---

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: My Lords, I appreciate the opportunity of taking part in this debate and I thank my noble friend Lord Russell-Johnston for initiating this discussion. In the UK we have benefited over many years from different cultures. People come here and enrich our society, and that continues. We
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1426
 
would be a meagre and poor society if we were not continually welcoming people with different ideas and different backgrounds; it enriches us.

Only three days ago, it was my privilege to go to a nursery school in north London where children were performing a nativity play. There was a little Welsh girl there, and perhaps that is why I was at that particular nursery school. Twenty different countries were represented in that nativity play by children from all parts of the world. They were comfortable and at ease. They were playing and laughing with one another. That is the positive side, when we are able to appreciate each other, welcome each other and be comfortable with one another. As we are comfortable with each other in Britain—and we have improved considerably in recent years; we accept and live with one another with smiles on our faces—and get to know one another here, so that is reflected in our attitudes abroad. If we know people of a different language, different religions and different cultures here, so we are able to understand more their situation and their problems and possibly how we can meet some of those problems in other parts of the world. There is the positive side to this new welcoming of different cultures.

There is, however, also a negative side, and that is what my noble friend has drawn to our attention this afternoon. It is the side that hurts, demeans, undermines and even destroys people. It is the flipside of culture—the flipside of different traditions. What we are doing today is looking at that situation and seeing how we can look at the various attitudes and values and somehow bring a change.

First, as has been mentioned, we have only one set of laws: those enacted by this Parliament, which are supreme. I might think that the answer to every problem was the Welsh laws of Hywel Dda, which perhaps in their time had their place, or, going back even further in history, the code of Hammurabi. But today the only way that we can live together in a stable, respecting society is by accepting one set of laws. Whoever comes here must realise that this is the law of the land; it is what you must accept and obey. The only way to change those laws is through the ballot box. Democracy enables people, if they so wish, to alter the laws or their emphasis. Under that one set of laws, different cultures can flourish. If you all accept the basic law and the basic value, the different cultures know where they stand and people can rejoice in their differences. But in the end, there is one law, and, as my noble friend said, there is also one penalty if you transgress them.

When I look at the traditional curriculum of education in the United Kingdom, I wonder whether we are reflecting sufficiently in the education process the changes experienced in the United Kingdom today. Are children learning the values of different faiths and backgrounds? Shouldn't more time be given to that? Are they learning the values of citizenship and even of the laws of the UK? That applies not only to children but also to parents and grandparents who come over here. Of course they respect their traditions, as we all do, yet people must agree that there is one set of laws and one set of values.
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1427
 

When I was a young Methodist minister, a long time ago now, Band of Hope, a teetotal movement, was quite strong—other noble Lords might have known it. We had the Band of Hope in this, that and the other religion. Then suddenly we realised that children were going home with our ideas to alien situations where our standards were not accepted. We need to reach not only children but their families and try to change attitudes. It will take a generation, possibly more, but we must start now.

I do not often get the opportunity to go to the cinema, but two or three years ago I saw the film "Bend it Like Beckham", about a girl who was a first-rate footballer but from a different background. There were stresses, strains and turmoil as she tried to get her family to accept her. We must support people at every level as they try to encompass what for them are new values.

The horror of honour killings is but one aspect of the divide between us. Earlier this year, we mentioned many times in this House the position of African boys and girls who have come here. At one time we thought that as many as 300 were disappearing from London schools every month. In one case, the body of a boy called Adam was fished out of the Thames. There are different aspects of the issue, some of them terrible, and I am told that more is yet to come. We look not only at honour killings but at other deviations, such as accusing a child of witchcraft and taking the most terrible approach to try to cleanse that child. There is a great deal to be discussed at that level also.

The areas to be addressed are education, the enforcement of the laws of the land, and the United Kingdom's own acceptance of the conventions of the European Union and the United Nations. I ask the Minister what conventions we do not support 100 per cent. Which have not been ratified, and which have not been fully ratified? I think of the Convention on the Rights of Child, where in one or two places we need to strengthen our support. We must do that in other matters as well. Perhaps the Minister could one day give us a list of the conventions that we have yet to fulfil. The role we should have, in completely ratifying these conventions, is to protect the rights and dignity of every individual.

Cannot the United Kingdom become the role model for the rest of the world in how we respond internationally—how we develop a society that respects those dignities and values and how we embrace those who reach our shores and encourage them to become part of the full community, respecting their cultures but also making sure that the big problems which arise belong to the past? That is our opportunity and our responsibility.

3.31 pm

Baroness Cox: My Lords, I join other noble Lords in warmly congratulating the noble Lord, Lord Russell-Johnston, on introducing this debate on an issue of growing concern and great sensitivity. As he himself indicated, both honour killings and forced marriages
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1428
 
are manifestations of honour-based violence, which mainly affects women and girls in communities around the world where acceptable norms of behaviour are rooted in concepts of honour and shame.

This is an issue of growing concern. The joint FCO/Home Office forced marriage unit receives reports of approximately 250 cases of forced marriage each year, mainly with an overseas dimension, and Southall Black Sisters deals with approximately 150 cases each year relating to forced marriage. The noble Lord mentioned that the Government have undertaken a nationwide consultation with agencies about creating a special offence for forcing someone into marriage. I join him in asking whether the Minister can confirm that Her Majesty's Government are, or are thinking of, introducing such legislation to that effect. I hope the answer will be in the affirmative.

Much has been achieved since a Home Office working group was established in 1999 to look at forced marriages in the United Kingdom. Guidelines applicable to forced marriage and other forms of honour-based violence have been developed and produced for the police, social services, education and the Law Society. I understand that guidelines are also to be developed for health professionals next year. Disseminating such guidelines and ensuring their implementation, as well as ensuring the availability of training for professionals in all sectors, will indeed be an important cornerstone of improvement. However, this cannot happen in isolation from work with the communities themselves. Communities must be part of the solution and not just the problem. A holistic and well resourced response must be developed and put in place if these issues are to be tackled effectively. Will Her Majesty's Government provide adequate funding for the education and training of all concerned?

I use the term "sensitivity" because this kind of violence is derived from deeply held values, long-established cultural practices and, ultimately, belief systems in which we find the genesis of much which we hold to be good but also, sadly, much which we in this country cannot condone. These issues involve acts of violence with all their associated traumas, anguish and death. Too often hidden until it is too late, a victim has been abused and/or killed, and a family with its surrounding community left with the aftermath. There are parallels with domestic violence and those working in this field—including women's groups and the Metropolitan Police Service—agree that honour-based violence should be placed within the wider legislative and policy framework of domestic violence. I remind your Lordships that in the United Kingdom two women a week still die at the hands of their partners or ex-partners.

I had the privilege of speaking earlier this year at a conference organised by the Metropolitan Police—whom I admire for their vision and commitment in addressing this issue.

When I began to study the problem, I had to try to understand a belief system that convinces its followers that the only honourable way to restore a defiled state of honour is to kill, and also to ask whether our society
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1429
 
has any alternative to offer. I suggest that there are concepts of honour, and breaches of that honour, as defined in certain cultures that can lead to hope and not to despair; that there is honour in having the courage to let go of historic norms, values and practices which have been held within the category of the sacred. Can we help people here to realise that honour is not lost by an insult or the exercise of freedoms which our country enshrines, such as the freedom to choose religion or to marry someone from a different faith, and that honour is not regained by avenging that insult or other kind of perceived shame by violence and death, but that instead honour can be manifest in forbearance and dignity and pride can be demonstrated in forgiveness?

In addressing these questions I began to discern the fundamental importance of a profound difference between aspects of beliefs, values and practices of what we may call the contemporary "western" value system and those cultures which sanction or require honour killings. The former is theologically and culturally grounded in concepts of "right", "wrong", repentance, forgiveness, reconciliation, and, in theological terms, redemption and salvation; or, in secular terms, ideally in rehabilitation, restoration of relationships and reintegration into society. By contrast, some other cultures are premised on concepts of honour and shame—particularly with regard to sexual relationships and perceptions of honour or defilement of women. Once honour has been defiled, it is deemed in those cultures to be irredeemable. Moreover, it casts a stigma over the whole family. The only way to try to restore the honour is to punish and destroy the source of shame—hence the violence so often associated with honour killings and other forms of violence. Similar responses may be associated with the shame caused by conversion to another faith or the perception of blasphemy causing offence to adherents of a particular religion.

Mussurut Zia, of the Lancashire Constabulary Pennine Division's hate crime and diversity unit, in an excellent paper entitled "Izzat Honour", explains:

"It would be na-ve to assume that honour based violence only occurs in one particular faith group. This type of violence can be found in the Hindu, Sikh, Christian and Islamic communities across the world, but it must be highlighted that this is a cultural not a religious practice. However it seems to be most prevalent in Muslim communities across the world, therefore a more detailed look at the Islamic stance on honour based violence is required".

This can also be linked to traditional Islamic Sharia law, where there is no equality between men and women, between Muslims and non-Muslims. This makes women especially vulnerable in cases involving sexual issues, where they are disadvantaged in a Sharia court, or where the family takes the law into its own hands. Such responses may be reflected in, as Mussurut Zia suggests,

"domestic violence, forced marriage, suspicious suicides (the victim may have been under immense pressure to commit suicide, or felt they had no other alternative), and traffic accidents and missing persons".

Cultures that are based on concepts of shame and honour tend to have norms and practices conducive to violence, especially domestic violence. They are rooted
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1430
 
in traditional beliefs which do not see people primarily as individuals whose value lies in their individual characteristics and achievements. Instead, their value and status are derived from conformity to predetermined roles which, in the case of women, have traditionally been rooted in domestic responsibilities, deference to men and sexual obedience. When people brought up in societies imbued with such traditional values emigrate to countries with very different values and practices, they may suffer acute crises of identity and threats to family relationships. The Metropolitan Police Service work with communities through the Forced Marriage Project over the past four years has shown that even young women who have been allowed access to higher and further education in this country and the opportunity for careers of significant reward of all kinds are still confined by concepts of honour and shame.

Such family or community crises derived from a clash of cultures are likely to increase as children in those families grow up. Second-generation immigrants may experience some tensions as they seek to adjust to their host culture, and to enjoy their own peer-group relationships. Their parents and grandparents may react by trying to assert traditional mores more robustly. They may thus resort to controlling, or trying to control, every aspect of their young people's social lives, particularly their daughters. They may also resort to physical chastisement, and to the practice of arranged or forced marriages. Such repressive measures may then generate a range of responses from the younger family members, such as secret double lives, hostility and rebellion, depression and even suicide.

In such situations, honour-related violence and killings can be seen not only as justified, but as a required response to behaviour seen as shameful by a family, shaming them and, through them, the whole community. It is often perpetrated nowadays by younger family members born in the United Kingdom, not just by parents who were the incoming immigrants.

My focus in this debate is the roots of the problem so often associated with honour-related violence and killings. I have tried to indicate the deep cultural causes that are grounded essentially in spiritual concepts of honour and shame which make change extremely difficult. Many of those who adhere to these beliefs are themselves, as I have already emphasised, feeling vulnerable, lonely and marginalised in our own country, which is in many ways a world away from their traditional way of life. Therefore, to challenge practices that for them come within the domain of the sacred may well seem a challenge too far.

Of course, we must uphold all our country's laws with regard to domestic violence and murder, and I strongly support any measures that will clarify the criminal aspects of such practices and enable the full strength of the law to be applied to behaviour that must be seen as totally unacceptable in our society. I fully support the police in all the initiatives they are taking. However, we also need to consider as a matter of urgency ways of deterring such behaviour and preventing a predicted escalation.
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1431
 

Some significant remedies have already been implemented. Women's helplines and refuges have probably saved many lives, but there is a severe lack of refuge provision. There are only eight beds nationwide for female victims of attempted forced marriage, and no services for male victims. Demand far outweighs supply. Therefore, will Her Majesty's Government please consider urgently providing more resources to increase the number of places of refuge for those at risk of this kind of violence?

Your Lordships must also recognise that such domestic violence is often a result of deep anguish experienced by the perpetrators. The vehemence of much of the violent behaviour is indicative of pent-up anger, frustration and misery. In itself, it may be a cry for help. There is therefore a need to develop ways of engaging the men and women of these families and communities in friendship with fellow citizens who can help them adjust to life in this country, to find alternative ways of developing self-esteem and of adjusting to the differing behaviour of their family members, particularly their younger generation. They are unlikely to find such help if they remain entirely confined within their own communities for friendships and social relationships.

I give one example to highlight this kind of dilemma, described to me by a Muslim friend who organised a women's group counselling session for Muslim women. A young mother who came was distraught because her daughter had started going out with a non-Muslim. She said that because she loved her daughter, she could accept the situation, although of course it grieved her. But she said she was terrified that her next-door neighbour, from Afghanistan, would come with an axe to kill her daughter for the shame she had brought to the community—and also her, because she had allowed this shame to develop without taking appropriate punitive action herself.

In recognising the profound need to understand and to try to address the cultural and spiritual needs of those who are suffering in this syndrome of honour-related violence, we are confronted by many challenges. For example, our own society has become so secularised that we often do not even recognise the need for spiritual help. However, as much of the cause of honour-related violence lies in a spiritually legitimated response to behaviour which is itself associated with psychological and social problems, we cannot ignore the spiritual dimension of help and healing.

Understanding the spiritual dimension of their pain might open up possibilities for adjustment of values, without which there will be no change in practice. If we are willing to come alongside those who perpetrate the violence and those who are victims, we may be able to help them to know that honour can be defined and maintained in a different cultural context in different ways; and that honour lost does not have to be punished by violence, but can be restored to those who had been defiled, giving hope where all hope had seemed to be eternally lost.
 
15 Dec 2005 : Column 1432
 

Here we are dealing with the realm of the sacred. Therefore, we must maintain the utmost sensitivity to ensure that our endeavours to help are not seen as manipulative or profane. But ultimately, it is only by encompassing the spiritual dimension of "honour" that we can effectively address the practices of honour-related violence.

3.45 pm

---