotherlandmarkpublicationlooking at thesituation ofRoma/Gypsyand Travellers –see pp. 8–9.
In Budapest on 28–30 November2001, Save the Children, with theOpen Society Institute, hosted aconference to bring to the tablethe findings of their new andmuch needed report Denied aFuture? The Right to Education ofRoma/Gypsy and Traveller Childrenin Europe. Included in this launchwas an earlier report of thefindings of a micro-level studyconducted by the Open SocietyInstitute, the Roma EducationResearch Project.1
Denied a Future?The concluding months of 2001 have seen the launch ofsome significant reports and proposals for new legislation –some of them too close to our publication date formeasured comment.What characterises them, however,argues Michelynn Laflèche, is that any successfulimplementation of their recommendations will require aconsistent if unorthodox practice-to-policy response.
Both reports, and indeed theresults of the conference itself,point to an issue of growingseriousness that needs to bestrongly addressed in Europe(with Britain firmly included) –the experiences of discriminationand disadvantage faced byRoma/Gypsy and Travellercommunities. Not a new problemby any means, this is one forwhich policy-makers lack thebasic knowledge, understanding,and, importantly, tools to evenbegin to deal with it in aneffective manner.2
report is a comprehensivedocument all policy-makerswould benefit from reading – anda wider audience too. Of courseit provides the reader with thenecessary background to thedevelopment and persistence ofdiscrimination againstRoma/Gypsy and Travellers, but,by focusing on education forchildren and young people, it putsinto perspective the life-longimpact of that discrimination.
Several key findings are worthmentioning here. We are forciblyreminded, in words and images,that ‘throughout Europe,regardless of their varyingcultures, context and histories,Roma/Gypsy and Travellercommunities continue toexperience disproportionatelevels of poverty, discrimination,lower quality service provisionand lack of personal security,freedom of movement andchoice.The absence of effectiveredress mechanisms leavesindividuals disempowered anddistrustful of official structures andinstitutions.These factors combineto create many barrierspreventing particular groups ofchildren from accessing their rightto education.’
Perhaps the central finding ofthis report is that the experienceof discrimination by Roma/Gypsyand Traveller communities is notconfined to any one area ofEurope, but is found throughoutEurope. Regardless of economicdevelopment, GDP and otherperformance indicators like ratesof literacy and employment, and
In addition, devolution hasinfluenced how, in NorthernIreland and Scotland compared toEngland and Wales, the issue ofanti-Gypsy and Traveller racismhas been framed more centrallywithin the anti-racism campaignsand activities in various areas ofsocial policy. However, despitesome differences in policyapproach, these nomadiccommunities experience thesame forms of discrimination anddisadvantage throughout the UKas they do across the whole ofEurope.
The report goes on to make aseries of recommendations basedon its findings.While each countryreport has its own series ofrecommendations – in the caseof the UK, very practice oriented– the executive summary pullstogether general frameworkrecommendations that deservemention here. Aimed mainly atgovernment theserecommendations are listed intextbox 1.
Cohesive CommunitiesAnyone who was able to view acopy of the recent Home Officereport on community cohesion3
in response to the unrest anddisturbances in Bradford, Oldhamand Burnley this past summer willfind the thrust of theserecommendations familiar. Notbecause these two reports wereproduced collaboratively in anyway, but because the issues are infact the same.
Education is one of the keytools to building ‘cohesivecommunities’, certainly, but this isnot a new idea and therecommendations of the Save theChildren and Cantle Reports echothose in the Ouseley Report,4 theStephen Lawrence Inquiry Reportand, not to be left out, theRunnymede Commission Reporton the Future of Multi-EthnicBritain – and these three latter areinformed by and re-express ideasfrom even earlier reports.
From the Save the ChildrenReport and the conference tolaunch it, what becomes clear is
POLITICSIN EUROPE
notwithstanding the extent oflegislation to outlawdiscrimination and/or promoteequality, the Roma/Gypsy andtraveller communities by andlarge are excluded frommainstream society and theoverall life-chances social inclusioncan bring to individuals andgroups.
Despite this evidenced fact, itwas more than distressing tolisten to European Commission
representatives continue topresent a view of the EU as aprogressive model – a model, interms of equality and anti-discrimination on grounds of race,ethnicity and nationality, not justfor the accession countries toaspire to, but for them to attemptto match through the accessionstrategy requirements.
Broadly speaking, any countrywishing to join the EU must showthat it not only commits inprinciple to equality and fairnessas a basis for social organisation,but that it actually puts theresources into trying to achievethis, and takes the need toeliminate racism anddiscrimination as seriously as theneed to lower inflation andunemployment.This is to bewelcomed. However, there are nogrounds for complacency on thepart of the EuropeanCommission or the EU memberstates, and no room forexcessively self-congratulatoryremarks such as those made atthe conference.Acknowledgement of progressmade is necessary in order tocontinue to move forward; but bythe same token, an honestreflection on where problemspersist is equally required.This isan issue of leadership.
The UK’s record is no betterthan that of other EU or CEEcountries. Gypsy/Traveller childrenexperience high levels of socialexclusion. In relation to educationthis situation is demonstrated bylow attendance records, low levelsof achievement/completion,incidents of harassment, bullyingand direct and indirect racism, asreported all too frequently bythose whose voices and facesillustrate the UK report associatedwith Save the Children’s Denied aFuture. And none of this is beingadequately recognised: ‘Despitethe increase in awareness acrossthe UK concerning issues of“race”, ethnicity and education, the“place” of Gypsies and Travellersin this awareness has beensomewhat lacking’ (UK Report p.211).
Box 1Recommendations of the Denied aFuture? ReportAimed mainly at government they call for the following:• Realistic appraisal of what reformed provision will
demand from public budgets in the long term with along-term commitment from governments not only toadequately resource reforms aimed at endingdiscrimination, but also to ensure that proper systemsare in place to effectively monitor and evaluateoutcomes.
• Active consultation and involvement of Romacommunity members – essential in developing servicesor adapting practices to meet the needs of localcommunities.
• Development of more flexible curricula, such as theremoval of all derogatory references to Roma/Gypsiesand Travellers from school texts; the inclusion ofreferences to ethnic and other minority groups in apositive and balanced manner and, wherever relevantand possible, the offering the Romani language inschools alongside other languages.
• Changes to teacher training, for example, children’srights, human rights and equal opportunities trainingshould be included as mandatory elements of pre-service and in-service teacher training curricula; suchtraining must also ensure that teachers are familiar withthe skills and approaches needed to work with childrenfrom different ethnic, linguistic, religious and culturalbackgrounds.
• Deployment of more teachers, teaching assistants andclassroom assistants, especially drawn from Roma/Gypsyand Traveller communities in order to ensure highervisibility of role models.
• A more effective use of school buildings such as offeringafter-school and weekend activities for children andyoung people and also to create opportunities to bringother family members onto school premises.
• Carrying out more research in order to develop aclearer understanding of the respective roles ofeconomic, social and cultural factors in the withdrawaland self-withdrawal of children from formal education.
• Making further and more visible efforts to establishschools as places where all children are safe fromphysical and verbal abuse. The whole school communitymust be involved in developing strategies to addressracist bullying, physical and verbal abuse.
• All governments to acknowledge the value of pre-school provision and adopt strategies that would enablepre-school facilities to be accessible, available, and freeof charge for all families that need them.
• Governments to take urgent action to end the practiceof segregation for Roma/Gypsy children, particularlywith reference to the special school system.
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 20012
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
POLITICSIN EUROPE
3
that local-level action andstrategies will determine thesuccess of national andtransnational-level policy proposalsfor combating discrimination anddisadvantage – from practice topolicy rather than policy topractice. Indeed, the communitycohesion report emphasises thispoint – part of the solution to anational crisis is to allow the local(even more local than municipalitylevel) to take ownership of theproblem, develop responses andinform national policy from thoseactivities.
In addressing the extensivelevels of discrimination anddisadvantage faced byRoma/Gypsy and Travellercommunities, local strategiesleading to national policy arewhat is called for.The OSI arguethis point in their research reporton Roma Education, but perhapsit’s better put by Robin Oakley inhis recent article on Roma Rightsand Access to Justice in Europe inthe latest issue of Equal Voices(see textbox 2).
Over the last year, in meetings
with over 500 grassrootsorganisations across UK, we heardthe following message repeatedly– national policy is notimplemented at local level,therefore the solution must comefrom the locality itself and informnational policy. We thereforewelcome the new reports inprinciple.Their effectivenessremains to be seen, but let us
ensure that the ‘project’ ofbuilding community cohesion hasroom for the complexities ofexperiences of racism,discrimination and disadvantagethat groups and individualsexperience in the UK today – andthat the specific needs ofRoma/Gypsy and Travellercommunities feature in this newagenda for change. ❑
Box 2Local-level strategies are important because:• National-level policies and strategies relating to minorities are usually ineffective unless some
mechanism is found to implement them at local level.• The local level, especially of the municipality, is the level at which the delivery of most public services
is administered.• The situation of Roma, like other minorities, varies from locality to locality, so that it is important that
national-level policies are implemented flexibly, to meet local needs.• The local level is the level at which Roma, like other minorities, can most easily organise themselves,
represent their interests at political level, and participate actively in the civic process – especiallythrough the formation of local NGOs.
• The level of the municipality, and especially the local neighbourhood, is the level of meaning in mostpeople’s lives, i.e. which they know, care about, operate in, and can have some direct control over.Local strategies therefore need to reach not just regions and municipalities, but also right down toneighbourhood level.
• The local level is the level at which most innovation takes place, as enterprising individuals andNGOs develop creative practical solutions to new problems. (For this reason it is important thatnational policy-makers support and learn from local initiatives, and promote the dissemination of‘good practices’.)
Robin Oakley, Peter Mercer and Jeanette Buirski (2001) ‘The Approach of the RrAJE Programme:Local level Strategies for Combating Roma Exclusion’, Equal Voices (EUMC) November: 20.
targeted action to secure theright to education for over 2million children can be appraised.
The InternationalLegislation handbookLow standards of education forRoma/Gypsy and Traveller childrenpersist despite the existence of araft of national and internationallegislation. International andregional legislative frameworks arelaid out in the InternationalLegislation Handbook, whoseintroduction reinforces themessage of the entire report.‘Education is a fundamentalhuman right’, it states, and belongsto the first [civil and political] andsecond [economic, social andcultural] generation of humanrights; also, in some opinions, tothe third generation of humanrights – namely collective andsolidarity rights. ‘In any event,neither the state nor families canbe released from the responsibilityfor implementing education’,despite the difficulty, arising fromits cross-sectoral nature, ofassigning education specifically toany one of the generations ofhuman rights.
The legislation handbookprovides us with the ‘internationaland regional legal instrumentswhich guarantee the right toeducation. It attempts an analysisof these provisions, and illustratesthe control mechanismsdetermined by some of theinstruments, so that effective useof them can be made.’Instruments specific to
Roma/Gypsies and Travellers arelabelled clearly under relevantheadings within each chapter.
The principal rights andinstruments are then expoundedunder the chapter headings of:
The United Nations LegalFramework
The Council of Europe’s LegalFramework
The European Union’s LegalFramework
The Legal Framework of theOrganisation for Security andCo-operation in Europe;
while under the rubric ‘OtherRegional Initiatives’, it covers theStability Pact for South EasternEurope and the status of theCommissioner of the Council ofthe Baltic Sea States onDemocratic Institutions andHuman Rights.
Chapter on the UnitedNations’ legal frameworkBy far the largest section of thelegislation handbook, this chapter’scoverage of relevant UNlegislation deals chronologicallywith UN documents that act asreference points in establishingthe right to education.
The right to educationThe 1948 Universal Declarationof Human Rights, though not alegally binding instrument, andtherefore not creating legalobligations for states, ‘hasrepresented a point of referencefor subsequent internationalinstruments and for muchnational legislation’.
The 1966 InternationalCovenant on Economic, Socialand Cultural Rights guaranteesthese three [second-generation]rights, and is ratified by 142states. Its control mechanism isthat of reporting, by StatesParties, to the Committee onEconomic, Social and CulturalRights, which in support of theright to education imposes threekinds or levels of obligations onStates Parties – to respect,protect and fulfil.
The 1966 ICCPR is a covenantthat guarantees civil and political
The report’s rationale is that‘Across Europe the challenge ofproviding Roma/Gypsy andTraveller children with access toquality education is not beingmet’. Many school systemscontinue to marginalizeRoma/Gypsy and Travellerchildren, thereby effectivelydenying them the chance toreach their full potential. Byexamining the situation within 14countries from west to eastEurope, the report highlights theimpact of a lack of personalsecurity and freedom ofmovement, poverty andpowerlessness on access toeducation for Roma/Gypsy andTraveller children.
By setting the issue within thecontext of the enlargement ofthe European Union a benchmarkis created against which the
success offuture
Educating Roma/Gypsyand Traveller ChildrenSave the Children Fund’s latest report, ‘Denied a Future? The
right to education of Roma/Gypsy and Traveller Children in
Europe’ is divided into four parts:Volume 1: South-eastern
Europe;Volume 2:Western and Central Europe; an
International Legislation Handbook, and the Report
Summary, which gets a volume all to itself to cover the
extensive material provided in the other three volumes.
We are verygrateful toPoppy Szaybofor permissionto reproducesome of herexcellentphotographsthat appear inthe Save theChildren Fund’sReport.
The Report isavailable fromthe registeredoffice of theSave theChildren Fund,17 Grove Lane,London SE58RD (tel: 0207703; fax: 0207703; email:[email protected];www.savethechildren.org.uk)
MIGRATION &MIGRANT
COMMUNITIES
[first-generation] rights and hasbeen ratified by 144 states.States Parties must report to theHuman Rights Committee onhow they are implementing theprovisions of the Covenant.
The 1965 InternationalConvention on the Elimination ofAll Forms of Racism, ratified by155 states, prohibits racialdiscrimination. Article 5 states theright of all to equality before thelaw ‘notably in the enjoyment ofthe following rights: … the rightto education and training’.
The 1989 UN Convention onthe Rights of the Child‘guarantees the whole range ofhuman rights … to children’.Article 28 establishes the child’sright to education, and article 29‘reflects a consensus of worldopinion on the fundamentalpurposes of education’.
Minority rights and specific instrumentsStill within the chapter on theUN, articles that set out minorityrights in relation to education areidentified; then instrumentsrelating specifically toRoma/Gypsy and Travellerchildren are discussed under theheadings of the UN Commissionon Human Rights and its Sub-Commission for the Promotionand Protection of Human Rights.The latter, under its original nameof the Sub-Commission on thePrevention of Discrimination andProtection of Minorities, recordedthe first reference in UN text toRoma/Gypsies and Travellers in1977.
Thematic mechanismsThe Sub-Commission’s fourworking groups – onCommunications, onContemporary Forms of Slavery,on Indigenous Populations andon Minorities – report to aninternational panel of experts inpursuance of its remit ofestablishing thematic mechanismsfor studying a particular humanrights situation.The WG onMinorities is becoming the focalpoint for UN activities in the
protection of minorities.Two Special Rapporteurs – on
Contemporary Forms of Racism,Racial Discrimination,Xenophobia and RelatedIntolerance, and on the Right toEducation – receive theirmandate from the UNCommission on Human Rights.The former has reported on theminority situation ofRoma/Gypsies since beingmandated in 1993, and recentlyhe has focused attention on EastEuropean Roma/Gypsies inHungary, the Czech Republic andRomania.
The Committee on theElimination of RacialDiscrimination monitors andreviews states obligations underthe ICERD, meeting every 4years to review the ‘legal, judicial,administrative and other stepstaken by individual states to fulfiltheir obligations to combat racialdiscrimination’. States have tosubmit reports to CERD; state-to-state complaints can be heard;and individuals may lodgecomplaints with CERD againsttheir state, with some provisos.CERD’s first-ever ‘thematicdiscussion’ (Aug 2000) took as itstopic the issue of discriminationagainst Roma.
UNESCOThe Convention againstDiscrimination in Education(1962) is based on UNESCO’sconstitutional principlesproscribing ‘any form ofdiscrimination and promoting the
right to education for all’ and hasbeen ratified by 89 states.Mechanisms by which individuals,groups and NGOs cancommunicate with UNESCO’sBoard and committees aredescribed in the conclusion tothis section on the UN.
Other chaptersThe Council of Europe, the EUand Other Regional Initiatives aredescribed in complementarydetail.The conclusion to thishandbook states that ‘there is noshortage of international legal andpolitical instruments to deal withthe right to education andminority issues. However,implementation of legislationrelated to the right to educationof Roma/Gypsy and Travellerchildren is still at a backwardstage, for there is insufficientpolitical will to accept andimplement it.’
The other three handbooksBoth volumes of country reportsinclude individual country as wellas volume summaries, while themain Summary volume identifiesthe principal findings of the 14country reports, Save theChildren’s conclusions andrecommendations for futureaction. Illustrations throughout areby documentary photographerPoppy Szaybo, and were takenmostly in 2001 with groupsactively involved in the project.Their presence and quality are aconstant reminder of who thisreport is about. ❑
immigration controls. Theconference was subtitled ‘Whatneeds to change?’, and thereasons why change is neededwere explored in a number ofpresentations.
In reviewing the economicbackground to the immigrationdebate, delegates were invited toconsider the evolution of theEuropean labour market overrecent years. This had beenmarked by strong growth inemployment, accompanied by themaintenance of productivity andwage levels. Skill shortages weremanifesting themselves in bothhigh skill sectors and traditionalindustries such as construction.Demographic changes expectedover the next 30 years were likelyto be a long-term factorcontributing to a tight labourmarket.
The position of migrantworkers varied considerablyacross the economies of thedeveloped world – ranging from50% of the labour force inLuxembourg, to less than 1% inJapan.Temporary migration hasgenerally increased over the lastdecade in most countries.Whatcould be demonstrated from thisexperience is that migration doesnot generate economic imbalanceeither by increasingunemployment or restrictingwages. Migration appears to playan important role during periodsof economic recovery byexpanding labour markets duringperiods when inflation might beexpected to threaten growth.
Could immigration policytherefore be adapted to theshort-terms needs of expandingeconomies? Contributors weresceptical, noting that few thingsare as permanent as temporarymigration.There was a tendency
in developed countries to moveaway from quota-based systemsfor recruiting migrant workersbecause of the cumbersome andbureaucratic character of mostquota schemes. Successfulimmigration countries nowappeared to favour theintegration of immigrant workersfrom an early point after theirarrival, with the prospect of long-term settlement replacing therotation of short-term migrants.
From an economic standpoint,policies should be orientedaround recognition of the benefitsbrought by migration to Europe’scompetitive labour markets, andshould aim for the bettermanagement of flows.
National perspectives An important part of thediscussion focussed on theconcrete efforts of nationalgovernments to construct policiesthat took the new realities ofmigration into account. Italyprovided an important case study,with a three-fold increase inrecent years of its resident foreignnational population.Though stillconstituting a smaller proportionof its population than the EUaverage (3.3% as opposed toaround 5% for the whole of theEU), immigration into Italy wasexhibiting trends which might inthe medium term become moretypical of the region as a whole.Unlike other traditional countriesof inward migration, Italy wasexperiencing very diversemovements of people, with noone national group making up adisproportionate percentage ofthe whole.
Policy innovation in Italy hingedon the idea that immigrationshould be considered an issue forforeign policy rather than
The Wilton Park tradition ofbringing together representatives
of government,intergovernmental bodies,academics and NGOs todiscuss major issues on the
international policy agendahas often, in the past,produced stimulating
exchanges and newinsights across arange of vexedissues. Itsstanding – as an
executive agencyof the Foreign and
CommonwealthOffice, though
independent of official policy – issufficiently impressive to ensureattendance from representativesof any of the respective fields itchooses to examine, and itsNovember conference onmigration to Europe maintainedthese standards.
Delegates from a dozen or soforeign affairs ministries werebrought together withrepresentatives of the EuropeanCommission, the UN HighCommissioner for Refugees, theOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, andthe International Organisation forMigration, plus some of the mostprominent academiccommentators on migrationissues. Chatham House rulesgovern the proceedings toencourage participants to providea frank assessment of thesituation under discussion withoutthe concern of being directlyquoted.
Critical assessmentThe theme running throughout allthree days of discussion was animplicit criticism of the existingregime of international
Immigration policies:Radical change on the agenda?The 649th Wilton Park Conference ‘Migration to Europe:What needs to change?’, on 19–21November 2001 is discussed here by Don Flynn of the Joint Council on the Welfare ofImmigrants, who is coordinating a UKREN immigration project.
domestic. It would be managedwith a framework of agreements,brokered with sending countries,and covering such themes as there-admission of nationals,development and trade.Countries co-operating within thisframework were then allocated aquota of labour permits, examplesof which are 3000 for Tunisiannationals and 6000 for Albanians.
The approach was criticisedfrom a number of quarters,notably by delegates concernedabout making issues likecooperation in trade anddevelopment conditional onaccepting the immigration agendaof the more powerful partner.Others pointed to recentevidence that Tunisians inparticular had a high success ratefor placing themselves inemployment in Italy, primarilybecause, until the introduction ofthe new arrangements, they hadbeen able to travel in advance ofan offer of work contract andseek out an employer personally.The new system of quotas andpre-arranged work contractsdescribed by Italian delegates wasin danger of undermining theenterprise which Tunisian migrantshad shown in the past.
Irregular migrationThe issue of so-called irregularmigration was seen by nearly allEuropean governments as a majorarea of concern. In fact, solidevidence demonstrating asignificant volume of clandestinemigration was felt to be lacking byexperts. It has been commonlyasserted in quarters associatedwith governmental positions thataround 500,000 people have beensmuggled into the countries ofWestern Europe each year, but itwas difficult to see how thisprecise figure had been arrived at.The only reliable statistics onirregular residence came fromGermany and these suggested adecline in the total numbers since1995. Immigration enforcementagencies were in any eventconfronted with the problem thatapprehended irregular entrants
are often not removed because ofhuman rights issues arising fromeither conditions in the countriesof origin, or length of residence inthe host country.The reality of thesituation has impelledgovernments to make use ofamnesties for irregular residents,with an estimated 1.4 millionbenefiting in the EU countriesover the course of the 1990s.
Options for governmentsacting against irregular migrationseem constrained. The lawenforcement approach appearedto be of limited application in theEuropean context.The US modelof strict border controls dependson substantial budgets forenforcement agencies, and eventhen does not succeed inestablishing watertight controls atborders. Further difficulties aregenerated by the fact that theexternal borders of the EU arenot fixed but are movingeastwards as candidate countriesaccede to membership.The EUmust also be aware that theimposition of tightly policedborder controls has implicationsfor neighbouring countries, andhas in recent years turned anumber into migrant receivingcountries themselves.
The scope for reformThe need for substantial changeto immigration control policies inEurope was marked out over thefirst two days of discussion. Thecase for better managedimmigration flows in the interestsof economic growth wasconsidered alongside the need forsending countries to secureaccess to European labourmarkets and procure the benefitsby way of increasing the skills oftheir nationals and the value ofremittances. The substantial costof not facilitating immigration, interms of the bill for the intensivepolicing of borders and thepotentially negative consequencesfor the integration of settledimmigrant communities, was alsodiscussed. The case having beenmade for change, the issue thenwas, of what sort?
The parameters for changehave been marked out to asubstantial extent by the work ofthe European Commission aspart of the Tampere process,which aims at the fullharmonisation of immigrationpolicies across the EU over a 5-year period ending in 2004.Thehuge volume of proposalsemerging from the Commissionon this issue – amounting toaround one-third of its legislativeoutput over this period – had setout an approach to immigrationwhich was described as beingmuch closer to a Canadianmodel, intended to facilitateimmigration, than to therestrictive traditions of the EUmember states.
Reviewing the scope forreform from the standpoint ofthe UK, a representative from theHome Office indicated that themood for a fundamental rethinkof policy was now deeplyestablished in official circles.Therewas a strong feeling that thepublic debate should be moveddecisively away from perceivedabuse of asylum procedures, andthat social partners – employersand the trade unions – should beencouraged to speak up in favourof a positive approach tomanaged migration. It was hopedthat policies could be elaboratedthat would move away fromofficials ‘second-guessing’employers and other sponsors onthe suitability of individualmigrants for residence in the UK.The cutting edge for enforcementaction should be a clampdown onillegal employment practices andthe exploitation of migrants.
The vexed question of theUK’s opt-out protocol with regardto the Tampere process mightalso be looked at in the nearfuture, since it seemed clear thatthe proposals emerging from theCommission had much incommon with the direction inwhich the UK governmentwanted to move.
The discussion concluded withsuggestions as to the principleson which future policy might be
European policiestowards the Romacommunity duringthe last 50 years.
Part two gives a detailed accountof the Fifth World Romani Congress, held in Prague in2000.This Congress ‘came at a crucial time in thedevelopments of Roma politics and was marked by theclaim for full yet non-territorial nationhood for theRomani people’ (p.xvi).
Part three ‘Diversity in Romani experience: countriesof the region’ provides case studies of how Roma haveexperienced the policies directed towards them, andexmines their situation in various CEE countries, rangingfrom Austria and Germany to former Yugoslavia, in anattempt to demonstrate the diversity of the Romaexperience in the region.
BackgroundTo write about Roma communities in Central andEastern Europe (CEE) is extremely timely, as theirconcerns attract increasing attention from WesternEuropean Institutions and Governments, due on the onehand to the enlargement of the EU, and on the other tothe proliferation of Roma people fleeing persecution fromCEE countries and entering Western Europe as refugees.
As pointed out in the first chapter, these two mattersare interlinked since the entry of CEE countries into theEU will increase the free movement of people, includingRoma refugees, in Europe. It is thus little surprising thatboth Western European Institutions and Governments areconcerned with the Roma, perhaps the largest refugeepopulation migrating from CEE countries at present.Despite this renewed interest, the issue is anything butrecent, and policies have consistently failed to improve thesituation of Roma communities.This book is thereforewelcome in that it points out the problems of previousand current policies as well as providing us with somestrong theoretical and empirical pointers towards makingpolicy towards Roma communities more effective.
Key issuesGiven that the one constant common feature that links allRoma together is the continuous discrimination they havefaced throughout the centuries, and which they still sufferfrom today, this book is very much needed. It is also
Between Past and Future – The Roma of Central and EasternEurope, edited by Will Guy, is a comprehensive bookwhich aims ‘to present – for non-Roma and Roma alike –a stimulating collection of rich resources and at timesprovocative views for policy makers, administrators,journalists, politicians, researchers and the general public inthe hope that this will inform debates about this complexand emotive area. Ultimately this might help lead to morepragmatic and realistic policies to aid the integration ofthe Roma – the largest, poorest and most marginalizedminority in Europe’ (p.xiii).
This book will undoubtedly serve as an invaluablereference tool as it deals with a topical issue in a challengingand rigorous way. If one message comes across as crucialwhen dealing with Romani issues, it is the complexity ofthe problem; this book therefore provides a good exampleof the diverse considerations at hand without making themistake of oversimplifying them.Adding to this diversityand complexity, these essays help us to understand theinterconnectedness of the issues, in particular policiestowards Roma and their role in shaping Roma identity inCentral and Eastern European (CEE) countries
StructureThe book divides into three sections.
Part one, ‘A truly European people: themes and issues’,provides a thematic analysis of the Roma experience in ahistorical and policy perspective, focusing on Romaniidentity and the various policies in the CEE region, inparticular Communist, post-Communist and Western
Edited by Will GuyHatfield, Herts: University of Hertfordshire Press, 2001
Between Past and Future:the Roma of Central andEastern Europe
• and finally that these objectivesshould be secured through thecooperation of all statesinvolved in the migratoryprocess.Further reflection on each of
these points, and theirestablishment as the core ofimmigration policy, might providethe best hope of moving theimmigration debate beyondnarrow-minded prejudice towardsa proper engagement with thecomplex realities of the modernworld. ❑
based.These included:• the need to secure orderliness
in the way people move acrossnational frontiers;
• assurances to all parties ofadequate protection ofessential interests;
• immigration being expected tolead naturally to integration, asopposed to maintenance ofthe peripheral status normallyassociated with temporarymigrants;
Continued from Pg.7
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
Nowheredoes itattempt tosimplifycause andeffect…
9
perceived as a ‘last chance’ to deal with the appallingsituation of Roma communities as the European Union ismore than ever involved in negotiations with CEEcountries in the context of EU enlargement. Indeed,
[n]egotiations over the approaching enlargement ofthe European Union offer a rare opportunity andunique “window” when political interest hasfocused on what is usually a neglected backwater inthe scheme of what is regarded as important on theworld stage. If this moment is allowed to slip theconsequences could indeed be critical and lead to anew and even darker period in the already grimhistory of the Romani people. (p.xvii)
In the introduction,Will Guy reiterates and stresses anobvious but ignored point – one which is still at the rootof failed policy in the last century – to the effect that ‘asignificant problem in resolving the predicament of Romais indeed one of ignorance about these people but theremedy cannot be dispensed in the form of a simple story’(p.xiv).The complexity and variety of Romani identity isthe first thing that needs to be understood if one is tocome up with successful policy proposals.The term‘Roma’ itself needs to be explained and its usage justified.
Following current usage this collection has mostlyadopted the umbrella name ‘Roma’ to try toencompass this diversity but, as used nowadays, thisterm carries the implication of a political project.By no means would all those written about acceptthis name and likewise some contributors adoptother formulations.With hindsight, ‘Romani people’(or peoples) would perhaps have been preferable.(pp.xiv–xv)
Across a wide range of themes, interlinked pointssurface and resurface throughout the chapters of the book.
1. OversimplificationContributors warn us of the bureaucratic/politicaltendency to oversimplify the issues.This tendency hasbeen – and remains – dominant, particularly in EuropeanInstitutions’ reports (Council of Europe and Organisationfor security and Co-operation in Europe-OSCE) andalthough no effort and expense are spared by theseinstitutions to come up with valuable and effectivepolicies, there is a real danger of these reports actuallydamaging the situation of the Roma communities today.Oversimplification, at the core of Romani policy bothduring the Communist and post-Communist eras, needsto be counteracted, especially at supra national level, if thenumerous funds issuing from international institutions areto be used effectively.
2.The historical contextThe continuous purpose and overarching framework ofthis collection of articles are perhaps best summarised inthe foreword where Ian Hancock states that ‘thecontemporary situation of Romanies can only be reached
in the context of history […] The social and historicalfactors that have brought Romanies in Europe to theappalling situation they face today must be properlyunderstood before the situation can be addressed andconfronted’(p.ix). Perhaps true of all communities, it iscrucial concerning the Roma whose identity and ‘indeedvery right to exist at all, has been in the hands of non-Romanies at so many times and in so many places’ (p.vii).Historical as well as socio-economic factors enable one toassess the highly complex nature of the problem.
The drive to consider historical factors leads in thisbook to a close examination, throughout a number ofchapters, of Communist policy towards Romacommunities in the post-war period. Communist andpost-Communist policies towards Roma have differedgreatly, and it is widely accepted that the Roma wererelatively better off during the Communist rule than inthe 1990s.As Will Guy reminds us in the introduction, ‘[a]central focus in this collection is the bitter experience ofRoma in the years following the ending of theCommunist rule’ (p. xv). For this reason, the contributorsconstantly refer to the Communist period as one where, asopposed to today’s tendency, the Roma ‘issue’ was treatedpurely as a social question.This policy obviously had itspitfalls as the Communists eliminated any culturalexpression of Romani identity and carried forward abrutal assimilation campaign to include the Roma in theirsocio-economic plans.
3. Need for a more holistic approachIn effect, the failure of successive policies towards theRoma since the collapse of Communism is primarily dueto the fact that policy-makers have neglected theimportance of socio-economic factors, both in their effecton the development of Romani identity, as explained inChapter 1, and, by their neglect, in the tendency of suchpolicy-makers to focus solely on the ethnic factors.Examining the issue in solely ethnic terms is certainly lessdemanding in post-Communist times. Indeed, it requiresless effort to recognise a community as an ethnic ornational minority than it does to allocate funds for itssocio-economic improvement.Whilst discrimination onthe basis of their ethnic origin is evident, it has to beunderstood in the context of extreme poverty andappalling social conditions for Roma communities as wellas the general economic hardship experienced across theCEE region in the 1990s as a result of its rapid transitionto a market economy.
Strength in depthMany interwoven issues are examined in the book,ranging from an ethnological account of the Romanipopulation to the political mobilization of Romaniactivists and organisations which has occurred recently.The strength of this new collection of essays is thereforethe fact that Romani identity is analysed in its entirety(social, economic, cultural, ethnic). Nowhere does itattempt to simplify cause and effect; rather it addressestheoretically and empirically the multiple facets of a denseand complex debate. ❑
MIGRATION &MIGRANT
COMMUNITIES
Sarah Isal,Research andPolicy Analyst(Europe),Runnymede
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 200110
A more patient-centred,accessible and equitable NHS
Introduced in 2000, the NationalHealth Service Plan set out toreform and modernise the NHS.This included structural andpolicy changes aimed at greaterpatient involvement creating amore equal relationship betweenNHS and patients, atmainstreaming health advice andadvocacy services, at greaterintegration between health andsocial services, and atimprovements in the level andquality of health services. All ofthese are aimed at changing andimproving the culture andservices of the NHS.
Set in the wider context ofthe government’s policy agendaand relevant legislativedevelopments, this new NHSmodernisation agenda dependsheavily on reducing healthinequalities in BME communities- as outlined in the NHS Planpassed in May 2001 and in eachof the National ServiceFrameworks (NSFs) issued to
date.The legal provisionsoutlined in the Race Relations(Amendment) Act and theHuman Rights Act outline legalrequirements for tacklingdiscrimination and promotingracial equality in health services.Likewise, the government’s policyagenda – including tacklinginstitutional racism in light of theStephen Lawrence InquiryReport and the social exclusionagenda incorporating health,regeneration and neighbourhoodrenewal, education, and so on –has created a context andenvironment which aims at far-reaching change andimprovement.
Health InequalitiesStatistics show that in the UKone person in 16 is from aminority ethnic group. In London,that figure is nearer one in four ;while in the boroughs of Brentand Newham about half of allresidents come from a minoritygroup. Statistics continue toindicate the health inequalitiesthat exist in London’s black andminority ethnic (BME)communities. For example, Asianpeople are 60% more likely tohave heart disease than whitepeople, and up to 5 times morelikely to have diabetes. Likewise,black African-Caribbean peopleare 5 times more likely than theaverage to have high bloodpressure and twice as likely todie of a stroke, as a result, underthe age of 65 (King’s Fund 2000).On the whole, while peopleacross all ethnic groups in Britaincan suffer from the sameillnesses, some health problemsare specific to particular groupsand communities.
What is widely accepted is thelink between poverty and ill-
health. BME groups andcommunities with the worsthealth are also those living in themost deprived areas with thelowest incomes.TheGovernment’s consultationdocument on Health Inequalities(October 2001) highlights sixpriority themes that will form thebasis of the agenda for NHSbodies aiming to reduce healthinequalities.
A study in London of incomedistribution shows the starkdifferences between minorityethnic groups with, for example,76% of the Bangladeshipopulation being amongst thelowest one-fifth of earners inLondon (London HealthObservatory 2001). BMEcommunities also tend to havelower average incomes andhigher unemployment – in arecent comparison,unemployment amongst thewhite population was 6.5%, whilstthe rate for Indians was 7.4%;black groups 20.5% andPakistanis and Bangladeshis 15.9%(London Health Observatory1998).
As the gap in healthinequalities in London continuesto widen, attempting to stabiliseand reduce health inequalities isa key government health priorityas part of its wider agenda aimedat tackling social exclusion.
Institutional RacismThe King’s Fund notes, however,that ‘income alone does notexplain why black people andpeople from minority ethnicgroups are more often ill thanwhite people. Racism in societyacts as a major hurdle both tohealth and wealth.’ Recentchanges in policy and legislationplace black and minority ethnic
HEALTH
An opportunity to reduce inequalities in BME communities and reduce racism anddiscrimination in health, discussed by Aisling Byrne and Samira Ben Omar, Kensington andChelsea & Westminster (KCW) BME Health Forum
BME Health ForumThe BME Health Forum is a policy forum aimedat creating an effective and sustainablemechanism for communication on health policyissues between the current Health Authority,PCGs/PCTs and other NHS bodies and BMEcommunity groups and individuals, in order toempower communities to effectively engage indebate between them and local health services.
Its key role is to oversee the development ofKensington, Chelsea & Westminster HealthAuthority’s Facing Up to Difference Strategy,support the statutory agencies in initiating andimplementing diversity strategies and initiatives,and to ensure health is integrated as an issuefor other KCW-wide regeneration,neighbourhood renewal initiatives, etc.
Contact: Samira Ben Omar/Aisling Byrne,Tel 020 7725 3252,[email protected]
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001 11
Health AdvocacyHealth Advocacy is vital in givingpeople from BME communitiesfair access to health services.Advocates inform people aboutNHS services, help patients andtheir families make decisionsabout their care and work withhealth professionals to developculturally sensitive services.
Coupled with the move tomainstream advocacy serviceswithin NHS Trusts (PCTs andNHS Trusts) has been a majorproject initiated by the King’sFund aimed at developing thecapacity of community-basedhealth advocacy services inLondon. Advocacy is increasinglyseen as a fundamental part ofthe process of empowermentand one of the best ways tofacilitate access to services bysocially excluded people andhard-to-reach groups. Feedbackfrom advocacy service providersshould be channelled through topolicy-makers to help improveservice provision and improveaccess.
The King’s Fund report(Silvera and Kapasi 2000) onHealth Advocacy in London’sBME communities highlights thefundamental role health advocacyservices play in reducing healthinequalities in BME communities:‘the issue of health advocacy ... iscentral to the King’s Fund’sconcerns with health inequalitiesand promoting cultural diversityand equality of access to healthcare’.
One of the recommendationsthat came out of the abovereport was that in order toprovide effective health advocacyto BME communities, healthadvocates must be provided withadequate support and accreditedtraining.This will then provideorganisations with the skills andcapacity to effectively advocateon behalf of their clients.Thetraining will also help standardisethe quality of advocacy acrossLondon.
The University of East Londonhas developed an AccreditedAdvocacy Course aimed at as-
yet unqualified people working asadvocates, and at volunteersfrom community groups.TheKing’s Fund is funding somebursaries to cover tuition fees.This Certificate in Advocacy is aone-year programme, with twointake points for the programmein September and January.1
The King’s Fund AdvocacyReport also found that while ‘theholistic advocacy supportprovided by communityorganisations was critical’ forusers, especially refugees, asylumseekers and people whose firstlanguage was not English, linksand relationships betweencommunity groups and the‘statutory agencies they wereassisting clients to use were inmany cases quite poor’.Specifically, ‘an apparent weaknessin the links identified by allagencies was with CommunityHealth Councils and RaceEquality Councils [and with] theprimary care sector generally’,although PCGs were in theprocess of being set up and sowould not have had aninfrastructure in place.
Yet, the report concludes that‘health advocacy remains amarginalized and undervaluedactivity ... funding for services ispatchy and highly insecure, oftencoming from charitable trusts orfrom funding “pots” outsidemainstream budgets.Thechallenge is to bring healthadvocacy into the mainstream’.The Report concludes that‘advocacy is not an optionalextra but an essential tool inimproving the health of some ofLondon’s most disadvantagedcommunities’ (Silvera and Kapasi2000).2
Patient and PublicInvolvement in the NHSA major aspect of therestructuring of the NHS, asoutlined in the NHS Plan, hasbeen the proposed newstructures for user, patient andpublic involvement. In September2001, the government produceda consultation document on
health and race equality issues atthe heart of the current reformand modernisation agenda. In thewake of the Stephen LawrenceInquiry Report, the 2001 RaceRelations (Amendment) Act nowrequires all public bodies –including NHS Trusts, Hospitalsand Health Authorities – to meetthe requirements of the Actaimed at reducing institutionalracism and discrimination.
In the NHS, there is still muchto be done. As Naaz Coker haswritten in her recent book,Racism in Medicine, ‘Nearly adecade after racism in medicinewas first exposed systematically,doctors from black and minorityethnic groups are still beingsidelined within the profession.This is a shameful waste oftalent.Yet it is not inevitable, andit can be tackled given sufficienteffort’ (Coker 2001).
Coker argues that wide-ranging reforms are required inthe NHS and professionalmedical bodies. From therecruitment of doctors toeliminating racism in medicalschools and monitoring thecareer paths of black and Asiandoctors, the Race RelationsAmendment Act now requiresNHS chief executives andpersonnel managers to take amore proactive stance ineliminating institutional racism.‘Freedom from racist harassmentand discrimination is afundamental human right’, said SirDonald Irvine, President of theGeneral Medical Council. ‘Inupholding that right, all of us inthe medical profession have aresponsibility to tackle racismand pursue racial equality.Discrimination must have noplace in medicine.’
Linked to this, access to healthservices, particularly by BMEcommunities, continues to be afundamental problem. Healthadvocacy for BME communities iscentral to ‘concerns with healthinequalities and promotingcultural diversity and quality ofaccess to health care’ (Arora etal. 2000).
HEALTH
1 For futherdetails, contactJoan fletcheron 0208 2232788.
CEMVO Health NetworkThe CEMVO Health Network aims to become the voice ofhealth advocates from BME communities in the London regionand provide health advocates with access to information, support,resources and influence.The Network will bring togetherpractitioners, researchers, policy makers and users to share ideasand experience, and develop responses.The Network willdevelop new ways of involving and supporting marginalisedLondoners to access health services via health advocacy. Healthadvocacy is only one aspect of improving access to healthservices; there is the potential for health advocacy to have amuch wider significance.
This strategic Network has the clear potential to impact uponthe cross-governmental focus on health and inequalities andreinforce the modernisation agenda within the health service.TheNetwork will work with members to interpret the changingcontext in which the health advocacy agenda will be required tooperate and how these changes can affect the futuredevelopment of health advocacy services within BMEcommunities.
‘Involving Patients and the Publicin Healthcare’ and after extensiveconsultation have now produceda ‘Response to ListeningExercise’.The proposals plan tobuild on existing work byCommunity Health Councils(CHCs) and the voluntary sectoron patient and publicinvolvement.The newarrangements will be:
• Locally based ICAS(Independent ComplaintsAdvocacy Services) willprovide independent advocacysupport to patients.
• New bodies called PALS(Patient Advice and LiaisonServices) will provide on thespot help and information ineach NHS Trust, and referpeople to the ICAS service topursue formal complaints.
• Patient Forums will operate ineach Trust and PCT with theaim of influencing day-to-daymanagement of healthservices.These Patient Forumswill also monitor theeffectiveness of PALS andICAS in their area.
• The National Commission forPatient and Public Involvement
in Health will set up localnetworks as a resource forlocal citizens, helping andsupporting community groupsand promoting better publicinvolvement. It is proposedthat outreach teams that willmake up the Network willwork from local community-based premises.Theseoutreach teams will have a laypanel to guide thedevelopment of their work..
• Similarly, at a local level, theOSCs (Overview and ScrutinyCommittees) based at thelocal authorities, will alsoscrutinise health services aspart of their role inmonitoring healthimprovement and reducinghealth inequalities for localresidents.
• At a national level, theCommission will co-ordinatepolicy issues based oninformation from localnetworks, Patient Forums andPALS.
With the creation anddevelopment of these newstructures and policies, thechallenge will be to ensure that
BME community representationand participation, as well asaccess to services by BMEcommunities, improves. Policiesand legislation have movedbeyond tokenism on diversity;the challenge for NHS bodies isnow to mainstream diversity inall aspects of their work, and toensure that parallel structures foron-going monitoring andevaluation provide theframework for systematicaccountability to thecommunities and patients theyserve. With sufficient effort,commitment and action,institutional racism, discriminationand the worsening healthinequalities that have beenwitnessed can start to bereversed: ‘The profession’sleaders must take action now totackle racist behaviour amongtheir ranks and to promote equalopportunities for all’ (Coker2001). ❑
ReferencesArora, Shona et al (2000) Improving
the Health of Black and MinorityEthnic Groups: A Guide for PCGs.London: King’s Fund.
Coker, Naaz (2001) Racism inMedicine, London: King’s Fund
London Health Observatory (1998)Health in London – Black andMinority Ethnic Populations.Acheson [see www.lho.org.uk]
London Health Observatory (2001)Knowing London Better : MappingHealth Inequalities Across London.Justine Fitzpatrick, Health Analyst;Dr Bobbie Jacobson, Director ;September 2001. [seehttp://www.lho.org.uk]
NHS (2001) Involving Patients and thePublic in Healthcare: Response tothe Listening Exercise, June 2001.[see http://www.doh.gov.uk/involvingpatients/listening.pdf]
NHS Plan (2001) A Plan forInvestment, A Plan for Reform [seehttp://www.doh.gov.uk/nhsplan/index.htm]
National Health Service Frameworks[see http://www.doh.gov.uk/nsf/about.htm]
Silvera, Mike and Kapasi, Rukshana(2000) Health Advocacy for MinorityEthnic Londoners: Putting Services onthe Map. London: King’s Fund.
A Health Service ofAll the TalentsComing from the United States, her first impressions wereof the differences between our two healthcare systems.YetBeverly Malone, the new General Secretary of the RoyalCollege of Nursing, recognises that we face similar problemsand challenges.
What strikes me most forcibly isthe principle of healthcare as aright, not a privilege, which is atthe heart of the National HealthService.This is a principle worthdefending and developing.Thequestion is, how do we take itforward? We have to put it intothe context of the drive forhealth-service modernisation,coupled with raised expectationsfrom the general public andadvances in technology.Potentially, it offers nurses moreopportunities for showingleadership, developing specialtiesand working across disciplines todeliver high-quality healthcare innew ways than at any time sincethe NHS was formed.
For example,Yana Richens, anurse from the West Midlandsand the latest winner of theMary Seacole Award, has beenawarded £25,000 to undertakeresearch into what women fromPakistan want and need frommaternity services, and todetermine how these needs canbest be met.The award, whichmarks the achievements ofJamaican nurse pioneer MarySeacole, recognises thecontribution of black andminority ethnic nurses to nursing.I’m delighted that Yana has justaccepted an appointment as anRCN Research Fellow.
So, nurses everywhere arepushing at the boundaries,looking at ways to take on thesenew roles with the aim ofimproving patient care.Tacklingthis ambitious agenda meansrecruiting, retaining and valuing anursing workforce which canprovide the expertise and drive
to make things better forpatients.To shape and deliverthat care, we need a healthservice of all the talents.
We can’t afford not to recruit,retain and reward a nursingworkforce that reflects thediversity of this country in the21st century.That is somethingthe UK shares with the UnitedStates.
Growing up as an African-American woman in the UnitedStates has been a powerfulgrounding. I grew up in a societywith very clear boundaries,though I and many others havestepped over nearly all of themsince then. I am also blessed withclose family and friends whocelebrate my successes, thenchallenge me to aim even highernext time.
As an African-American UScitizen now living in the UK, I amexploring the ways in which
diversity and ethnicity are dealtwith here. As I see it, we needfirst to acknowledge ourdifferences before we can trulycelebrate our diversity and startto build bridges to betterunderstanding and team work.Denying the differences meansnot building those bridges.Diversity is a real strength – theissue is to maximise ourpotential.
The RCN is playing its part inthe endeavour. We’recontributing to theGovernment’s strategy to tackleracism. And through the RCNConnect initiative, we arereaching out to our membersfrom ethnic communities – andthat includes the manyinternationally recruited nurseson whom the UK health sector isincreasingly reliant.Through ourWorking Well initiative, we areaiming for equality of workingconditions for all staff. It includesconfronting racism, bullying andother forms of harassment. It’sabout removing barriers toeffective working – andimproved patient care. ❑
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001 13
Beverly Malone heads Britain’s sixth largest trade union, TheRoyal College of Nursing, and brings to this role formidablelobbying and campaigning skills from a stint as DeputyAssistant Health Secretary for the Clinton administration inWashington, DC
Racism in Medicine is a timely book that pulls togethermany of the threads that enthusiasts for race equality inthe National Health Service are working upon, ensuringthat the agenda is made clearer and that the impetus anddirection and good intentions are not lost. For too long ithas been common practice for health service managersand clinicians to demand evidence for racism or tocommission research that measures the extent of theproblem while a colour-blind approach has been nurturedand sustained, feeding into excuses for lack of action andchange. In many ways it is sad to note that much of theevidence presented uses research conducted anddisseminated many years ago and yet not acted upon.
This weighty book is divided into two sections:‘Racism, the evidence’ and ‘Agenda for action’.
Racism, the evidenceThis first section demonstrates that racism exists in theNHS by tracing legislation from the creation of the NHSto the present day.This chronology may appear ratherlaborious or long-winded to those who have beenworking in the field for some years, but it does provide aperspective. Its statistical and anecdotal evidence focusesprimarily on medical institutions, and concernssurrounding the recruitment of overseas doctors, careerprogression for black and minority ethnic doctors,training opportunities, issues in primary care, and theongoing problems of doctors who are children of first-generation immigrants.
This section highlights the perception that most NHSorganisations see minority ethnic doctors as a problem,both first and second generation.The chapter on thehistory of recruitment of overseas doctors to addressdemand in the NHS from the 1950s onwards isinteresting, particularly in its analyses of the impact of theMerrison Report in 1975, which led to a two-tier systemof registration for overseas doctors from non-EEA(European Economic Area) countries, now known as thePLAB test.This is both a test of the English skills of thedoctor and an Objective Structured Clinical and OralExamination (OSCOE), and its format is unfamiliar tomost overseas doctors.
The PLAB is a tough exam to pass. As demonstratedby a study that revealed only one of 100 British-traineddoctors is able to pass, it obviously tests much more thanEnglish-language competence. In this respect, it is
interesting tonote thatmany doctors qualifying fromnon-EEA countries, such as India, have English as a firstor second language, and that they have been taught theirmedicine in English, while EEA doctors, often withlower English-language competence, are not tested forEnglish skills before practising in this country. It is notdifficult therefore to interpret the attitudes of institutionsand politicians calling for tougher tests for overseasdoctors as racist.
Recruitment studies conducted by medical researcherstell the same exclusionary story. A study by Esmail andEverington in 1995, analysing offers made to applicantsfor medical schools, showed that minority groups weresignificantly disadvantaged in nearly 50% of theseschools. As the evidence in this book mounts up, what ishighlighted is the slow and lumbering response and half-hearted cooperation of the medical institutions, theuniversities and colleges admissions service, and theCouncil of Heads of Medical Schools.
Agenda for actionThe second section, ‘Agenda for action’, presents acollection of papers which address the race agenda inhealthcare today. Each chapter demonstrates the existenceof the inverse care law in medicine, ie that those whoneed care most receive the least. It highlights thedisturbing evidence that points to black and minorityethnic groups receiving both delayed and inferior care.
The book aims to be constructive, using models forunderstanding the relationship between ethnicity andhealth, and how these may be translated into strategicmodels that can develop cultural competence and moreculturally sensitive services and frameworks for improvingservices and medical practice. It also encourages PrimaryCare Groups or Trusts to ask themselves the rightquestions to ensure they are commissioning anddelivering appropriately.
Coverage includes recent initiatives and research beingtaken forward at different levels of the NHS, such asracial harassment, language issues and interculturalcommunication, and a paper on good practice for fairselection.The racial harassment chapter reveals interestingstatistics from studies conducted: for example, that 66% ofblack nursing staff and 58% of Asian staff reported beingracially harassed by patients; and 37% of black and Asian
Equality of healthcarein the NHS
Racism in Medicine: An Agenda for ChangeEdited by Naaz Coker
Available from the Kings Fund bookshop [tel: 020 7307 2591]
Recruitmentstudiesconducted bymedicalresearcherstell the sameexclusionarystory.
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
HEALTHREVIEWS
15
staff have reported being harassed by colleagues,including supervisors and managers. Racial harassmentcontinues to affect the working lives of black andminority ethnic groups. Most incidents still gounreported.
Agenda for change?My only criticism of this book is that the division intotwo sections does not work as well as the section titleswould suggest. Although the second is titled ‘agenda foraction’, it continues to make the case for racism in theNHS, which was the remit of the first.The first sectionillustrates the issue by looking at doctors, whilst thesecond looks at nurses and more general issues in greaterdetail.The models in the second section do not then,necessarily, reflect the problems highlighted in the first.This detracts from the robustness suggested by the title. Itmight, therefore, have been more apt to subtitle the bookand the second section ‘Agenda for change’.
Ethnic monitoring is a running theme; however, thelack of a chapter or explicit highlighting of this veryimportant issue and how it can be taken forward is aflaw.The NHS has been collecting ethnicity monitoringdata for many years now and there is little evidence tosuggest that it has been used constructively orstrategically to improve services for minority ethnicemployees. A chapter devoted to the subject in thesecond section could have appraised various models andadvised the NHS on improving its strategies.
The need for the NHS to address these shortcomingsis as pertinent as ever. Even at the time of writing, anissue of the Health Service Journal (8 November 2001)highlights the fact that as many as 2000 qualified doctorsand dentists among our refugee population could play arole for the NHS in easing staff shortages. Although thisfigure was revealed by a working committee in 1999 itsrecommendations are yet to be carried out.
One year on many of these refugees still live inpoverty, trapped by the system.The Department ofHealth is quick to point to a good-practice project inRedbridge and Waltham Forest where ten refugeedoctors have been helped to pass the English test part ofthe PLAB and four have been helped to pass theirOSCE. Although laudable in its uniqueness, this is hardlya flood. Understandably, many doctors are frustrated andangry at the lack of progress. It is widely known that theNHS is facing huge manpower shortages. Racism inMedicine points out that to meet these shortages willrequire at least 500 additional doctors annually. Given allthe other issues around retaining newly qualified doctorsthat train in Britain, this will be no mean feat.
Both parts of the book make recommendations forchange, but they get somewhat lost in the detail of theconcerns and cases they present. A more clearly definedset of recommendations on issues such as ethnicmonitoring might have provided a clearer ‘Agenda forAction’. Nevertheless, the book remains a valuableaddition to the library of anyone interested in the NHSand its future. ❑
Anjum Fareed
Palliative Care in aMulticultural Society
Perhaps death is one of the most profound interfaces thatcan be experienced in a multi-racial/religious society.Today not only do all cultures and religions have theirown views of death but they interact in such a way that anindividual could have a almost unique viewpoint.To havethat death occur amongst people who are not only unableto understand your viewpoint but maybe believe in itsopposite, must pose one of the greatest challenges to ourability to demonstrate respect for other people and theiropinions.
The National Council for Hospice and SpecialistPalliative Care Services, through the above publicationsand its recent (11 December) conference, challenge us tore-examine our own views and practices and create anenvironment which will be supportive to the dyingpatient.
Shirley Firth, in her book, states clearly that the onlyway to ensure that professionals can face up to thechallenge in a supportive way is after adequate training.Interactive training too, so that not only will they be ableto face such events in a supportive and dynamic way, butto ensure that the information they absorb is more thanmere ‘fact files’ on different cultures.
Training must be intensive and dynamic and involverole-plays to make professionals explore their own, perhapslatent, beliefs: ‘The challenge to the healthcare worker isnot to provide answers or question tenets of faith (orabsence) but to meet the dying person in a spirit ofcompassion which allows the person to feel accepted andvalued.’
Both these NCHSCS publications stem from theorganisation’s decision to review progress since publicationof their ‘Opening Doors’ report (Hill and Penso 1995).Groups who were actively pursuing some of the objectivesof that 1995 report were invited to a seminar, and the firstof the above-listed publications was the result.
The second publication,Wider Horizons, provides thetitle and much of the agenda for this December’sconference at which the author spoke. Both conferenceand book aimed to promote dialogue, understanding andbest practice in meeting the palliative care needs of peoplefrom different ethnic groups, and workshop themesincluded: beliefs and attitudes to illness and death; culturalsensitivity and cultural competence; disclosure, patientautonomy and informed consent; and care and ageing.
In reviewing progress since 1995 both publications
Palliative Care Services for Different Ethnic GroupsProceedings of a Seminar held in December 2000compiled and edited by Dr John Mount, July 2001£10. ISBN: 1 898915 28 8Wider Horizons: Care of the Dying in a Multicultural Society Shirley Firth, July 2001. £15. ISBN 1 898915 27 XBoth published by National Council for Hospice andSpecialist Palliative Care Services, London[www.hospice-spc-council.org.uk]
Mann Ki Baat: Coping with DistressCommissioned by Northern Birmingham MentalHealth Trust and funded by the DoH and NLCB,this video addresses mental health problems inthe South Asian communities. In an area ofeveryday life where embarrassment andincomprehension can lead to seriousconsequences for both sufferers and families, itoffers techniques for recognising and tacklingthe onset of cognitive and behaviouraldysfunction. It claims to be a very powerfultool, suitable both for training practitioners andfor raising awareness of mental health issuesamong client communities, and is available ina range of languages – Bengali, Punjabi,Gujarati, Hindi, Urdu and English.
Dharmendra, a Bollywood star, whose popular personacheerfully links the various parts of the video, helpschallenge the idea that mental health problems aresomething to be ashamed of.
Structurally excellent, the video begins with a numberof people giving us a glimpse of some of the pain theyhave experienced as a result of their mental healthproblems.After a short introduction by Dharmendra theygo on to relate their stories in full.A variety of scenariosand symptoms ensures that everyone watching can identifywith the speakers, and each vignette ends with anaffirmation of there being ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ ifproblems are addressed with understanding and resolution.Dharmendra ends by thanking the participants for theirfrankness and advice.
The video and the booklet that accompany it are aninvaluable resource for people working with South Asiancommunities. I viewed the video with Mr Ayyaz InayatProject Manager at Eastwards Trust. He was sufficiently
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 200116
highlight the fact that many of the issues raised thenremain major concerns.There is very little ethnicmonitoring, but most available information would suggestthat take-up of palliative and specialist services bymembers of the non-white communities is still relativelylow.
A number of factors are used to explain this: thedifferent characteristics of the minority ethnic groups,such as age, diet, religion/beliefs, prohibitions, family rolesand expectations.These issues have been highlighted inother publications, but the Firth publication goes on totalk about the disease profile of the communities, lack ofadequate communication, inappropriate services and therole of other health professionals such as GPs who are thegatekeepers.
Hospice services are generally concentrated aroundcancer, and there is a lower level of this amongst theminority ethnic communities compared to the white
HEALTHREVIEWS
population. However, as these communities adapt to theBritish diet and environment, this is likely to change andthe consequences will need to be catered for.Communication is discussed by reference to the King’sFund Advocacy Project, which has been referred toelsewhere in this Bulletin.
Firth makes it clear ‘that despite good intentions it hasbeen difficult to influence the culture of health servicedelivery on a permanent basis’.The NHS is subject to astream of changes, a factor instrumental to the relativesuccess of some of the projects. In some cases the projectshave been able to use these changes to their advantage,enabling them to embed in local systems. In other areas,while changes were causing attention to be divertedelsewhere, projects have failed to find a platform.
Leadership, linkages and lasting change are the remediesprescribed. ❑
Qaisra Khan, Runnymede
enthused to order a number of copies and will be usingthem with both service users and staff.
Talking about Suicide:A Family DramaAlso produced for North Birmingham Mental HealthNHS Trust and DoH funded, this video addresses the issueof suicide amongst South Asian women.The suicide rateamongst South Asian women is one of the highest in theUK.The video is available Bengali, Punjabi, and Gujarati.It is not available in English, but all the versions haveEnglish subtitles.
Narrators Saeed Jaffrey and Meera Syal introduce youto a scenario of tensions within one family group.You aregripped from the start, as two parents read a suicide notefrom their daughter. Moving back in time it relates a keyepisode in the life of the couple’s two daughters: the notecould be from either of them! You understand from thestart that the husband is unlikely to be a victim becausethe video is about Asianwomen; but his charactertoo is shown to bevulnerable.
At each significantmoment a scene unfolds,and then eachprotagonist relates itfrom their ownperspective.Professionals also comeforward to suggestwhere they could havegone for help oradvice, highlightingthe crucial piece ofadvice, which is that
Health Outreach Videos for theSouth Asian Community
Both the MannKi Baat andTalking aboutSuicide videosare available toorder fromMental HealthMedia, 356Holloway Road,London N7 6PA[fax: 020 76860959; tel: 02077008171;www.mhmedia.com] at £39.95(or £24.95 fororganisationswith fewer than10 full-timeemployees).
African-Caribbeans – sopreventing self-harm should beof more concern to psychiatriststhan conditions perceived as adanger to others.
• Social causes are regarded asmore to blame for these highrates than biological or physical– chronic stress and acutestress.The former mayproduce vulnerability; the latterthe ‘last straw’.
• Social risk factors for mentalillness include city life, thwartedaspirations, financial strain,discrimination, low autonomyemployment, uncertainty aboutthe future, and the area inwhich you live. African-Caribbeans in the UK are morelikely to be exposed to most ofthe known social risk factors.
Psychiatry needs to re-focus itspractice in recognition of theimpact of social risk factors.
As Dr McKenzie states: ‘TheWHO claims that if there is adisparity in the rates of illnessbetween two groups in the same
area there is a potential forprevention… The potential forprevention in the African-Caribbean population in the UK istherefore huge.’
At its most basic definition,primary prevention wouldaddress the needs of theindividual – on the personal,institutional and community levels.Secondary prevention wouldinvolve providing culturallyrelevant, non-discriminatoryholistic, mental health services forindividuals and their families.Tertiary prevention woulddepend on creating betterrelationships with and within theprofession of psychiatry –destigmatising, resocialising, andsupporting colleges, schools andother professionals in teachingand implementing these changes.
The next best thing toprevention is targeted treatmentof the cause. ‘This would arguefor therapy modalities thatacknowledge and help individualscope with discrimination inaddition to any psycho-pharmaceutical treatment. Itwould also argue for racism to beconceptualised as a public healthissue and taken up by the DoH inaddition to the Home Office,’ saysDr McKenzie.
He concludes with a reminderof how vital is prevention, as‘psychiatrists have no cures’. DrMcKenzie also argues thatpsychiatry will have to move from‘exclusive preoccupation with theindividual to a preoccupation withthe individual in a society’. ❑
Dr Kwame McKenzie, who lecturesat the Royal Free and UCL MedicalSchool, London as well as workingas a consultant psychiatrist withinthe NHS, has written widely onthe reasons for mental illness inminority ethnic groups, on theoutcomes of illness and on theneed for reconceptualisation andchange in service provision toachieve equity of service.
Notes from Dr McKenzie’spresentation
• 40% of users of London’spsychiatric services are fromminority ethnic groups, thoughthey make up only 25% of thepopulation of London.
• Depression is the mostcommon mental illnesssuffered by African-Caribbeansin the UK – the women twiceas likely to succumb as whitewomen; and the men likely toexperience depressive ideasand worry.
• Suicide rates are risingdramatically among young
Social Risk Factors for Mental IllnessCriminology in the New Millennium, in their 9th year offocusing on issues of race, gender and criminal justice,included a presentation on ‘A New Psychiatry for African-Caribbeans’ in their 26 October conference, writesorganiser, Ruth Chigwada-Bailey.
Ruth Chigwada-Bailey’s nextconference is on8 March 2002 atPortcullis HouseWestminster,addressing issuesaround Race,Gender andViolence in theHome. Speakersinclude BarbaraFollett MP, LizzyGummer(Home Office),Prof. Jill Radfordof TeessideUniversity,HannanaSiddiqui(Southall BlackSisters), JulieBindel(University ofEast London)and JackieHolder.Esther Stanford(Society of BlackLawyers) is inthe Chair.Further detailsfrom RuthChigwada-Bailey,98 AldridgeAvenue,Stanmore,Middx HA71DD [tel: 0208204 9587;email:[email protected]].
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
HEALTHREVIEWS
the protagonists need to get away from the situation and talk.There are basically two scenarios.The couple has two
daughters: one married and the other studying for herGCSEs.The younger sister is determined not to be likeher sister and competes with her brother.When she doeswell in her GCSEs she lies to her parents about herchosen A level courses.
The elder sister has had two miscarriages and isfrightened to try again. Her husband remortgages the houseand sets up a business.The business starts to go under andthe daughter has her third miscarriage.Whilst the wife issuffering depression the tension in the house becomesunbearable and the husband starts abusing the wife.
These scenarios are worked out so you begin to feel
involved with the family and understand the individualsconcerned. It is therefore a relief when it is revealed thatno-one actually commits suicide. One of the reasons whysuicide is prevented is because the potential victimvisualises the distress of her parents in the event.Thesituation does not resolve itself perfectly, but the familymembers have started talking about their problems and soare more able to resolve issues.
The protagonists, narrators, and professionals all giveout the message that nothing is beyond hope as long asyou find someone to talk to.The Facilitator’s Bookaccompanying the video provides you with furtherresources and a list of national contacts. ❑
Qaisra Khan, Runnymede
17
18
EDUCATION
Through their participation inLECT’s programmes theseteachers have been able to bringthe Commonwealth ideal to life,taking their skills to students indifferent countries, sharing ideaswith fellow educators across theCommonwealth and bringing newideas back to their own schools.
LECT’s mission in its centenaryyear continues to be to supportteachers and promote excellencein education throughout theCommonwealth throughencouraging, developing,promoting and funding:
• international educatorexchanges and study visits;
• cross-national collaborationand linking;
• information sharing andsupport;
• experience and good practicecompared and shared;
• enhancement of theprofessional status of teachers.
LECT’s programmes arefunded by the Department forEducation and Skills (DfES), theScottish Executive EducationDepartment (SEED), theDepartment of Education inNorthern Ireland (DENI) and theNational Assembly for Wales.Through their commitment tocontinuing professionaldevelopment, these departmentsoffer substantial funding forteachers to participate ininternational professionaldevelopment opportunities.
The Commonwealth TeacherExchange Programme is asignificant avenue of professionaldevelopment for teachers.TheProgramme promotes internationalgoodwill and understanding byallowing teachers to experienceand contribute to an importantexchange of educational ideaswhile experiencing the culture andlifestyle of another country, asdemonstrated here by Andrea
Inniss’s Study Visit as describedbelow.
LECT’s programmes can be:
• short term – 2 weeks to oneterm
• long term – 2–3 terms
and can be arranged forgroups or individuals aroundmany curriculum themes.
During 2000/2001 over 700teachers took part in theseprogrammes to destinationswhich include Australia,Bangladesh, Canada, Ghana, India,Kenya, New Zealand, Jamaica,South Africa,Tanzania,Trinidad &Tobago, Zambia.
Whilst the current closing datefor long-term programmes was30 November, late applicationsare still encouraged. Short-termprogrammes are more flexibleand visits often take placethroughout the year. ❑
Since its foundation in 1901, writes Christine Miller, LECT(the League for the Exchange of Commonwealth Teachers)has enabled over twenty thousand teachers from everycontinent to participate in its professional developmentprogrammes.
International ProfessionalDevelopment Opportunitiesfor Educators
Andrea Inniss with her Principal, CraigCrone, at the end of her exchange yearin Toronto.
Andrea Inniss’s Exchange Experience in CanadaI had heard about the teacher exchange programme many years before I applied.The application process began to stimulatemy appetite for a chance to work in a completely different education environment. I chose Canada as my exchangedestination.
My pre-visit meeting made the experience suddenly real. I was also the only black teacher in the group! By the end ofthe two-day conference I felt stimulated; I was going to change my life and experiences as well as open up channels toencourage black teachers in the countries I visited to take part in an exchange programme.
My exchange was brilliant! I was matched with a partner who was keen and informative and did everything he could tomake my experience positive. I taught in Smithfield Middle School in metropolitan Toronto, which had over 1000 pupils. I hadcome from a primary school in London with 280 pupils! Canadian teachers were keen to find out about the EnglishNational Curriculum, especially the literacy strategy.
Having had the best teaching experience ever, I would encourage all teachers to take up this opportunity. But I wouldparticularly like to encourage fellow black teachers/colleagues to go for it!
Since returning I have changed jobs twice. I have worked in a secondary school for boys with emotional and behaviouraldifficulties.This school felt that my work in Canada had given me the experience necessary to teach Years 7 and 8. I gainedlots from this post and moved on to become a manager of a Primary Learning Support Unit.
It worked for me and I am thankful to all the people who encouraged me to take on this career challenge.What haveyou got to lose? Try it.Your family and friends are only a phone call away!
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001 19
EDUCATION
Education, reminded us that inthese challenging times even thegovernment needs to positionitself as a leading economiccompetitor. For the goal ofextended competitiveness to berealised the country needs ahighly skilled workforce. However,he pointed out that:
in 1999 … the McKinsey Waron Talent research showedthat only 3% of companiesbelieved they were recruitingenough talent to reach theirbusiness objectives in 5 years’time.… The truth of thematter is that we do stillneed to train and equipyoung people for tomorrow– to be educators, the nextgeneration of incomeearners, the keys to thefuture competitiveness of thecountry – the skills base, thetechnologists, the innovators,the satisfiers of customers.
Unfortunately, the knowledgeand talents of some black andminority ethnic young people areneither being developed norutilised to their full potential.Some are not even able toaccess the kind of workexperience that couldmeaningfully inform theiracademic or future careerchoices. However, businesses andschools, by forging mentoringlinks with young people, will domore than just provide them withaccess to and knowledge of theworld of work (the traditionalpreserve of the school/businessrelationship). As one menteeeloquently articulated: ‘someone[the mentor] is showing us thatwe can go out there and achieve,and get what we want.’
Runnymede would like tothank the Bank of England forhosting a most successful launch.Through the medium of thisevent alone, more than 1,000copies of the handbook havebeen distributed to schools,businesses and mentoringorganisations. ❑
Linda Appiah, Runnymede.
On 28 September at the Bank ofEngland the Runnymede Trustofficially launched its handbookMentoring: Business and SchoolsWorking Together.This handbook isthe culmination of a year-longstudy to identify good practice inschool/business mentoring forschemes that service black andminority ethnic schoolpopulations, specifically or ingeneral.
A range of peoplerepresenting the fields of business,education and mentoringattended the launch, and thisevent provided Runnymede withthe opportunity to showcase thepublication and also thank theresearch participants andsupporters of the project fortheir time and commitment.
Mentoring has a long traditionwithin black and minority ethniccommunities. However, businessmentoring is now making animpact on multicultural schoolsand colleges. Runnymede devisedthe mentoring handbook not justto fill the knowledge gap thatexists at this level and introducethe ideas and advantagesmentoring has to offer this agegroup, but also to encouragebusinesses and employees tobecome actively involved inworking with, setting up and/orrunning school/business
School–BusinessMentoring Launch
mentoring schemes with and forculturally diverse schoolpopulations.
The Runnymede handbook –Mentoring: Business and SchoolsWorking Together – clearlyillustrates the importance andbenefits of mentoring forbusinesses, mentors, schools andnot least the mentees themselves.Input from an interested, non-judgemental adult, a ‘mentor’ whocan guide and advise a youngperson through a transitionalperiod of their lives, is a resourceto be valued and welcomed. Asone mentee remarked: ‘it’s morelike a friendship.We can talk toeach other – share and talk, andwe can still get down to work.’
As for businesses, by forginglinks with the local communitythey give their employees theopportunity to develop theirpersonal skills while raising theprofile of the business within andbeyond its locality.
These points were reiteratedby all three key speakers at thelaunch – Alan Clarke of the Bankof England, Michelynn Laflèche ofthe Runnymede Trust and JohnMay of Business in theCommunity – who commendedthe accessibility of the publicationfor those interested in mentoring.
John May, Business in theCommunity’s Director of
NMN Approved ProviderThe National Mentoring Network’sApproved Provider Standard is a newbenchmark for organisations providing
one-to-one mentoring. It represents only the first stage indeveloping a generic quality assurance framework for mentoring,and further materials to support organisations delivering mentoringwill be published early in 2002.
Approved Provider status can be applied for up to 14 January2002.The NM Network is receiving applications from organisationsof all sizes and from all sectors, and is guaranteeing to consider atleast the first 300 applicants – who will be notified by 31 March.
Enquiries to the NMN office on 0161 787 8600 or (by email):[email protected]
The NMN was set up in 1994 and is funded by membership fees and support from theDfES and the Home Office.
Should you wishto obtain a copyof the handbookplease contactus at:The RunnymedeTrust, Suite 106,The LondonFruit and WoolExchange,BrushfieldStreet, LondonE1 6EPTel: 020 73779222Fax: 020 73776622Email:[email protected]
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 200120
MULTI-ETHNICBRITAIN
CONFERENCEREPORT
Séamus Taylor’s presentationSpeaking as one of the Report’s Commissioners,Séamus Taylor reminded us how, on the Report’spublication, the media was saturated with coverage,much of it grossly distorted. Hence, the importanceof events like the evening of 27 November as
opportunities to convey the Commission’s visionand engage in dialogue on the real issuesraised.
Séamus pointed out that Runnymede’smajor study of the 1960s, Colour and
Citizenship, had not examined the Irishexperience, although he understood it had
collected some data on it.That study was veryinfluential and paved the way for the Race Relations
Act 1976.Thirty years on, the Runnymede Trustees hadfelt it was timely to take stock.As a result, in 1997Runnymede established the independent Commission onthe Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, backed by all the mainpolitical parties.
The Commission looked across a very broad canvas,with its focus very much on Multi-Ethnic Britain – asmuch on Britishness and Whiteness as on the problemsexperienced by what are conventionally described as theethnic minorities.
As part of the Commission’s extensive consultationprocedures, over 1,000 submissions were received fromorganisations and individuals across Britain. Specialistpapers commissioned on a range of topics included threeon the Irish in Britain: one by Bronwen Walter onDiversity, Disadvantage and Discrimination; and two byMary Hickman, one on the construction of race in Britainand invisiblising the Irish, and one on issues of identityamongst the Irish in Britain.1
Specially commissioned focus groups were run byNOP with young people across Britain who were Black,Asian, Irish, dual-heritage and White British. In fact AGIYfacilitated NOP in running the Irish Focus Group.
Two possible limitations of the work overall could becited: the neglect of race and housing; and the fact that thestrategic pitch of the themes and the approach oftenmeans there is less detail on specific items or areas thanone might wish for.
Key themesHow does Irishness fit into the six key themes of thereport? • Rethinking the national story and the national identity
– the Irish feature here• Understanding that all identities are in a process of
transition – again the Irish are visible here• Developing a balance between cohesion (holding the
overall society together) equality and difference(acknowledging, tackling inequality and respondingpositively to difference)
• Addressing all forms of racism – what we called themulti-racisms – again the experience of the Irishfeatures significantly here
• Reducing material inequalities• Building a human rights culture
Irish issuesIrish issues are mainstreamed throughout the reportwherever evidence was submitted or was already available.Although over 100 copies of the Commission’sconsultation document were issued to Irish organisations,only seven responses were received. However, the Irishresponses, though few in number, were in the main ofgood quality, with valuable information for theCommission to draw on.
The focus group with young Irish people, a mixedgroup in terms of gender and socio-economic status,highlighted some interesting issues, including a deep senseof exclusion on the part of some of the young Irishpeople, and a perception of their discriminationexperience which was similar to but less intense than thatexperienced by Asian and black young people. Notsurprisingly, the Commission’s clearest evidence of Irishdisadvantage was in relation to Health.2
Overall, the Irish dimension contributes significantly tothe report’s key themes – the Irish experience illuminatesBritishness in ways similar to the Black experience’sillumination of Whiteness.The Irish experience of racismalso illuminates the relationship between conflict andracism and how in a context of wider historical orcontemporary conflict a racist ideology can emerge whichfacilitates and feeds individual and institutionaldiscrimination.We are reminded of this daily now withthe war in Afghanistan, and the anti-terrorism measuresbeing introduced in Britain. For the Irish Communitythere is a real sense of déjà vu here. For othercommunities there are valuable lessons we should seek tolearn from.
Séamus Taylor sees the report as, in a sense, breaking aprevalent mould – that of a black–white binary on raceequality issues.This report has involved centrally three of
The Irish – in the Future ofMulti-Ethnic BritainOn 27 November, at the London Voluntary Sector Resource Centre on Holloway Road,the Action Group for Irish Youth (AGIY) hosted an evening discussion to mark the firstanniversary of the publication of The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain.The keynote speakerswere two of the Report’s Commissioners, Séamus Taylor (head of public sector policy atthe CRE), and Professor Stuart Hall.
1 Bronwen
Walters’s
paper can be
read on the
Runnymede
website
[www.runny
medetrust.org.
uk/meb]
2 AGIY, among arange of well-produced andtargetedpublicationsaimed athelping youngIrish peoplecope withtheirexperience ofliving inLondon,produce apocket bookon StayingAlive:Your Guideto StayingHealthy inLondon. Full ofgood sense andunpatronisingadvice onaspects ofhealth fromAlcohol toSmoking and
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001 21
Britain’s leading academics and writers on race – BhikhuParekh,Tariq Modood and Stuart Hall.
Historically Séamus thinks it is fair to say that peoplelike Bhikhu,Tariq and Stuart have on occasions in the pastwritten race, and in so doing invisiblised the Irish. In thisreport they have in one fell swoop rewritten race and putthe Irish at the centre of the debate.The significance ofthis should not be underestimated.Academically themajority of academics in Britain writing on race havehelped create and perpetuate a paradigm of race relationswhich focuses on inequalities explained by skin colour.This is a very powerful paradigm and it has muchexplanatory power. However, it does not explain anti-Muslim racism, antisemitism, or in this instance thespecifics of the experience of the Irish in Britain.
By adopting a more inclusive approach in this reportthe dominant paradigm on race in this country has beenbroken – the myth of white homogeneity has beenshattered.This can only be to the benefit of a fullerunderstanding of the nature of multi-ethnic Britain, and tothe benefit of the Irish community over time.
In initiatives such as the work of the Commission,Séamus finds that individuals as well as groups always playa key role. He would like to single out Stuart Hall forgrasping the significance of the Irish to the whole projectat the outset and ensuring that it was threaded through thereport in an appropriate way. Without the intellectualcommitment, analytical rigour and incisiveness of Stuartthis would not have happened.
Key recommendationsIt is interesting that many of the Commission’s keyrecommendations are the liveliest issues of the moment interms of race equality in public policy:• creation of a single Equality Act• a single Equality Commission• Equality built into performance management• Equality built into inspection regimes• Public sector equality schemes • Establishment of a Human Rights Commission• Formal declaration of a multi-cultural society, leading
to a Multi-Culturalism Act
Media coverage of the reportPre-launch coverage by the Telegraph and the Mailseriously misrepresented the report’s messages. However,they successfully created a framework within which thereport has been subsequently discussed, and eclipseddiscussion of the substantive recommendations for aperiod of time. Reaction to the report provided afascinating insight into the dark heart of modern Britain –in particular its media and their power over politics, butalso its politics and their complicit collusion with mediamanipulation. Nonetheless, many accurate pieces appeared,which resulted in huge demand for the report.
A few thoughts on the Irish experience.Although this report made a contribution toforegrounding the Irish experience at the heart of thedebate about the future of multi-ethnic Britain, there’s
little room for complacency.The Irish place remainsprecarious, regularly invisiblised and ignored. Irishcommunity organisations have a vital role to play, inparticular in continually bringing public sectorinstitutions’ attention to the realities of the Irishexperience.That role is needed as much now as at anytime before.
Key points from Stuart Hall’s speechStuart Hall wanted the Multi-Ethnic Britain Report to beseen differently from earlier reports.The Parekh Report,he reminded us, was written to the community as awhole. It invites the community as a whole to engage in aseries of long-term debates about its own future, and thedecision to write it in that mode affected how thethemes of the Report were selected.
Professor Hall reminded us that we were allsupposed to see multiculturalism and diversity in theUK as ‘much better than it was before’, with tokennumbers of black faces, ethnically diverse TVnews-presenters, etc. But was this real orillusory?
Having come to the UK in 1959, he hasseen the whole arc of immigration.Things areindeed different after 50 years, but notprofoundly changed. Multicultural drift goes on.‘Things go on behind your back, without you reallynoticing, bumbling, stumbling along in an amateurishway’, but the belief you are encouraged to take on boardis that Britain has ‘turned the corner’.
The Parekh Report was trying to say that thatjudgement is much too complacent. Think about the lastsix months in this field, in the industrial cities of theNorth, with the signs of chasms between communities,and people unable to disappear into the landscapes of theirown areas.Think of the ease with which the BNP hasbeen able to identify targets.
No trendy industries have gone to those societies –which are now economically destitute, politicallyabandoned. It is so easy to expose people to the suggestionthat it is the fault of the Muslims, or of asylum-seekers,Afghan asylum-seekers, people of absolute desperation.There have been three Afghan wars since the line drawnin the sand by the British - an iconic image of thecolonised past. Our culture tells its own stories.
Everywhere we face the multicultural question: how dopeople live peacefully together – or else devour oneanother? The host community cannot remain unchangedand unwelcoming. How can we live with real histories,real resentments, and make a common life together? Thisis a question for the whole of society. Everybody has tochange, including the ethnic minorities themselves. If youreally mean that Britain is a multicultural community theneverything is going to have to change.
The ReportLiving with difference is profoundly difficult said ProfessorHall.The colonial fantasy is that everywhere can (be madeto) look like home. But no more! Dialogue needs to bebetween genuinely equal partners, with nothing hidden
MULTI-ETHNICBRITAIN
CONFERENCEREPORT
from Aids toStress, ittypifies AGIY’sdown-to-earthand well-informedapproach tohelping youngpeople of allnationalitiescope with thejoys and woesof their first,oftenbewildering,encounter withcity living.Thisand otherpublicationscan beobtained freefrom AGIY, at356 HollowayRoad, LondonN7 6PA [tel:020 77008137; email:[email protected]].
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 200122
behind the back.Can other people belong to/in Britain? Professor Hall
responded to his own question with reference to what theReport sees as the key points to address in the yearsahead.• People give their lives cultural / symbolic meanings by
relating what’s happened to them to the collectiveexperience, looking both forward and back.Thesymbols to which we attach meaning need to be morediverse to stimulate responses in all.
• Materials to make a good life – we all need access tothese, and resources need to be more equallydistributed.
• Having a stake in the nation.The classic Britishcollective sense - in the head, in books, in buildings(not in the constitution we don’t have) – is importantas ‘cement’, ‘glue in the works’, but these traditionsneed to be inflected to reflect the reality of others.When the Daily Telegraph misreads the wording of theReport as it did, they literally cannot see the normalmeaning of the sentence dealing with ‘Britishness’, andare feeling deeply threatened. Instead of debate we hadflight.
• Equal material outcomes: these are not achieved by anymeans all Britons, but for ethnic minorities it’s even lessso.The adversity of the migrant experience must berecognised and acknowledged.This is not so easy whenEquality has become a banished word in New Labour’sthird way. ‘Social inclusion’ is ‘okay’ but what aboutproblems for the mainstream? If equality and socialjustice can’t be delivered then just feeling good about
Questions and Answers SessionThe Question session was wide-ranging, so just a few comments fromboth speakers are noted here:
Séamus: The NI peace process attempts to strike a balance onEnglish/Irish relations that’s more of a parity than ever before.
Séamus: Lack of discussion about Good Practice is a weakness of thereport.Also a failure to talk about positive mixed-race experience.
Stuart: (on the topic of ‘national emergencies’) Scapegoating isunnecessary. It’s a difficult balance to strike but I’m not convincedthat the Home Secretary’s language is that of someone who trulyvalues civil liberties.There’s no need to suspend the right of judicialreview.The national reaction to national emergencies is a seriousquestion that needs someone’s full-scale attention.
Stuart: Social exclusion/Social inclusion – does this terminology haveany validity? Stuart Hall disapproves of the substitution of socialexclusion for inequality. He doesn’t want to rubbish the term, but hemistrusts the ideological game that is going on, the languagecleansing.This government believes in Fairness rather than Equality.The language of politics matters. Conflate the opposites and there areno hard choices – thereby you weaken the language. Social inclusioncan create a sense that the ‘majority’ is on its way to it, but that’s notso. Inequalities widen in every dimension.
Séamus: You can’t just work at the margins to bring people in, and thenleave the centre untouched.
MULTI-ETHNICBRITAIN
CONFERENCEREPORT
Britishness wouldn’t be enough.• On the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report, some
within the police force have still not takeninstitutionalised racism on board. Equality before thelaw is fundamental. Without it, no other equality canpersist.The institution of law cannot exercise thepower it does over other communities in a state ofcorruption.The message has to be driven from the topand the bottom or it is social hypocrisy.
• Constitutional failure to produce multiculturalism isracism. It is a blockage on social change; it isstereotyping.Visible black / white racism is ‘just there’we are told, but historically this is not true – it derivesfrom clashes of religions and of civilisations.Throughthe power of language, difference comes to be seen asgroup difference – transmitted down the line from thepast.
• In terms of the ease of sorting out who gets thegoodies and who doesn’t, religion is as powerful ademarcator now as in the Middle Ages. How muchdifference can we tolerate and still remain acommunity? Shall we be expansive, enriching (in ourtolerance of difference, in our welcoming of it) or stillbe fundamentalist – by withdrawing and policing theboundary? Are we so afraid to see our little livesinvaded? In globalisation, everyone’s lives will beinvaded. Global capitalism will not keep out poorlabour corralled elsewhere.There is a recipe for fascism in attempting to hold
history at bay. Negotiation is the better choice, saysProfessor Hall – go softly, softly, but remember to change. ❑
Runnymede ConferenceExamining the Debate on Building
Community Cohesion
18 March 2002Venue: Peter Runge House, 3 Carlton House
Terrace, London SW1
Working in partnership with the IndustrialSociety, Runnymede’s conference on 18 Marchwill revisit key themes of our Report on TheFuture of Multi-Ethnic Britain. Presentations anddiscussions will explore the Report’s spirit andrecommendations in the national policy contextof debate on building cohesive communities.Theconference will also address as subthemes thevital elements of social cohesion – includinghousing and neighbourhood renewal, policing,schooling, corporate social responsibility, and therole of business in building and supporting theirlocal communities.
A conference mailing, with full programmedetails, will go out in early January. Addressenquiries in the first instance to Mrs Filiz Caran atRunnymede [tel: 020 7377 9222; fax: 020 73776622; email: [email protected]].
A Crucial Conundrum for 2002
RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
IDENTITYAND SOCIALCOHESION
23
not opposed in principle to anew law on incitement toreligious hatred but thatsomething so ‘complicated andsensitive’ should not be ‘rammedthrough parliament’ as anemergency piece of legislation.
Some were disturbed at the
lack of a clear definition of‘religious hatred’, and thegovernment’s offer to refer thisdefinition to the interpretation offuture Attorney Generals wasseen as whimsical in its mostliteral sense.Tom Butler, Bishop ofSouthwark, among those in favour
Home Secretary David Blunkett’spublic pronouncements on arange of social issues, raised by hisown legislative proposals and theofficial publication on 11December of the Cantle Report,have dwelt much on the necessityfor social cohesion and a sense ofidentity if Britain is to become amore harmonious home countryfor everyone. He has tried todraw that most difficult of linesbetween tolerance of others andintolerance of others’ intolerance– a conundrum for us all.
Religious hatred and blasphemyHis proposal to introducelegislation against incitement toreligious hatred as part ofemergency legislation to combatterrorism produced variedreactions. Confusion about thereal meaning of ‘incitement toreligious hatred’ as opposed toblasphemy, and between theimpact of a new law on‘incitement’ when the existingblasphemy law would not havebeen amended under the newlaw as originally proposed,unsettled lay and legal opinionalike. At the report stage, LordLester of Herne Hill speaking inthe House of Lords on 10December urged the governmentto ‘deal with the underlyinganomalies first’, saying that he was
IslamophobiaThe Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia, who brought out Islamophobia, aChallenge for Us All (The Runnymede Trust 1997), have produced follow-up publications tothe 1997 report.
Addressing the Challenge of Islamophobia: Progress Report 1999–2001 refers to thecontinuing debate about legislation on religious discrimination; negative stereotypes ofIslam in the media; chaplaincy and pastoral care in hospitals and prisons; Islamophobia andracist violence; the concepts and categories which are used in monitoring exercises; andthe place for religion in a society such as Britain where there is substantial diversity ofbelief, disbelief and faith.
In addressing why religious discrimination is still an issue, the key concerns aresummarised as: discrimination in employment and service delivery; attack because ofreligious affiliation or identity; incitement to hatred because of religious affiliation still notbeing a crime; lack of recognition and respect for people of other faiths; blasphemyquestion – only one faith is protected by the state; and fewer rights in respect of publicduties are afforded to members of some faiths than others (p.10).
Addressing Prejudice and Islamophobia lists and describes some of the many sites postedon the Internet since 11 September whose aim is to resist generalisations, and to giveaccurate information about Islam’s complexity and diversity.
In November, the Commission produced a set of ‘Observations on the Anti-Terrorism,Crime and Security Bill’, with particular reference to Part 5, in which Government isrequested to: ‘(a) make a high-profile statement explaining the concepts of racial orreligiously aggravated offences; and (b) indicate to practitioners in the criminal justicesystem the kinds of evidence which may be admitted in considerations of whetheroffences are or are not racially or religiously aggravated’. The Commission’s detailedsuggestions on giving effect to points (a) and (b) above recommend the adoption of textsfrom The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain (on the Nature of Hate Crime) and fromIslamophobia (on Evidence of Racial or Religious Aggravation).These observations areposted on the website.
In addition, the website contains a resource for schools, post 11 September, which isbased on our (1993) publication Equality Assurance in Schools. All of this material can beaccessed at www.runnymedetrust.org/meb/islamophobia, and paper copies of thesepublications can be obtained from Kaushika Amin at the Commission’s new address of356 Holloway Road, London N7 6PA [tel: 020 7609 8870].
Religious Discrimination: a Christian ResponseA Discussion Document from the Churches’ Commission for Inter FaithRelationsLondon: Churches Together in Britain and Ireland, 2001£5.95. ISBN 0 85169 259 1Copies from CTBI Publications, 31 Great Smith Street, London SW1P 3BN[[email protected]]
What is religious discrimination? How serious a problem is it? How canit be overcome? This excellent publication explores the issue of religiousdiscrimination and answers key questions in order. Although it is aimed atChristians it provides an interesting and informative read for anyonewishing to find a response to the issue.
The book attempts to find answers to the 10 most frequently askedquestions.1. Why is religious discrimination a serious problem?2. Why should Christians be concerned about religious discrimination?3. Shouldn’t people of other faiths fit in when they come to live in
countries like Britain?4. How can Christians treat people of other faiths equally if they believe
that their religion is better than that of others?
5. Why should we protect the rights of minorities here when Christiansare suffering overseas?
6. Does not the law already provide protection against religiousdiscrimination?
7. Might not a law against religious discrimination cause more problemsthan it solves?
8. Would a law against religious discrimination mean that Christianorganisations could no longer insist on appointing only Christians tosuch posts as ministers and teachers?
9. Would a law against religious discrimination mean that people couldnot criticise one another’s beliefs?
10.Would a law against religious discrimination unfairly favour people ofother faiths?In order to answer these questions the book explores what is meant
by religious discrimination, gives the historical and theological backgroundto the contemporary Christian affirmation of religious freedom, andproposes some practical ways in which Churches can combat religiousdiscrimination.The appendices are also extremely useful, particularly theextracts from relevant legal texts within both British and Europeanlegislation.
Bulletin No. 328, December 2001ISSN 0965-7762
In 2002,The Bulletin, Runnymede’sQuarterly newsletter,will be published in the months of March,June, September and December by:
The Runnymede TrustThe London Fruit & Wool ExchangeSuite 106, Brushfield Street,London E1 6EPTel: 020 7377 9222 Fax: 020 7377 6622Email: [email protected]: www.runnymedetrust.org
Annual subscription in 2002 is £22.00
The Runnymede logo was designed byFour IV Design Consultants. Otherdesign elements were originated byFour IV and developed by St. Richards Press.
Typeset and printed by:St Richards Press Ltd.Leigh Road, Chichester,West Sussex PO19 2TU.Tel: 01243 782988 RUNNYMEDE’S QUARTERLY BULLETIN DECEMBER 2001
CONTENTS
IDENTITYAND SOCIALCOHESION
RunnymedeTeam:
MichelynnLaflècheDirector
RobertBerkeleySenior Research and Policy Analyst(The Future ofMulti-EthnicBritain)
of proceeding despite anomalies,wanted to grasp the opportunityfor this ‘much-needed reform’.It has been a long-term aim ofthe Commission on BritishMuslims and Islamophobia tohave incitement to religioushatred made a criminal offence –and for information on theCommission’s recent observationsto government see pg.23 of thisBulletin.
Social cohesionPreceding and followingpublication of the Cantle ReportDavid Blunkett has madespeeches and written articles indefence of what have been seenas over-robust comments onethnicity and social relationships.During that week he had beenexhorted from many angles tore-examine his position. ‘Calmdown, Mr Blunkett, and thinkbefore you speak’ (IoS 9 deccomment p.24), ‘Stop and listen,Mr Blunkett – don’t makematters worse’ (Bill Morris,Leader of the TGWU,Independent Review, 12 dec p.5),‘Spare us another race debate’(David Aaronovitch IoS 9 dec).
His Guardian article of 14December (‘It’s not about crickettests’), which begins ‘Race,
language and the bonds ofcitizenship are among the mostprofound issues any society has todeal with …’, takes him intofamiliar territory, as he writes ofsocial cohesion and social justice,common citizenship, equal worthand dignity, rights and duties,distinct cultural identity but with asense of belonging, and sharedvalues.The major themes of theMulti-Ethnic Britain Report arebeing revisited, and here, as inother articles published in thisBulletin, we would urge the mediato be responsible enough thistime round to support level-headed debate on issues ofcommunity cohesion.
Increased debate on theseissues in 2002 will takemomentum from the number ofsignificant publications producedat the end of this year – inparticular the CRE’s consultationdraft of the Statutory Code ofPractice on the Duty to PromoteRace Equality [respond by 25February 2002; info fromwww.cre.gov.uk], and theGovernment’s consultationdocument on the transposition ofthe European Race Directive intoUK law for which responses arerequired by March 2002[www.dti.gov.uk/er/equality].
Protection from Sectarian and Religious Hatred ProposalA Member of the Scottish Parliament, Donald Gorrie, produced a consultation document in October2001 for a proposed bill on Protection from Sectarian and Religious Hatred.The bill would clearlystate that violence or harassment arising from sectarian or religious hatred or bigotry is unacceptableand would incur severe penalty. It could also instruct all organisations in Scotland to draw up theirown code of conduct to combat sectarian and religious hatred and bigotry.The consultationdocument poses questions and looks at definitions, provides an overview of the issue within Scottishsociety and the proposed legislation.There is also a section on comparable legislation in other partsof the world. (The closing date for replies is 28 January 2002. For further information, [email protected]).
Tassaduq AhmedRunnymede was sad to learn of the death on Saturday 8 December of Tassaduq Ahmed who until1998 was a Runnymede trustee.
He had initiated many projects within the East End that furthered his commitment to the careand well-being of others, both within the Bangladeshi community and beyond. He was alsofounding trustee of the 19 Princelet Street project to create Europe’s first multicultural museum ofimmigration and diversity, marking his dedication to building trust and friendship across national,ethnic and religious divides.
Funeral prayers were said at East London Mosque after the Jumma prayer on Friday 14December, and burial was at Woodgrange Cemetery, Forest Gate on the 18th, with Shok Shoba, acondolence meeting, later that same day in London.
Messages of condolence can be sent to his niece, care of Susie Symes, Chair of the SpitalfieldsCentre, 19 Princelet St, London E1 6QH [tel: 020 7247 5352; [email protected]].Memoirs of Tassaduq Ahmed for publication in the next issue of this Bulletin should be addressedto Runnymede’s Director, Michelynn Laflèche.
