Chapter Five Conclusions
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 The research has confirmed for Glasgow city - what Central Government through the Home Office report Working Together (Home Office 2004) expressed at national level - that faith communities are an under utilised resource and that their skills, capacity, and willingness to contribute to public life is not always recognised or utilised. The faith groups who participated in this study engage large numbers of citizens, many of whom do, and would be, willing to work for the common good of the city. There is evidence of goodwill towards GCC, an understanding that a relationship with local government is important, and a desire to relate well.
5.1.2 This report highlights difficulties in communication, gaps in knowledge and provision, policy and practical issues of concern to faith communities, perceptions and experience of religious intolerance, and a dearth of energy and commitment to inter or multi faith activity. The research also engages issues, such as religious and racial abuse and equality, which have implications beyond Glasgow City Council area.
5.2 The interrelationship of religion, ethnicity, race, and abuse
5.2.1 Throughout this study, the researchers were aware that issues to do with religious faith and practice could not be separated from issues of culture and ethnicity for many of the faith groups in the city. Focus group participants and interviewees, from all faiths, spoke of racial and religious abuse interchangeably. There was a strong sense that an already existing link between the two in the general population had been strengthened and highlighted by the tragic events in America in September 2001, and that the balance had shifted perceptibly from racial, towards more religious, discrimination and abuse.
5.2.2 The Christian and Jewish communities also perceived a cultural gap, albeit of a different type, between themselves and those of other, or no, religious affiliation who regard them as "weird" (young Protestant woman). This cultural difference, which was usually, though not always, experienced between ethnically white people, sometimes resulted in the harassment or bullying of children and young people, if they admitted Christian or Jewish faith and practice.
5.2.3 This means that it is no longer possible for government or citizens to behave as if 'religious practice' is simply a private matter. It is, at the very least, a significant public issue in terms of community cohesion and community safety. Both government and faith groups, therefore, have a responsibility to explore the delicate, but blurred, boundary between what should remain properly private, and what must be addressed at communal and city level.
5.2.4 A further dimension to the intertwining of religious, cultural, and ethnic issues was the tension, evident in conversations with participants from minority ethnic faith groups, between the pressure to integrate into Glasgow city life, and the pressure to maintain their distinctive cultural identity. It was expressed most often through a pre-occupation with keeping alive knowledge of their languages, especially in younger generations who are being educated through the medium of English.
5.2.5 In no way did the researchers sense that the pressure for distinctiveness was a rejection of indigenous Glasgow culture. On the contrary, most participants from minority ethnic communities seemed to express a genuine love of the city and its people and a sense of being, and wanting to be, at home in it. Their dilemma was how to be true to their own identities while making a full and positive contribution to the local community.
5.2.6 One effect of the gradual integration of minority faith communities is the difficult experience for the majority Christian population of having to relinquish their traditional primacy of position to make space for others. It was expressed in Christian focus group conversations as a sense of being "sidelined," or "relegated" by or "not getting a fair crack of the whip from" GCC. Their dilemma was how to welcome and make space for other faith groups, which most Christians seemed concerned to do, while ensuring that their own identities are equally respected and valued. The exclusive truth claims of Christianity, for example about the uniqueness of Jesus Christ, make accommodation of difference a difficult step for some Christian groups, especially, but not only, smaller, more evangelical groupings.
5.2.7 The implication, then, is that unless the city is to opt for destructive and unstable patterns of either assimilating minority religions and cultures, or trying to live in parallel societies, both the minority faith groups and the indigenous, largely white, Christian population must explore how to accommodate the difference of the other. This may appear to be an unnecessary and self evident assertion, but underlying this discussion of religion and culture is the wider debate about the accommodation of all forms of difference.
5.2.8 Such accommodation would require the deconstruction of both mindsets and ways of proceeding in which white, Christian, largely male, heterosexual, able bodied functioning is still more or less the norm, and catering for religious, cultural, gender, disability or sexual orientation needs is seen as making special provision (albeit by right or by legal obligation). In its place will be a norm of equality in diversity which relativises all differences, including moral differences. Ironically, the same movement which will give minority ethnic faith groups, and overtly Christian or Jewish people, the right to the protection of their identities, customs, and practices, will also afford protection to practices, like homosexuality, which many faith groups would want to challenge on moral grounds. This is precisely the movement that some focus groups described as a secularising agenda of Central Government and the Scottish Executive.
5.3 Implications for government
5.3.1 Knowledge, communication, and access to information
5.3.1.1 Providing the best possible services as a local authority is only useful if those to whom they are directed have knowledge of them and can access them. The reported lack of knowledge about, and frustration in trying to access, GCC services on the part of many faith groups suggests that GCC must review the way it provides information on its services. Such a review would need to include not only the types, forms, and languages in which information is made available, but also the routes for dissemination.
5.3.1.2 The experience of the research team confirmed the findings of the Leeds pilots faiths consultation that effective communication with faith communities can be difficult to negotiate, and there is no one model or approach which suits all faith groups. It would be helpful to 'map' the internal and external communication structures of faith groups. The FOF, and possibly the SIFC, could, then, be invited to help design a strategy for effective communication with different parts of the faith constituency in Glasgow.
5.3.2 Systemic Change - the concept of normative provision of services
5.3.2.1 Another implication of this study for GCC concerns the reported lack of knowledge and insensitivity of Council staff. This suggests that GCC must work systemically to change the mindset of Council employees from the perception that providing culturally, or religiously, appropriate services is 'special' provision, to one in which diverse provision is regarded as normative . This means that there will be an in-built flexibility in the provision of services which allows for differing varieties of service to meet the needs of different citizens. An example might be the provision of food from Council facilities such as care homes, 'meals on wheels,' or day services. It is routine to provide for a limited range of special diets: vegetarian, diabetic, and gluten free being some of the most common. These are special exceptions to a standard menu which is largely, though not entirely, based on West European fare. Diverse provision would mean that a standard menu would always have other options, e.g. Asian (Indian), Asian (Chinese) according to the variety of ethnic populations likely to use a facility. It also means that, as a matter of course, people would be asked to specify needs such as religious and medical ones from a pre-printed list including: Hallal, kosher, no garlic/onion, no salt, diabetic, gluten free etc. The pre-printed list is important, because it means that what are currently 'special' exceptions to a general norm, which have to be specified as exceptions, become standard options.
5.3.2.2 Clearly, there will be limits to the level of flexibility which is possible, or is financially viable, within a system. It is not a case of expecting provision for absolutely every choice that citizens would wish to make. Nor is it a case of suggesting, in this example, that Council facilities need to hold ingredients for a range of options which may be used rarely. Rather that they would have a mechanism to source suitable food from outside contractors immediately when needed. Such an arrangement could be negotiated with the local community to ensure suitability. What is being proposed is intended to move GCC service provision further towards equitable provision for the diverse ethnic, cultural, and religious needs of people within the Glasgow City area.
5.3.2.3 Such a change of mindset will take generations to embed and will require a 'whole organisation' approach, which fundamentally changes the ethos of the Council. Religious, cultural and diversity awareness training courses for staff is a key practical action that faith communities want GCC to take. This will ultimately only succeed, however, if the whole Council system from recruitment, through in-house procedures, consultation, and policy, to client relations is reviewed and realigned to take diverse service provision as normative. Glasgow has a large and talented pool of people of faith, from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds, who would be a valuable resource to support this process.
5.3.2.4 What is being suggested here for Glasgow, of course, applies equally to local government in other areas of Scotland. It applies also to the Scottish Executive.
5.3.3 Taking religion seriously
5.3.3.1 The reported low level of religious tolerance in the city is supported by the survey findings of substantial concern for religious/sectarian abuse (see table 4). This suggests that both Central and local government should consider proactive measures to address religious intolerance as well as racism, before the issue escalates further.
5.3.3.2 A legislative framework, in terms of religious hatred, is already in place and being monitored as to its effectiveness. But the researchers found that much of the energy of GCC is aimed at tackling racism rather than wider issues of intolerance. 68 This is because the statutory requirement on local authorities to implement the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 69 is providing a driving force, which, as yet, the issue of religious intolerance does not possess. It could also be an outworking of the fact that traditionally, religion in Britain has been considered more a private than a public matter.
5.3.3.3 Whatever the reason, the religious element of intolerant behaviour appears to be underplayed or ignored unless it is related to 'sectarianism,' which usually refers to intra -Christian intolerance and violence. The findings of this study indicate that such an approach is no longer tenable, at least in the city of Glasgow. The inextricable link between race, ethnicity, and religion in a number of Glasgow's faith communities means that, to be effective, measures to tackle racism and intolerance, as well as measures to promote diversity, must take religion seriously.
5.3.3.4 GCC could make much more constructive use of the expertise, experience, and good will of faith community representatives in important policy consultations and decisions. This would not only avoid the sense that some expressed of being treated in a 'tokenistic' manner, but also expand the knowledge and skills base available to GCC officials.
5.4 Implications for faith communities
5.4.1 Finding appropriate frameworks of relationship
5.4.1.1 The responsibility for tackling religious intolerance and promoting diversity in society is one which faith communities share with government and other sectors of the community. Being specialists in religion, faith, and religious practice gives faith groups a unique, and leading role in such work.
5.4.1.2 This study indicates that, currently, faith communities in Glasgow do not appear to have either the capacity or the willingness to undertake such a role. This assessment is based on the reported low priority accorded to inter or multi faith work in most faith communities, the lack of leadership and vision, and the fact that it remains largely the preserve of an enthusiastic few, rather than being a core concern for most faith groups. 70
5.4.1.3 The research team are conscious that there can be significant theological and doctrinal obstacles to meaningful relationship between faith groups, and do not underestimate their importance. Deep, honest, and respectful inter faith dialogue however, while it is the chosen path of many, need not be the way forward for all or, even perhaps the majority of believers. There are positive and creative ways of being in relationship which allow communities to leave aside, rather than discuss, their differences in pursuit of a shared aim. Some of the most innovative existing models of good practice in relationship between faith communities are those which depend on a multi faith, rather than an inter faith, dynamic. 71
5.4.1.4 There is a good deal of scope for faith groups to work side by side on issues of common concern in a manner which does not oblige participants to enter the fraught arena of doctrinal discussion and difference. Multi faith approaches to social enterprise initiatives and urban regeneration have been shown, in other settings, to provide a practical and worthwhile focus that allows faith groups to learn about one another in a natural and phased way.
5.4.1.5 Finding an appropriate framework of relationship which allows a faith group to reach out to other faith groups is crucial to the sustainability of work to promote diversity and religious tolerance. This means that faith communities and individuals who are serious about tackling religious and cultural intolerance must consider which framework of relationship they can sustain, and then set about finding people of like minds in other faith communities with whom to build such relationships.
5.4.2 Building sustainable infrastructure
5.4.2.1 One characteristic which the models of good practice share in common, is the development, early in the existence of inter or multi faith groups, of structures which can support and animate relationships between very diverse faith communities. The reported absence of structures which can facilitate relationship at local level in the GCC area is a significant impediment to the development of relationships between faith groups at grassroots level in the city.
5.4.2.2 Generating an infrastructure which will involve and enthuse the ordinary adherents of different religions, is one basic step towards grounding relationships between faith groups in such a way that they can withstand, and even transform, the destructive dynamics of religious and racial intolerance. Faith communities will have to decide whether or not they are willing to invest the time and resources needed to create this type of network at various levels within the city.
5.4.3 Engagement
5.4.3.1 All the structure in the world, however, will be to no effect if there is not the will to engage with other communities. One of the most significant, and depressing, findings of this research is the fact that, while some of the smaller faith groups appear to be active and engaged, many in the two largest faith groups, the Christian and Muslim communities, appear in different ways disengaged from inter or multi faith relationship in Glasgow.
5.4.3.2 Some participants from the larger and more established Christian churches described their denomination's involvement as "polite and businesslike" at the official level, and more or less non-existent at local level. The reasons for this disengaged stance were not clear. There did not appear to be overt issues of doctrinal difference, though it is possible that the format of the focus group questions simply failed to uncover them. It was clear that much of the energy of these denominations is still invested in trying to improve 'ecumenical,' i.e., intra-Christian relationships. The sense of the researchers is that the majority of Christian community surveyed has not yet recognised that the milieu of Glasgow is changing, and the new need is to engage, not the Christian 'other,' but people of other faiths.
5.4.3.3 There is some evidence to support a claim that many in the Muslim community are disengaged: the reported frequent non attendance of the Muslim representative on the FOF and SIFC; the Muslim focus group description of their community as "not proactive" in inter faith work; and the very poor response rate for Muslim returns to the survey. There could be a number of reasons for their stance. The most obvious reason is the pressure under which the Muslim community find themselves both on the streets in Glasgow and, according to them, in the media. They have a strong sense that their faith community is being demonised, even by the British government, and this is fuelling Islamophobia in the city. One or two comments from focus group participants also suggest that the community have experienced people rebuffing their attempts to reach out; a sense that others put up barriers when they try to contribute.
5.4.3.4 On the other hand, some groups, most notably the Baha'i and the Jewish communities, appear to be very active and to achieve representation on religious networking bodies far in excess of the size of their groups in Glasgow. The members of the Baha'i community who participated in the research seemed well connected with a wide range of groups. They were able to give assistance to the researchers in identifying participants from faith groupings other than their own.
5.4.3.5 The findings of this research suggest that faith communities need to review their engagement with other faith groups, and their contribution to positive religious and cultural relationships in the city. Such engagement will not come without both effort and cost in terms of the delicate and some times painful negotiation of, or inability to negotiate, religious or theological difference. Nonetheless, there is a significant contribution which only faith groups, as the keepers of religious faith and tradition, can make to developing Glasgow as a truly open, diverse and welcoming city. For this to come about, however, engagement in inter or multi faith relationships must be authorised and supported by leadership and be an integral and central part of the communities ways of being. The questions for faith communities are whether or not they have the will to actually make that contribution and whether the leadership will authorise and sustain it.
5.5 Implications for the post of Inter Faith Liaison Officer, GCC
5.5.1 This study clearly indicates that the intention of the Scottish Executive and GCC to appoint an Inter Faith Liaison Officer is timely. There are several immediate implications of the research which bear directly on the work of this post. These are initial tasks apparent from this small and limited study. Doubtless, as the post holder develops their work, other tasks and projects will become apparent.
5.5.2 Promoting diverse service provision as normative
5.5.2.1 The Inter Faith Liaison Officer, as the GCC's specialist in inter faith issues, should play a key role in helping to identify religious needs. The officer should work closely with policy officers and others towards systemic change in GCC through the development of an ethos of diverse service provision as normative, as discussed above in section 5.3.2.
5.5.3 Developing an effective communication strategy between GCC and faith communities
5.5.3.1 The post will be in a pivotal, facilitative role between the Council and the faith communities, facing equally in both directions. There will be a need for this Officer to lead on a process of mapping the communication structures of different faith communities and with the help of FOF, SIFC and other faith representatives, to contribute to an effective communication strategy between GCC and each faith group as well as between faith groups.
5.5.4 Exploring frameworks of relationship and patterns of engagement between faith communities
5.5.4.1 At community level, this Officer will have to help faith communities explore the most appropriate patterns of relating for them; advise on, and encourage, the building of local infrastructures of contact; and encourage engagement.
5.5.5 Good practice - strategic partnerships for social enterprise
5.5.5.1 Theological and/or doctrinal issues can become an obstacle to the development of positive relationships between faith communities. In some of the examples of good practice from around the UK cited earlier in this report, inter faith liaison officers found that developing co-operative social enterprise projects helped to overcome relational barriers. Given that Glasgow has a high level of economic disadvantage, this Officer could explore, with the inter faith development officer employed by Communities Scotland and Glasgow Alliance, the development of partnerships for social enterprise as a useful strategy for improving faith community relations.