Newsline 20 June 2014

Newsline 20 June 2014

Newsline is a weekly round-up of news and opinion from the NSS website. If you're not already a member, becoming one is the most tangible way of supporting our work. Our campaigning is wholly supported by our members, people like you who share our belief that secularism is an essential element in promoting equality between all citizens. Please join today.

News, Blogs & Opinion

Ofsted withdraws 'discriminatory' guidance on inspecting faith schools

News | Tue, 17th Jun 2014

Ofsted has told the National Secular Society that it is updating its guidance on inspecting 'faith schools' following criticism that it endorsed gender segregation in lessons.

Last week the NSS accused Ofsted of "capitulating to oppressive religious demands" and called on the schools watchdog to review the guidance.

The briefing note for inspectors on inspecting 'faith schools', updated just three months ago, advised inspectors that in Muslim faith schools gender segregation "should not be taken as a sign of inequality between different genders."

Inspectors were also advised that art and music lessons in Muslim schools can be "restricted", that health and sex education will be taught within Islamic studies and that daily prayers will often "dictate the shape of the school day".

As pointed out to Ofsted by the NSS, the guidance appeared to contradict Department for Education policy, which has made clear that segregation in the classroom should not be tolerated.

In correspondence to the NSS, Ofsted said the briefing note was "currently being updated and should be published shortly once it has been amended."

The National Secular Society welcomed Ofsted's review.

Stephen Evans, NSS campaigns manager, said: "Ofsted inspectors should not be accommodating unreasonable religious demands from groups involved in running faith schools. Doing so normalises practices inconsistent with core values such as gender equality and individual liberty. Ofsted should be ensuring these values are upheld in schools, not facilitating their erosion.

"We also hope the revised guidance will make no allowance for publicly funded religious schools to dilute the National Curriculum and sex and relationships education in order to accommodate religious dogma. To do so would be a betrayal of children's rights."

PM reaffirms Britain is a “Christian country” – British Social Attitudes figures suggest otherwise

News | Wed, 18th Jun 2014

Prime Minister David Cameron has again stood by his assertion that Britain is a "Christian country", saying he believes "very deeply that we should be confident in that status as a nation".

His assertion came as the latest British Social Attitudes survey revealed that 50.6% of the population now claim to have no religion (up from 47.7% last year). The proportion of the British population who identify themselves as Anglican has more than halved in the past ten years, with just 41.7% now regarding themselves as Christian. 4.6% self identify as Muslim, 1.5% as Sikh, 1.5% as Hindu and 0.5% as Jewish.

The survey found just 24% of people think being Christian is an important element of 'Britishness' – down from 32% in 1995.

The Prime Minister's latest remarks were included in the foreword to the programme for a National Parliamentary Prayer Breakfast held on Tuesday, organised by the all-party parliamentary group Christians in Parliament.

The Prayer Breakfast provides Christian organisations with an opportunity to meet with and lobby parliamentarians – around 80 MPs and 20 peers attended the breakfast and associated seminars, along with almost 600 churchgoers, campaigners and lobbyists.

David Cameron became the first prime minister since Margaret Thatcher to attend. Mr Cameron repeated his claim that the UK is a "Christian country". He said it was "absolutely right that our Parliament should express this confidence through this annual prayer breakfast."

Mr Cameron also said he believed Christianity could inspire politicians to "get out there and make a difference to people's lives".

Justin Welby became the first Archbishop of Canterbury to speak at the event and shared a table with the Prime Minister. Mr Welby delivered the key note speech on "Global Christianity in the 21st Century" raising issues such as the persecution of Christians through blasphemy laws in Sudan and Pakistan. Mr Welby also used the opportunity to defend state funded "church schools" following recent criticism of the role of religion in schools following the so called 'Trojan Horse' plot.

Ed Miliband also attended, making it the first time the leader of the opposition and prime minister have both done so – something reflected on in the speech of Stephen Timms MP, the Labour Party's 'faith envoy' and Chair of Christians on the Left.

The event is modelled on the American National Parliamentary Prayer Breakfast, held annually in Washington DC, which has been attended by every president since Dwight Eisenhower and is and is organised by The Fellowship Foundation, a conservative Christian organisation

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: "Politicians are as entitled to their personal faith, or not to have a faith, as everyone else, but when a PM agrees to attend a religious event of this kind, other political leaders, even if not religious, will feel beholden to go too, which seems an imposition on them.

"No doubt the churches will consider the prayer breakfast a coup, but the PM may yet regret attending it. The British public have never liked politicians wearing their religion on their sleeve or seeming to imply that they or their religion are better than others.

"Three out of five of the population are not Christian - and that proportion is growing fast. The Prime Minister's message should therefore be to stress cohesion rather than to trumpet baseless Christian triumphalism. The non-religious becoming the majority should be a signal to the PM to treat them with more respect, but instead he seems intent on marginalising them."

Maajid Nawaz becomes honorary associate of the NSS

News | Fri, 20th Jun 2014

The National Secular Society has welcomed the anti-extremism activist Maajid Nawaz to its list of prominent supporters by naming him an honorary associate.

Maajid Nawaz is co-founder and chair of Quilliam – a UK-based think tank which promotes integration, citizenship, religious freedom, and anti-extremism. He is also the Liberal Democrat's prospective parliamentary candidate (PPC) for Hampstead & Kilburn.

Maajid was at the centre of the recent Jesus & Mo cartoon controversy after he tweeted a picture of the cartoon, saying that, "as a Muslim, I did not feel threatened by it. My God is greater than that". Following his tweet, Maajid received death threats and vocal calls for his removal from the post of Liberal Democrat PPC from Mohammed Shafiq of the Ramadhan Foundation, Muslim commentator Mo Ansar, Bradford Respect MP George Galloway, and others. Maajid said of his action: "My intention was to carve out a space to be heard without constantly fearing the blasphemy charge, on pain of death".

Human Rights and a respect for individual liberty are matters close to Maajid's heart. His work is informed by years spent in his youth as a leadership member of a global Islamist group, and his gradual transformation towards liberal democratic values.

Having served four years as an Amnesty International adopted 'prisoner of conscience' in Egypt, Maajid is now a leading critic of his former Islamist ideological dogma, while remaining a Muslim. He now encourages inclusive citizenship-based participation of Muslims in the West, while seeking to synergize a respect for human rights with the civic liberal imperative to defend those in danger of being stigmatized by extremists of all stripes due to their personal choices.

On becoming an honorary associate of the NSS Maajid said: "I am proud to associate with the NSS and have no qualms in lending my name to the fine cause of British secularism."

National Secular Society president, Terry Sanderson, said: "We're delighted to welcome Maajid as an honorary associate. Promoting freedom of religion and belief, equality and fundamental human rights for all is central to our work, and Maajid's fearless commitment to these principles has been inspirational."

A “religious ethos” is not why faith schools succeed – it’s selection that does it

Opinion | Tue, 17th Jun 2014

Rather than a faith-based ethos, Terry Sanderson argues that it's selection that allows faith schools to outperform other schools – and calls for fairer admissions policies to ensure a level playing field for all.

The headline in the Coventry Telegraph was pretty unequivocal "Coventry Faith Schools Report Better GCSE results than other city schools".

As far as the dwindling number of enthusiasts for religion-based schools are concerned this is the reason we need "faith schools". They achieve. Their ethos of religion and, by implication, superior morality, makes them better academically as well.

It's a myth enthusiastically reiterated by the assistant head at the Coventry Blue Coat Church of England School, Matthew Connor-Hemming, who told the Coventry Telegraph: "The faith ethos enables students to excel in their studies, thrive in the wide range of activities on offer and develop into caring individuals with a strong desire to positively change the world around them."

Leaving aside the implication that community schools are hotbeds of depravity, what Mr Connor-Hemming failed to mention is that all four of the city's "faith schools" have entry criteria with which only the most determined and pushy parents will be able to comply.

The sort with sharp elbows and the confidence to negotiate the mire of "faith selection".

The busy, working class and disadvantaged parents might also want the best for their children's education but be completely unable or unwilling to (a) suddenly find a commitment to a Christian faith that has heretofore been entirely lacking or (b) be able to negotiate the barriers put in their way by a system that deliberately seeks to exclude their difficult or low-achieving child.

Look at the Blue Coat Church of England school's admission criteria, for instance, which has 203 places for "faith applicants" (vicar's letter to confirm regular church attendance of parents and child required), and 37 "open places". On the application form for the "open places" parents are also required to tell of their commitment to faith and how many times they go to church. So, what "open" means in this context seems entirely up to the church authorities.

The other existing "faith schools" in Coventry, Bishop Ullathorne Catholic School, Cardinal Newman Catholic School and Cardinal Wiseman Catholic School are all Catholic and all three have exacting entry requirements.

The four Christian faith schools in Coventry will be joined next year by Sikh and Muslim free schools.

Do we need to say that those Muslim and Sikh children who are presently attending community schools, and providing the much needed platform for integration, will now be drawn away to spend the day exclusively with others of their own (or, at least their parents') religion? They will be educated by people likely to have a conservative and traditionalist mindset who will – deliberately or not – discourage their pupils from being full participants in the surrounding culture.

Faith schools are a disaster, whichever way you look at them. They are justified with a mythology of achievement that is only possible by unjust selection.

To quote the joint divisional secretary for the National Union of Teachers, Jane Nellist: "I don't think you can say that having a faith makes you brighter. The better exam results are a combination of other factors. Outcomes are still very much about class and about economics. If you are from a deprived area you are much less likely to achieve well. In other parts of the country there are religious schools that are struggling and have been found wanting by Ofsted."

It is good that there is now a national debate at last about whether "faith schools" are an asset or a hindrance to our education system and the nation's cohesiveness. On the evidence of the poll by the Observer, it seems that now a majority have reached the conclusion that this unfair and unnecessary system should end.

Applying equality legislation to publicly funded schools should not be controversial. Of course the churches are not going to willingly give up their privileges, but the next Government must give the whole system a thorough examination and insist that all schools operate fair admissions, free from faith-based discrimination.

Schools and the failure of multiculturalism and multifaithism

Opinion | Tue, 17th Jun 2014

Rumy Hasan argues, faith based identity politics have contributed to an increasingly divisive school system, which undermines children's right to a broad, critical and tolerant secular education.

The spat between Michael Gove and Theresa May focuses on the failure to tackle Islamic extremism in Birmingham's schools. Whether such failure can be attributed to one party or the other is, in fact, a moot point. The real problem has deeper roots: it resides in the failure of multiculturalism and multifaithism. Given that both the previous and present governments describe Britain as being a multi-faith society, it is entirely to be expected that leaders of those groups for whom their faith trumps all other indicators of identity, will seek robustly to instil the imprimatur of the values and practices of their religion. In this context, recent statements made by Prime Minister David Cameron and Communities Secretary Eric Pickles that Britain is essentially a Christian country, are most unhelpful in that they provoke many within the faith minorities to emphatically say "no we are not", and to assert their own non-Christian faith identity with even greater vigour.

This fundamental truth has not well been understood by the political establishment. Rather, like the previous government, the present coalition government's concern has been on tackling Islamist terrorism following 9/11 and especially since the 7th July 2005 bombings. It is precisely this thinking that led Michael Gove to appoint Peter Clark, former National Co-ordinator for Counter Terrorism, to review the evidence of the Trojan Horse plot. This detracts from core of the problem of heightened faith identities that are facilitated by high levels of segregation in communities and in schools.

Indeed, concerns about segregated schooling go back decades. As far back as 1985, the Swann Report on education highlighted the dangers of "separate schools" for ethnic minorities. Two decades later, Barry Sheerman, chairman of the Commons Education Select Committee, warned in 2005: "Do we want a ghettoised education system? ... Schools play a crucial role in integrating different communities and the growth of faith schools poses a real threat to this. These things need to be thought through very carefully before they are implemented". In a similar vein, in 2007, Commission for Racial Equality Policy Director Nick Johnson cautioned that Britain risks becoming a "mini America" dominated by racially and religiously determined schools, and warned: "If a Muslim child is educated in a school where the vast majority of other children are also Muslim, how can we expect him to work, live and interact with people from other cultures when he leaves school? This is a ticking time-bomb waiting to explode". Given that practically nothing has been done to tackle the roots of the problems, that is, to tackle the very high levels of segregation and promote genuine integration, such a proverbial "time bomb" has indeed exploded in Birmingham, and will doubtless do so in many other towns and cities.

This reasoning and warning is absolutely correct. A natural consequence of residential segregation is that schools in inner cities have also become segregated: in the 21 Birmingham schools that were inspected by Ofsted, children of Muslim parents comprise over 90 per cent. Channel 4 News reported that in one school, only one child was non-Muslim; the white mother of the child thought that though a secular, state, school, it felt like a Muslim faith school. Indeed, this is precisely what has been happening: parents and governors of these schools are attempting to convert them into de facto Muslim faith schools. And here is something that has not been remarked upon: what is giving cause for concern re attempts by Islamists to take over state schools in Birmingham is precisely what has been made lawful in free schools and faith schools. Abandoning children to such schools, which are plainly not fit for purpose for modern Europe, is nothing short of a dereliction of duty.

The rising level of segregation is not only a phenomenon of "white flight" but also the flight of those from other religious-ethnic minorities. Polite society may not notice, but the stark reality is that Hindu and Sikh parents do not wish to send their schools where there is preponderance of Muslim children and vice versa. So what have arisen are "mono-faith" neighbourhoods and schools. Given the enormous importance of the formative years in life, this phenomenon can have a highly significant and lasting effect on how children from different backgrounds relate to each other. Put bluntly, there is likely to be a deleterious impact on integration and cohesion from heightened levels of segregation of children and this surely does not at all augur well for the goal of a socially cohesive society. If segregation of communities is not a desirable outcome and is an obstacle to improving social cohesion, then it is certainly also true for children in schools.

Michael Gove's call that school children must be taught "British values" is inadequate given that there is simply no agreed definition of what these values are. Rather, it is imperative that a child's accident of birth should not preclude a broad, critical, tolerant education; this must necessarily be secular. Moreover, this needs to be combined with children from minority communities mixing with others, especially with those from the majority white society. These enormously important lessons need to be learned and acted upon by both the government and the opposition.

Rumy Hasan is a senior lecturer at the University of Sussex and writes for the Huffington Post, where this article first appeared. You can follow him on Twitter @RumyHasan. The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the NSS.

New campaign urges party leaders to support change in the law on assisted dying

News | Fri, 20th Jun 2014

The campaign group Dignity in Dying has launched a campaign aimed at the three main party leaders asking them to support a change in the law to enable assisted dying.

A Private Members' Bill – The Assisted Dying Bill – introduced by Lord Falconer, will receive its Second Reading in the House of Lords on Friday, 18 July. Ahead of the debate, Dignity in Dying are calling on supporters of a change in the law to email party leaders to call on them to back the Bill.

The Bill would only legalise assisted dying for terminally ill adults with six months or less to live. The patient would be provided with life-ending medication that they would have to take themselves after two doctors declared their illness meant they that they had six months or less to live, and had made a clear and settled decision with time to consider all other options.

The proposed Bill does not permit the doctors to administer the medication, would not legalise assisted suicide for people who are not dying (for example disabled people or older people) and would only apply to adults with mental capacity both at the time of their request and at the time of their death.

A recent YouGov poll (pdf) found 73% of adults in England and Wales support the proposals in the Bill. Only 13% did not think the Bill should become law, with 13% undecided.

Despite widespread opposition from religious groups, the majority of religious adherents also support a change in the law on assisted dying.

According to other poll, 72% of Anglicans think people with incurable diseases should have the right to ask close friends or relatives to help them commit suicide, without fear of risking prosecution. Despite this, the Church of England has made clear its opposition to any change in the law, or medical practice, to make assisted suicide permissible or acceptable.

Describing assisted dying as "crude", the Church says "suffering must be met with compassion, commitment to high-quality services and effective medication". The Church's bishops are expected to oppose the Bill in the House of Lords.

56% of Catholics also support a change in the law despite Roman Catholic leaders being particularly vocal against assisted dying.

The Bill enjoys cross party support.

Liberal Democrat Peer and NSS honorary associate Lord Avebury, said: "This Bill can save a small but significant group of terminally ill patients from an agonising death. There is no way it could be misused, or that its rigorous safeguards would allow its limited purposes to be widened".

Crossbench Peer Baroness Murphy – another NSS honorary associate, said: "As a doctor, the relief of suffering at the end of life and respecting dying patients' individual sustained wishes about their own care take precedence. I welcome this Bill as an opportunity to clarify a difficult and complex area of current law and allow patients who are terminally ill to make real choices about life's end."

Conservative Peer Lord Dobbs said: "The right to life that we all enjoy should also provide the right to a dignified death wherever possible. So long as appropriate and rigorous safeguards are in place, I want to see that right to a dignified death established in law."

NSS President, Terry Sanderson, commented: "On assisted dying, as with same sex marriage, the Church of England is at considerable odds with the country's Anglicans, and even more with the population as a whole. Yet it seeks to justify its establishment, and the anachronistic privilege of its bishops in the House of Lords, on the grounds that it speaks for everyone. This is a self-serving delusion. Its bishops should not only abstain from voting on this issue but consider very carefully before advising peers to oppose the Bill."

Those supporting a change to the law are asked to make their voice heard by emailing party leaders.

Also see: Terry Sanderson: The choice of when to die should be that of the individual – not religious leaders

NSS Speaks Out

We were quoted on three separate occasions in the Telegraph this week. NSS President Terry Sanderson was quoted on the need to rethink the dominant role of Christianity in the military after official figures highlighted the decline of religious belief among service personal.

NSS executive director Keith Porteous wood spoke out after David Cameron became first prime minister since Margaret Thatcher to join a US-style prayer breakfast in Parliament, using the occasion to again claim Britain to be a "Christian country".

Our campaigns manager Stephen Evans was also quoted after Ofsted announced it was scrapping controversial faith school inspection rules following criticism from the NSS that it was capitulating to oppressive religious demands and endorsing gender segregation in the classroom.

Newsline will take a break next week, the next edition will be on Friday 4 July