A report published in the spring talked about communities living "parallel lives". People live in separate housing estates, they socialise in separate locations, they hold different religious beliefs, their children go to separate schools. A new fence has recently been built within one of the estates to separate the minority from the majority population.
There is widespread unemployment and poverty. The minority originally flooded in to work in the textile industry: the majority were traditionally employed in skilled engineering work. Now both industries have gone down the tubes. Government financial and social aid have done nothing to produce social cohesion. In fact, the report pointed out that many in the majority community believe that the minority gets everything, that all funding is directed towards them while the hard-working majority (if they had jobs) are neglected. Conditions are made worse by local political demagogues who exploit the tensions.
Belfast obviously? No, Oldham. Similar problems exist in Burnley and other parts of England too, like Bradford. Swap Muslim for nationalist and white majority for unionist and you could write the script. The report was commissioned after the serious rioting in Oldham and Burnley in spring 2001. It was carried out by the Community Cohesion Review Team (CCRT) established by Tony Blair's government to look at racial confrontation in England. The analysis may be clear but the CCRT haven't a clue what to do and everything they recommend is hotly contested.
There's been a wee review here and a consultation paper too. You won't have noticed it – why should you have, when the NIO snuck it out at three o'clock one weekend afternoon and successfully avoided any publicity for it? Issued in March this year, the paper is called A Shared Future: improving relations in Northern Ireland. Why sneak it out? Well, in the review of its current policy the NIO finally admits what you've read here many times, namely that what passes for its current policy has been a complete failure since Brian Mawhinney first imposed it.
The review looked at the "effectiveness and impact" of the policy including the Central Community Relations Unit and its useless front the Community Relations Council. It concluded that "current policies have had relatively limited effect on broader divisions in society ... In summary, Northern Ireland remains a deeply segregated society with little indication of progress towards becoming more tolerant or inclusive." How long did it take them to work that out? you ask.
At last, the NIO has decided they need a new policy. You'll notice the title of the paper omits the word 'community': it's just 'improving relations'. The paper points out that, "the term 'community relations' originated in the early 1960s in the UK as a response to the rise of immigration and subsequent pressures on British society." In other words, despite being completely irrelevant to circumstances in the north, it was imported here lock, stock and barrel. Yet millions have been poured down the drain in pursuit of that policy even though it has been a complete failure in Britain as well as being totally inappropriate for here.
The final paragraph of the review is scathing. Commenting on the initiatives forced through by the awful Brian Mawhinney from 1987-90 it says, "These polices were largely short term, and not based on an overall strategy, vision or values. They lacked a clear statement of what was meant by 'community relations' or of what the policies were trying to achieve." Precisely: you couldn't find a more accurate description of Mawhinney's politics if you tried.
Mawhinney spawned a huge community relations industry which largely replaced the textile and engineering industries in deprived parts of the north, except that the hundreds of 'nayce people' who staff it don't live in the districts where they dole out pittances to community groups. Thirteen years on, the NIO has admitted it was barking up the wrong tree all along. They knew it, but it didn't stop them plugging away long after Mawhinney was recalled to organise the destruction of the Conservative party in 1997. No wonder their spin doctors buried the announcement of the review.
The consultation paper asks for your views. It's full of stupid questions like "Do you agree that the overall aim for policy must be for a more shared but pluralist society?" Who doesn't? And if you don't, would you admit it? Do you want to live in a mixed area? Everyone will say yes, but most are lying. Most who can afford to in the north move to segregated housing. What's the betting on a copycat policy based on what Blair's Cohesion Team comes up with in England? Gotta be like, altogether now, the rest of the UK. No danger of taking any lessons from Belgium or Switzerland where they know something about ethno-political separation.
