Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-42)
RT HON
CHARLES CLARKE
MP
13 SEPTEMBER 2005
Q40 Chairman: My point,
Home Secretary, is that the Home Office was saying, at least within
government in 2004, that there were problems of anger, alienation
and activism as possible routes to extremism within the Muslim
community. The public face of the Home Office appears to have
been, including a response to this committee, a much more complacent
assessment of the nature of the problem. You say that it is different
times, different circumstances. I am unclear as to why the government
appears to have failed to act on its own internal assessment of
the problem over a year ago and is very belatedly attempting to
engage in a serious way with the Muslim community.
Mr Clarke: I do not really accept
the truth of your criticism, Mr Denham. I do not think we have
failed to act on this question. I think we have been very keen
to act on the questions because of the seriousness of them in
the way that you correctly record. Where I do think we are subject
to criticism is not our intent in the matter but whether we have
found the right way to do it and to do it in the most effective
way in order to have that engagement. You yourself in various
capacities have wrestled with those problems as well, as to how
to make it operate. I think that the criticism to be made of us
(if there is one) is that we have not been as effective as we
should have been or could have been in engaging these issues more
widely, but the implication that there is a lack of intent or
seriousness or that there is complacency about it I simply do
not accept.
Q41 Mrs Cryer: During
the period since 7 July both the Prime Minister and yourself have
been having meetings both nationally and regionally. There was
an meeting in Bradford on 23 August with Paul Goggins. It was
excellent, it was lively, lots of ideas came forward. I was there
along with other local MPs. My concern is what will happen to
the information and views expressed at these regional meetings.
Will they be fed into government thinking and policy?
Mr Clarke: Absolutely they will.
I have spoken to Paul Goggins about that particular meeting but
also about some others he and Hazel Blears have been doing and
senior officials in the Home Office have been attending those
meetings as well. The purpose of that is precisely to try and
locate ourselves correctly as to the policies that we take forward.
On 22 September we will seek to see how we can involve them in
that way, but certainly in terms of the meeting in Bradford I
can give an absolute assurance that the views expressed there
will be very much taken into account and hopefully will inform
what we need to do. The overall effect of these meetings, Mrs
Cryer, has been to strengthen my view and that of my ministerial
colleagues in the Home Office that there is a real desire to engage
in this process and have a proper debate and discussion and to
take it forward in the Muslim community and elsewhere, and that
is what we will try and respond to.
Q42 Chairman: Home Secretary,
I think you have accepted that some of this work has begun much
later than it might have done but is now under way. Is there any
truth in the suggestion that there is a tension in government
between fighting what could be described as the evil ideology
which leads directly to terrorism and engaging in the broader
issues of concern which may lead to anger or alienation amongst
young Muslims in particular and that the government has focused
perhaps too much on the former and not enough on the broader issues?
Mr Clarke: I do not think there
is a tension in government on this issue at all, I have to tell
you; I do not think that is the case. I am just thinking of my
colleagues in government and whether any of them have expressed
different orientations. I do not think so. I think there are three
issues, if I can put it like this. The first is, how can we strengthen
the role of faiths in our society? One of the first meetings I
sought immediately after 7 July took place on 7 July was with
the leaders of a wide range of different faith communities. I
think that is very important. When I was Secretary of State for
Education I thought it was important in terms of the non-statutory
curriculum on religious education. I think that is a key area.
I suppose I am not convinced that everybody gives the same priority
as I would to that overall faith-based approach that we need to
promote. The second element is the work that you described as
stronger work with the Muslim community as a whole, whether we
have been late to it or not (and I do not actually accept the
point), and the fact is that we have to develop and strengthen
our work in relation to that and we have to do it in a variety
of ways and the kinds of meetings that Mrs Cryer was referring
to in Bradford are means of trying to take that forward. Then
there is a third element which is dealing with that element you
describe which seeks to promote this kind of terrorism which is
completely unacceptable but I do not see any cross-government
tensions on that at all.
Chairman: Thank you, Home Secretary.
We will have to leave it at that point. Thank you very much indeed
for your answers this morning. The background to these issues,
of course, is an enormously serious set of events and the committee
is grateful for your answers this morning. We will, I know, be
having you back in October to look in detail at the proposed new
legislation but thank you very much indeed.
| 
