Wednesday, August 17, 2005


Just 76 of the 204 staff [37.3%] of the Commission for Racial Equality [CRE] are revealed to be `White' in the latest annual report of the œ20million quango. This continues a history of their gross under-representation in the organisation. For over ten years the CRE has failed to adopt `targets' to make itself representative of the broad population it serves, remaining determinedly institutionally racist. 77 of its staff are `Black or Black British', 30 `Asian or Asian British', while only one of its staff is recorded as of `Mixed background'.

The CRE's race and gender record keeping is also unacceptable. Despite its obsessive monitoring the latest annual report does not account for the racial identity of nine [4.4%] of its staff whose sex and grade is however known. It is nonetheless a substantial improvement on its 2001 annual report, which without any explanation failed to account for the race, sex or grade of 39 [18.3%] of its then 213 staff.

Liberty and Law director Gerald Hartup stated: "We should have the right to expect that our equal opportunities bodies are competent and practice what they preach. Parliament now needs to look critically at their activities and provide them with appropriate direction. Recommendations and investigations by the CRE cannot be taken seriously until it starts to put its own house in order"

The CRE has revealed that there is "under representation from certain ethnic groups" within its staff but will not voluntarily answer the straightforward question: which ethnic groups and by how much. Such an answer would provide a helpful guide to London employers about the racial profile they should aim for and would enable the CRE to be judged in the same way as the bodies that it investigates.

The CRE revealed minimal information to Liberty and Law Journal [LLJ] when asked on 25 July a straightforward question: The 2003 [Annual] Report also reveals "under-representation from certain ethnic groups" in employment at the CRE. Which are these under-represented groups? How under-represented are each of these groups according to CRE employment figures on which the conclusion of under-representation was reached? Your reply should allow me to see what the shortfall in numbers of each of these ethnic groups is and what their proportion of the total workforce should be.

The answer, which was came on 12 August was evasive. It said: The CRE uses Census 2001 - ethnicity and religion in England and Wales as well as the regional breakdowns to assess representation by ethnic group in our workforce. This information is available on the ONS website for you to compare with the CRE staffing numbers, which includes a breakdown by ethnicity, made available in our annual reports. LLJ is now forced to use the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act to uncover this basic information that the CRE will not otherwise provide.




Even if they produced no other positive result, the attacks on the London Underground have compelled Europeans of all faiths to think with new urgency about the Continent's Muslim minority. Such a reckoning was long overdue.... What Europeans are waking up to is a difficult truth: the immigrants who perform the Continent's menial jobs, and, as is often forgotten, began coming to Europe in the 1950's because European governments and businesses encouraged their mass migration, are profoundly alienated from European society for reasons that have little to do with the Middle East and everything to do with Europe. This alienation is cultural, historical and above all religious, as much if not more than it is political. Immigrants who were drawn to Europe because of the Continent's economic success are in rebellion against the cultural, social and even psychological sources of that success....

Tony Blair just proposed new laws allowing the deportation of radical mullahs and the shutting of mosques and other sites associated with Islamic extremism. But given the sheer size of the Muslim population in England and throughout the rest of Europe, the security services are always going to be playing catch-up....

The multicultural fantasy in Europe -- its eclipse can be seen most poignantly in Holland, that most self-definedly liberal of all European countries -- was that, in due course, assuming that the proper resources were committed and benevolence deployed, Islamic and other immigrants would eventually become liberals. As it's said, they would come to ''accept'' the values of their new countries. It was never clear how this vision was supposed to coexist with multiculturalism's other main assumption, which was that group identity should be maintained. But by now that question is largely academic: the European vision of multiculturalism, in all its simultaneous good will and self-congratulation, is no longer sustainable. And most Europeans know it. What they don't know is what to do next....

Figuring out how to prevent Europe's multicultural reality from becoming a war of all against all is the challenge that confronts the Continent. It makes all of Europe's other problems, from the economy to the euro to the sclerosis of social democracy, seem trivial by comparison. Unfortunately, unlike those challenges, this one is existential and urgent and has no obvious answer.

The case for assimilation

By distinguished Australian, John Stone

Since London's July 7 bombings, the federal Government has been under pressure to address Australia's rapidly growing Muslim problem. But it clearly still wants to avoid the real issues: the need to abandon outright our official multiculturalism policies and the need to sharply reduce, to the point of virtually halting, further inflow of people whose culture (Islam) is such that there can be no realistic hope of them ever integrating into Australian society.

Recently on this page (July 22), I proposed six measures to begin addressing those issues. Even as that went to press, further London bomb attacks were attempted. A retired senior ASIO officer (backed by the Federal Police Commissioner) now says ASIO knows of about 60 Muslims resident here who have received training in terrorist activities such as bomb-making.

Before I am accused of stirring up race hatred, the multiculturalism industry's invariable response when it lacks reasoned arguments, consider some figures. On July 22 I mentioned "roughly 330,000 Muslims in Australia today". That was based on the 282,000 self-declared Muslims in the 2001 census (81,000 more than in 1996). But the census religious affiliation question is optional; 1,835,000 people did not answer it in 2001. So 330,000 clearly understates the reality.

A YouGov poll among Britain's Muslims immediately after the July 7 bombings (London's The Daily Telegraph, July 23) found 6 per cent believed them fully justified. A further 24 per cent, while not condoning the bombings, expressed sympathy with the feelings and motives of their perpetrators. Some 32 per cent believe "Western society is decadent and immoral" and "Muslims should seek to bring it to an end".

If we (complacently) assume that Britain's Muslim problem is three times as bad as ours, then "only" 2 per cent of our Muslims would find London-type bombings here fully justified. Even on that understated 330,000 figure, that means 6600 murder-approving Australian Muslims. Likewise, another 8 per cent (26,400) will feel sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who, one day, will commit such atrocities here. On the same assumptions, more than 10 per cent (35,200) believe that Muslims should seek to bring our society to an end.

How do our multiculturalism apologists ignore such figuring? Even if they feel their own, typically comfortable lives aren't in much danger, don't they care about other Australians (for example, those using public transport) likely to be killed or maimed when calamity strikes? Don't they have children, or grandchildren, who will live in an increasingly Muslim-influenced Australia?

Here then are some more measures to help deal with the problem. First, cut back hard on giving welfare benefits to immigrants (genuine refugees excepted). The most powerful inducement to Muslim (and other) immigration into Britain has been the sheer munificence, for those involved, of social security benefits they receive. Anyway, why should Australian taxpayers foot such bills for those who, having chosen to live among us, then batten upon us?

Second, debar funds from any country that denies genuine religious freedom coming to Australian religious institutions. Saudi Arabia, whose oil moneys have funded fundamentalist Islamic mosques, schools and media outlets throughout the world, is the obvious example.

Third, the Australian Defence Force should be ordered to put more resources (and be given the necessary extra funding) into sealing our wide-open back door across Torres Strait from Papua New Guinea (the route taken, incidentally, by Peter Qasim seven years ago).

Fourth, government spokespeople, federal and tate, must stop bowing to political correctness and start calling ethnically based crime by its real name. The Sydney Morning Herald editorialists tut-tutting about such truth-telling should read their own Natasha Wallace's chilling report (SMH, July 22) on the horrific series of 2002 Ashfield gang rapes by four brothers of Pakistani origin.

Fifth, state governments (whose jurisdiction it is) should follow the Italian Government's recent lead and forbid the public wearing of identity-concealing garments such as the burka or the chador, which not only exclude Muslim women from society but can also cover bomb belts. If that were to deter Muslims from coming here, or induce some existing Muslim residents to go home, both results could be borne with equanimity.

Finally, make the 2006 census religious affiliation question compulsory. In short, we must fundamentally rethink our immigration policies and our official policies of multiculturalism (that is, non-assimilation). Our future immigration policy should focus on whether those concerned are capable of assimilating into an Australian culture shaped by, and part of, a Judeo-Christian Western civilisation.

Our outstandingly successful wave of postwar immigration clearly passed that test. Equally clearly, Muslim immigrants more recently have not. Australians generally, I believe, have had enough of this. If the Government won't deal with it, they will soon have had enough of it, too.

No comments: