Examination of Witnesses (Questions 660-672)
THE MOST
REVEREND VINCENT
NICHOLS AND
DR MUHAMMAD
ABDUL BARI
11 DECEMBER 2006
Q660 Mr Marsden: Let me clarify.
The Education Department have commissioned from Keith Ajegbo,
whom I think is Deputy Head at Deptford School and who came before
this Select Committee at the beginning of our inquiry, a survey,
a consultation, to consider whether there should be more coverage
in secondary schools of the history of Britain over the last 150
years, with a specific focus on how it has created the sort of
society in which we live today. That is what Keith Ajegbo is looking
at currently. The recommendations, we understand, are going to
come before the Government after Christmas and that was what my
question was related to.
Archbishop Nichols: I do not feel
very competent to give you a clear answer, frankly. History is
very important but, again, history is the most speculative of
all studies, and I am just not terribly confident about giving
an answer.
Q661 Mr Marsden: Britishness as a
concept, is that something which you see as a pluralistic issue
or something which can be handed down?
Archbishop Nichols: If you mean
Britishness as an identity, I think it is really quite difficult
to struggle with, actually, and obviously there is plenty of public
debate about it. I think every one of us lives with a number of
identities and I do think they are interlinked. I think the first
and the most formative of all identities is the family. I think
that is the foundation on which others develop and grow. I think
often the local community, however that is expressed, it might
be a sports club, it might be all sorts of things, is the stepping-stone.
I am quite certain you cannot impose a wider identity of Britishness,
or whatever, when those foundations are not there; you cannot
jump from nothing to being British. You have first of all to have
some stability in your own life, you need widening circles of
identity, which will indeed, I think, in my case, feed into a
broad identity of Britishness. I find it very difficult to envisage
how it can be encouraged, except as a broadening out of experience
and a sense of self that one has already.
Q662 Helen Jones: If I could perhaps
just follow this up. There is a belief, and the Government has
proposed, that this idea of Britishness and what it is to be British
ought to become more central to citizenship education. My question
to both of you really is about that kind of definition. There
seems to be a kind of amorphous feeling that we all know what
it means to be British, and if you ask some people they will give
you a very limited definition of that. My question to both of
you as regards faith schools is, can you come to a definition
of Britishness, which you can pass on to children, which includes
the values, the history of the kinds of communities which both
Catholic schools and Islamic schools deal with, which may not
be quite the same as, if you like, the tabloid version of Britishness,
for want of a better word? That is a very simplistic way of putting
it.
Archbishop Nichols: I think your
question demonstrates how difficult such a notion of Britishness
is to struggle with. There is an implicit suggestion in your question
that there is a problem between being Catholic and being British;
now there has been in the past. This place over here witnessed
it very dramatically a few hundred years ago.
Q663 Helen Jones: I am sorry to interrupt
you; that was not what I was implying at all. I was saying, many
people have a definition of Britishness which might be very different
from the ones that the communities hold. I am not suggesting that
they are less British.
Archbishop Nichols: I am sure
that is true and, if I may quote Mr Wilson, I am sure somebody
living in Liverpool, where I grew up, has a very different notion
of being British than has somebody who lives in Islington. I think
it is very difficult, but I think it has to be built gradually.
Dr Bari: Britishness is not a
constant, one dimensional issue, it evolves. Britishness 150 years
ago was different to Britishness today, with many communities,
many faiths, and Britain in the post-war, post-modernist age,
definitely it is the freedom of ever-changing society. Also, it
includes, in my opinion, all the dimensions, varieties and, if
I can use it, the flowers of the garden in this isle, human flowers.
If present Britishness cannot cope with accommodating all the
flowers in this garden then it will go one dimensional, which
will be failing. I think, in that aspect, I would come back to
the religious text; our religion teaches us that human beings
have been created in tribes and communities and races so that
they know each other. At the end of the day, the one who is good
or pious, he, or she, is the best. In that sense, modern Britishness,
with all its diversity is evolving and we are taking it forward
in Muslim schools, per se, through the curriculum, through
the Islamic studies and through the ethos, they are more or less
accommodating with this. I do not think there is any specific
answer to this. It is a continuous evolution, because the Muslim
community itself is an evolving community and there are newer
communities and they are within the fold of the Muslim community.
Hopefully, because our religion teaches diversity, the Muslim
community will be able to take forward the British identity, Muslim
identity and all multiple identities together to the forefront.
Q664 Helen Jones: Could I ask you,
Archbishop, can you define Britishness as adherence to a set of
values, things which have evolved through history, tolerance and
respect for the law?
Archbishop Nichols: Yes, I am
familiar with the list. One of the points of research which I
mentioned earlier on character education, the 16 year olds actually
come up with a list of values, which is very telling. I am not
sure how an Italian would react if we said "These are British
values," because they would say, "Well, actually, they're
Italian values too." How do you move on? I know we British
are decent human beings but how do you get beyond being decently
human to something which is more specific to this country; that
is my problem. Of course I agree with those values, but I am not
sure they are explicitly British.
Q665 Fiona Mactaggart: I was wondering
if you would be surprised by research which suggests that young
people who identify themselves through their faith most strongly
are actually the least likely to be politically active in the
form of voting or other political activity?
Archbishop Nichols: I have got
research on my desk which shows the opposite, so I am surprised.
Q666 Fiona Mactaggart: There is in
every faith, I think, certainly, for example, the Muslim faith,
if you look at a group like Hizb ut-Tahrir, there are extremists
who suggest that voting and participation in the democratic process
is against their religion. What advice do you give teachers to
deal with that phenomenon, which must exist in your Muslim schools,
Dr Bari?
Dr Bari: I do not know whether
they exist in Muslim schools, but the one organisation that you
mention, they used to say what you said and there were other problems
with a more extreme organisation than them who considered voting
not only haram, but anyone who would be voting would be Kaafir
or infidel. In the Muslim community, we have been tackling this
issue, and an overwhelming number of Muslim people in Britain
have rejected them. A big debate is going on and we see now that
those Hizb ut-Tahrir that you mention, many of them are now gradually
coming into the mainstream. What we say is that if we can debate
and argue and discuss with them then there is the potential that
many of them will come back, rather than probably proscribing
them, as unfortunately sometimes it is proposed. Proscribing any
organisation will simply take them underground and it is not going
to help anyone. In the same way, in the university there are radical
views, and radicalism is probably a part of human nature, and
probably a youthful quality is rebellion or radicalism. As parents
and as society, though, we have to discourage radicalism. Sometimes
tragically they come from a certain age and they go; so it is
a matter of continuous debate, discussion and holistic discussion
with our young people so that they are not marginalised and they
do not feel themselves marginalised.
Q667 Fiona Mactaggart: Archbishop,
could you provide us with the research to which you referred?
Archbishop Nichols: I will.[2]
Q668 Mr Wilson: Just something which
the Archbishop said, in response to the line of questioning from
Stephen and Gordon, on sexual orientation and sexual relations
and civic morality; you said, and I quote: "We don't need
citizenship education to deal with that." Surely you cannot
choose which bits of citizenship education you want to do and
which bits you do not want to do?
Archbishop Nichols: No. I am sorry.
The point I was making was that these issues, which are quite
rightly brought up, are dealt with in RE and PSHE. We have developed
excellent material, in co-operation with the Teenage Pregnancy
Unit, precisely to deal with these issues.
Q669 Mr Wilson: If they were to be
dealt with as part of the curriculum, would they be taught in
your faith schools?
Archbishop Nichols: I am sorry,
I did not quite follow. What I am saying is they are dealt with
in our schools.
Q670 Mr Wilson: I know, and what
I am saying is, if the curriculum for citizenship included modules
involving those sorts of issues, would you be against those being
taught in your schools, because you think you have them already?
Archbishop Nichols: I would expect
them to be taught, as I have said a number of times this afternoon,
in a way that is consistent with the pattern and the teaching
of a Catholic school. I do not believe citizenship education should
or can claim to be a morally neutral area in which a whole set
of other moral values are subversively introduced.
Mr Wilson: Thank you. That is very clear.
Q671 Stephen Williams: Much the same
as what Fiona Mactaggart asked; please can you send the Committee
your excellent material, as you called it, on the teaching of
homosexuality and abortion in Catholic schools? I am sure we would
be interested to see it.
Archbishop Nichols: It is quite
substantial but you are welcome to it. [3]
Q672 Chairman: It has been an extremely
good session and we have learned a lot, but what do you think
of Trevor Phillips' view that we are sleep-walking towards some
pretty dismal future, in terms of the segregation of our communities?
Do you share his pessimism, or do you think, from a faith perspective,
an active involvement of faith in the community can make a difference?
Archbishop Nichols: I have been
of the view, for quite a long time, that the effort to build a
harmonious
society, which consists de facto of so many
different cultures and faiths, can never work on one version of
the secular model. It can never work like that because aggressive
secularism actually denies people of faith the right to be who
they are, it tells them to take their faith and put it in a private
box, and that is no basis on which to gain their corporate effort
in building a common future. There is a version of secularism
which I think is coherent which accepts that the broad political
institutions are secular in their nature, which also creates a
public forum in which people are allowed to contribute their best,
which for many people is motivated and shaped by their religious
faith. That model, I think, does hold out a good future for us.
Dr Bari: I am not pessimistic
at all, but we have to be realistically optimistic and, for that,
we all need to work together. Britain is having lots of new communities
and newer communities are coming. I think it would be the strength
of overall British society to accommodate all newer communities,
maybe having very diverse views, but, as I mentioned, diversity
is in human nature. Unless a group or individual breaks the law,
creates hatred and creates other social problems we are fine.
I think we are in a position to debate, discuss and take the agenda
forward of creating modern Britain with this pluralised Britishness.
I am realistically optimistic.
Chairman: On that note, thank you very
much. It has been a very good session. Thank you for your time.
If you think of anything, on the way home or when you get home
to your respective destinations, that you should have said to
the Committee which would have added value to our discussion,
please do be in communication with us. Thank you.
2 Ev 198-199 Back
3
Ev 198-199 Back
|
