This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/18/naz-shah-mp-bradford-british-muslim
The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 6 | Version 7 |
|---|---|
| Naz Shah MP: ‘Muslims are not one-size-fits-all’ Naz Shah MP: ‘Muslims are not one-size-fits-all’ | |
| (about 9 hours later) | |
| I would be very surprised if anyone in Westminster knows more than Naz Shah about the challenges and rewards of integration. For that matter, there can’t be many people in the country who could bring more personal experience to bear on the matter than the Labour MP for Bradford West. | I would be very surprised if anyone in Westminster knows more than Naz Shah about the challenges and rewards of integration. For that matter, there can’t be many people in the country who could bring more personal experience to bear on the matter than the Labour MP for Bradford West. |
| Shah is the eldest daughter of a working-class Pakistani couple who settled in Leeds. When she was born in 1973, her father refused to pick the baby up because she was a girl. He used to beat her mother, who spoke no English and had no idea how to access support. When Shah was six, he ran off with a neighbour’s 16-year-old daughter. With her younger brother, pregnant mother, and their belongings bundled into bin bags, she had to abandon her home and move in with grandparents, fleeing the shame her father had brought on them. They moved 14 times in the following two years, to one unheated, rat-infested home after another; Shah contracted tuberculosis, but had to be her mother’s translator. “I became an interpreter at the age of six,” as she once put it. | Shah is the eldest daughter of a working-class Pakistani couple who settled in Leeds. When she was born in 1973, her father refused to pick the baby up because she was a girl. He used to beat her mother, who spoke no English and had no idea how to access support. When Shah was six, he ran off with a neighbour’s 16-year-old daughter. With her younger brother, pregnant mother, and their belongings bundled into bin bags, she had to abandon her home and move in with grandparents, fleeing the shame her father had brought on them. They moved 14 times in the following two years, to one unheated, rat-infested home after another; Shah contracted tuberculosis, but had to be her mother’s translator. “I became an interpreter at the age of six,” as she once put it. |
| Eventually her mother sold her wedding jewellery and managed to buy a house, but only with the help of a neighbour’s married nephew, who demanded a sexual relationship in return. He, too, turned violent, and at 12 Shah was packed off to Pakistan for her own safety. When she was 15, relatives told her to marry her first cousin. If she refused, an uncle warned, even more of her relatives would fall out with her mother. The newlywed couple moved back to Leeds, but when her husband began to beat her – leaving one ear permanently damaged – Shah left him. | Eventually her mother sold her wedding jewellery and managed to buy a house, but only with the help of a neighbour’s married nephew, who demanded a sexual relationship in return. He, too, turned violent, and at 12 Shah was packed off to Pakistan for her own safety. When she was 15, relatives told her to marry her first cousin. If she refused, an uncle warned, even more of her relatives would fall out with her mother. The newlywed couple moved back to Leeds, but when her husband began to beat her – leaving one ear permanently damaged – Shah left him. |
| Her mother could see no way to escape her own abuser, for she had nowhere to go. When his sexual interest turned towards her younger daughter, she poisoned him with arsenic. Too ashamed and fearful to tell the court of the abuse she had suffered, she was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years. It was left to Shah, still only 18, to bring up her 14 and 11-year-old brother and sister. | Her mother could see no way to escape her own abuser, for she had nowhere to go. When his sexual interest turned towards her younger daughter, she poisoned him with arsenic. Too ashamed and fearful to tell the court of the abuse she had suffered, she was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years. It was left to Shah, still only 18, to bring up her 14 and 11-year-old brother and sister. |
| Despite having left school at 12, Shah built an impressive career as an NHS commissioner and chair of a mental health charity. Now a single mother to three children of her own, she won Bradford West from George Galloway in 2015, only to be suspended by Labour earlier this year after antisemitic Facebook posts she had shared surfaced. The 43-year-old apologised profusely, was reinstated, and won praise this summer for forcing police in Pakistan to investigate the death of a female constituent. The family claimed their daughter had died of natural causes while visiting; she had in fact been the victim of an “honour” killing. | Despite having left school at 12, Shah built an impressive career as an NHS commissioner and chair of a mental health charity. Now a single mother to three children of her own, she won Bradford West from George Galloway in 2015, only to be suspended by Labour earlier this year after antisemitic Facebook posts she had shared surfaced. The 43-year-old apologised profusely, was reinstated, and won praise this summer for forcing police in Pakistan to investigate the death of a female constituent. The family claimed their daughter had died of natural causes while visiting; she had in fact been the victim of an “honour” killing. |
| Who, then, could be better qualified than Shah to talk about integration? We meet after Muslims Like Us, a Big Brother-style BBC documentary about 10 British Muslim men and women aired this week. “I really liked it,” Shah smiles. “I thought it was very reflective of British society, I really liked the fact that you saw that we’re not one-size-fits-all, niqab-wearing, hijab-wearing radicals. We’re not everything that you read in some papers. We’re very diverse.” She is considerably less happy, however, about the Casey review, published last week, of “integration and opportunity in deprived and isolated communities”. | Who, then, could be better qualified than Shah to talk about integration? We meet after Muslims Like Us, a Big Brother-style BBC documentary about 10 British Muslim men and women aired this week. “I really liked it,” Shah smiles. “I thought it was very reflective of British society, I really liked the fact that you saw that we’re not one-size-fits-all, niqab-wearing, hijab-wearing radicals. We’re not everything that you read in some papers. We’re very diverse.” She is considerably less happy, however, about the Casey review, published last week, of “integration and opportunity in deprived and isolated communities”. |
| Dame Louise Casey was given a tour of Bradford West by Shah while compiling her report, and it raises grave concerns about Pakistani or Bangladeshi enclaves segregated by poor English and “regressive” religious or cultural practices, where “far too many women [are] suffering the effects of misogyny and domestic abuse”. I hadn’t therefore expected the report’s loudest critic to be Shah. When the interview begins, I naively imagine that I will find out what Shah thinks it got wrong, and how to get integration right. Afterwards I wonder whether the MP is still too shaken by the antisemitism row to risk spelling out a clear position. Or perhaps integration is such an elusive conundrum that much clarity from anyone would be unrealistic to expect. All I know is that Shah spoke confidently, at great length, barely drawing breath, and I came away none the wiser. Working out what she really thinks is like trying to grab hold of a fish. | Dame Louise Casey was given a tour of Bradford West by Shah while compiling her report, and it raises grave concerns about Pakistani or Bangladeshi enclaves segregated by poor English and “regressive” religious or cultural practices, where “far too many women [are] suffering the effects of misogyny and domestic abuse”. I hadn’t therefore expected the report’s loudest critic to be Shah. When the interview begins, I naively imagine that I will find out what Shah thinks it got wrong, and how to get integration right. Afterwards I wonder whether the MP is still too shaken by the antisemitism row to risk spelling out a clear position. Or perhaps integration is such an elusive conundrum that much clarity from anyone would be unrealistic to expect. All I know is that Shah spoke confidently, at great length, barely drawing breath, and I came away none the wiser. Working out what she really thinks is like trying to grab hold of a fish. |
| Partly this is because she concurs (“I hear that, I get it”) with almost every opinion that comes up, which is a likable habit but makes hers rather hard to pin down. For example, “I recognise a lot of what Louise Casey’s talking about, because you have a community within a community; Bradford is referred to as Little Pakistan, I hear that, I get that. And I’m very vocal and outspoken about issues around patriarchy and misogyny and male-dominated clan politics. Where I fundamentally disagree is when someone fails to acknowledge that there’s government failings as well. Especially pertinent to Prevent.” | Partly this is because she concurs (“I hear that, I get it”) with almost every opinion that comes up, which is a likable habit but makes hers rather hard to pin down. For example, “I recognise a lot of what Louise Casey’s talking about, because you have a community within a community; Bradford is referred to as Little Pakistan, I hear that, I get that. And I’m very vocal and outspoken about issues around patriarchy and misogyny and male-dominated clan politics. Where I fundamentally disagree is when someone fails to acknowledge that there’s government failings as well. Especially pertinent to Prevent.” |
| The anti-radicalisation programme is notoriously unpopular among Muslims, so I’m not surprised when Shah says she has not met one in her constituency who has a good word to say for it. “But Prevent has to exist,” Shah quickly adds, “absolutely, and I’m the biggest advocate for a Prevent strategy.” What she cannot accept is Casey’s conclusion that “the government hasn’t been hard enough and hasn’t been strong enough”. She snorts. “Well, how much stronger? Prevent should have been about building resilient communities. It has turned into getting people to police people. That is not how we build resilient communities. The essence in communities has to be about building resilience. And how you do that is through community development.” | The anti-radicalisation programme is notoriously unpopular among Muslims, so I’m not surprised when Shah says she has not met one in her constituency who has a good word to say for it. “But Prevent has to exist,” Shah quickly adds, “absolutely, and I’m the biggest advocate for a Prevent strategy.” What she cannot accept is Casey’s conclusion that “the government hasn’t been hard enough and hasn’t been strong enough”. She snorts. “Well, how much stronger? Prevent should have been about building resilient communities. It has turned into getting people to police people. That is not how we build resilient communities. The essence in communities has to be about building resilience. And how you do that is through community development.” |
| I’m not sure what community development means, so ask what Shah’s version of Prevent would look like. “I tell you what it would look like. It would look like a safeguarding programme. If you get safeguarding right for children, you get radicalisation right. Because safeguarding covers all of that – building resilient children and resilient communities.” | I’m not sure what community development means, so ask what Shah’s version of Prevent would look like. “I tell you what it would look like. It would look like a safeguarding programme. If you get safeguarding right for children, you get radicalisation right. Because safeguarding covers all of that – building resilient children and resilient communities.” |
| And how would that be delivered? “Through empowering children, by having brave conversations, having resilient conversations and questioning things. You empower children to ask questions. You empower communities to say: You need to be answering these questions. If we do it through safeguarding, the family then are empowered.” | And how would that be delivered? “Through empowering children, by having brave conversations, having resilient conversations and questioning things. You empower children to ask questions. You empower communities to say: You need to be answering these questions. If we do it through safeguarding, the family then are empowered.” |
| What if it’s the family preaching the extremism? “Well, then you need to take action. What would we do if a child was being abused?” For a moment I think we’ve arrived at an unambiguous and comprehensible statement, but when I try to confirm she is saying that a child radicalised by parents should be taken into care, she retreats with: “Well, it depends on what we call radicalisation. Religious conservatism is not radicalisation, there’s a difference. Let’s not conflate the two.” | What if it’s the family preaching the extremism? “Well, then you need to take action. What would we do if a child was being abused?” For a moment I think we’ve arrived at an unambiguous and comprehensible statement, but when I try to confirm she is saying that a child radicalised by parents should be taken into care, she retreats with: “Well, it depends on what we call radicalisation. Religious conservatism is not radicalisation, there’s a difference. Let’s not conflate the two.” |
| I ask her to define them, and she replies with an anecdote about walking to school as a child with a girl from a devout Christian family who wasn’t allowed a television. “I used to find that really, really – ‘Oh my God, you’ve not got a telly in the house!’ But does that mean that family was extreme? No it doesn’t, it’s just religious conservatism, how you choose to practise your life. So, for me, when people choose to have a way of life that might mean you don’t watch TV – what you do is you empower those children, you empower those young people, you empower those families, you have conversations with them and those conversations have to be very, very brave, because you’re setting your children up to fail if they don’t have access to social media and they are in mainstream school. Then you need to be talking to people. For example, if a child is in a faith school, if you’re dropping them off and picking them up, you’re not necessarily empowering them to use public transport and be resilient in the community, so you need to have conversations with people even if they’re home-schooling.” | I ask her to define them, and she replies with an anecdote about walking to school as a child with a girl from a devout Christian family who wasn’t allowed a television. “I used to find that really, really – ‘Oh my God, you’ve not got a telly in the house!’ But does that mean that family was extreme? No it doesn’t, it’s just religious conservatism, how you choose to practise your life. So, for me, when people choose to have a way of life that might mean you don’t watch TV – what you do is you empower those children, you empower those young people, you empower those families, you have conversations with them and those conversations have to be very, very brave, because you’re setting your children up to fail if they don’t have access to social media and they are in mainstream school. Then you need to be talking to people. For example, if a child is in a faith school, if you’re dropping them off and picking them up, you’re not necessarily empowering them to use public transport and be resilient in the community, so you need to have conversations with people even if they’re home-schooling.” |
| Who needs to have those conversations? I’m becoming lost. “People! Authorities need to have conversations with them people. But if they choose that lifestyle, as long as it doesn’t impact on the safeguarding, then is that a lifestyle choice? That’s the killer question, isn’t it.” Does Shah look at it as a lifestyle choice? “I think some people have legitimate lifestyle choices.” | Who needs to have those conversations? I’m becoming lost. “People! Authorities need to have conversations with them people. But if they choose that lifestyle, as long as it doesn’t impact on the safeguarding, then is that a lifestyle choice? That’s the killer question, isn’t it.” Does Shah look at it as a lifestyle choice? “I think some people have legitimate lifestyle choices.” |
| Is wearing the niqab a legitimate lifestyle choice? “I do not agree personally, on a personal level – and please, if you quote this, do not take it out of context – I do not agree with wearing the niqab, I just don’t get it, right? But when I’ve talked about it, people say: what’s the difference between wearing the niqab and having a full tattooed face? And I’m like, OK.” | Is wearing the niqab a legitimate lifestyle choice? “I do not agree personally, on a personal level – and please, if you quote this, do not take it out of context – I do not agree with wearing the niqab, I just don’t get it, right? But when I’ve talked about it, people say: what’s the difference between wearing the niqab and having a full tattooed face? And I’m like, OK.” |
| Does she consider them the same? “No, but that’s the response I got. And then, if you’ve got barristers who are qualified, who are absolutely very educated, and who have studied Islam and then they’ve gone to it – one of my friends, very very articulate, an amazing woman, I was driving one day and she said ‘Hi Naz’, and I didn’t know who the hell it was. And she’d done it out of choice, she is not an oppressed woman, I assure you, she sees it as her liberation.” Liberation from what? “From her – for her – for her feeling however she wants to feel. That’s her choice. And I was shocked at it. I struggle with the niqab.” | Does she consider them the same? “No, but that’s the response I got. And then, if you’ve got barristers who are qualified, who are absolutely very educated, and who have studied Islam and then they’ve gone to it – one of my friends, very very articulate, an amazing woman, I was driving one day and she said ‘Hi Naz’, and I didn’t know who the hell it was. And she’d done it out of choice, she is not an oppressed woman, I assure you, she sees it as her liberation.” Liberation from what? “From her – for her – for her feeling however she wants to feel. That’s her choice. And I was shocked at it. I struggle with the niqab.” |
| The real issue, Shah feels, isn’t how people practice their faith, but poverty. “For me, that bit’s been missed by Louise.” Casey would presumably say that having no spoken English or any contact with the wider community are causes of poverty. Shah’s own mother would surely have been less vulnerable had she spoken English, and been able to earn enough to support her family? | The real issue, Shah feels, isn’t how people practice their faith, but poverty. “For me, that bit’s been missed by Louise.” Casey would presumably say that having no spoken English or any contact with the wider community are causes of poverty. Shah’s own mother would surely have been less vulnerable had she spoken English, and been able to earn enough to support her family? |
| “Absolutely, absolutely. But it’s not just about speaking English. Integration is a two-way street, and that’s missing from the report. | “Absolutely, absolutely. But it’s not just about speaking English. Integration is a two-way street, and that’s missing from the report. |
| I ask what a white British family reading this should do to assist integration. Shah tells me about an educated, professional man she knew who was the first Muslim to move into a street of 28 other houses, and sent a card to each of them introducing himself. In return he received only two cards. Then she tells me that not long after she moved into her house – “in a nice area, I had a good job” – the white neighbours on both sides put theirs on the market. But just when I think she has made a concrete point – white Britons need to be more welcoming and neighbourly to Muslims – she adds: “My neighbours didn’t sell up because they don’t want to live next door to Asians. People naturally are just comfortable in their own communities. We gravitate towards people who look like us.” | I ask what a white British family reading this should do to assist integration. Shah tells me about an educated, professional man she knew who was the first Muslim to move into a street of 28 other houses, and sent a card to each of them introducing himself. In return he received only two cards. Then she tells me that not long after she moved into her house – “in a nice area, I had a good job” – the white neighbours on both sides put theirs on the market. But just when I think she has made a concrete point – white Britons need to be more welcoming and neighbourly to Muslims – she adds: “My neighbours didn’t sell up because they don’t want to live next door to Asians. People naturally are just comfortable in their own communities. We gravitate towards people who look like us.” |
| Does she mean we should stop fretting about integration? “What I’m saying is, it’s not about not worrying about integration, it’s about building resilient communities. And building resilient communities where there’s poverty, that will require integration. You have more chance of getting a decent job and getting out if there’s integration.” | Does she mean we should stop fretting about integration? “What I’m saying is, it’s not about not worrying about integration, it’s about building resilient communities. And building resilient communities where there’s poverty, that will require integration. You have more chance of getting a decent job and getting out if there’s integration.” |
| In the course of the conversation, Shah has by now used the term “resilient communities” at least 10 times. When I transcribe the tape later, I find whole paragraphs constructed almost entirely out of buzzwords – community development, empowerment, safeguarding, ownership of narrative, social mobility, two-way street – which sound like a sociologist’s new clothes to me, until I think hang on, what if they’re only meaningless to my white, secular perspective? If only I was more integrated, I would get it. So what exactly are, I ask, “resilient communities”? | In the course of the conversation, Shah has by now used the term “resilient communities” at least 10 times. When I transcribe the tape later, I find whole paragraphs constructed almost entirely out of buzzwords – community development, empowerment, safeguarding, ownership of narrative, social mobility, two-way street – which sound like a sociologist’s new clothes to me, until I think hang on, what if they’re only meaningless to my white, secular perspective? If only I was more integrated, I would get it. So what exactly are, I ask, “resilient communities”? |
| “OK, resilient communities are where people have the same opportunities, so equality – equality is a massive thing, so you will not have the same opportunities in Bradford West as you would in a middle-class area.” I would love to pretend that everything now suddenly makes sense, but am not sure it does. | “OK, resilient communities are where people have the same opportunities, so equality – equality is a massive thing, so you will not have the same opportunities in Bradford West as you would in a middle-class area.” I would love to pretend that everything now suddenly makes sense, but am not sure it does. |