The Liberal Democrats have criticised Jack Straw for being “insensitive” by asking Muslim women not to wear veils when they attend his constituency surgery. Mr Straw has today gone further and said he would prefer Muslim women not to wear veils at all.
You can hear the Lib Dem view below, and Jack Straw’s defence of his position here.
Prominent Lib Dems were split on a not entirely dissimilar issue recently – the French government’s decision to ban religious symbols in schools, including the hijab. As an example, Evan Harris was apparently in favour of that ban, while Sarah Ludford was against. I’ve searched the party website in vain for an “official line” on that issue.
Where do you stand on this issue? Are we right to disagree with Jack Straw?
Note: Audio problem fixed with the aid of Martin Tod, thanks Martin!
UPDATE: I’ve just received this e-mail which also may be of interest:
DISPATCHES
‘Are Muslims A Threat To Free Speech?’
Jon Snow is presenting a Dispatches one-off studio special on the topic of Muslims and free speech.
Recent events (such as the Pope’s speech last month in which he made remarks about the Muslim faith which caused upset amongst some Muslims) have prompted a number of people to claim that the British tradition of freedom of speech is now under threat. On the other side of the debate, it’s argued that these protests show there is little public understanding of Muslim communities, and that Muslims in Britain have a right to protection from seriously offensive public references to their faith.
The show will be recorded on ONE NIGHT ONLY on Wednesday 18th October at The London Studios on the South Bank. If you are interested in being in the studio audience for this lively debate, then apply quickly – booking is now open!
The show will be recorded at 7pm on Wednesday 18th October at The ITV London Studios (approx 10 mins walk from Waterloo).
If you have a knowledge of current affairs, then apply now for your free tickets to join us for the show via our website, http://www.sroaudiences.com, or call 020 8684 3333. Only a limited number of tickets are available, so act quickly!
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Ben Wood
Ed Sanderson
Jack
Matt (Bristol)
John Grout
15 Comments
2 distinct issues:
1. Should veils be banned? Clearly the Liberal answer is no. We should be wary of banning anything without a very good reason – and there is bugger all reason in this case.
2. What about Straw’s comments?
IMHO he can “ask” people attending his surgeries to do whatever he wants. If it were me, the appriorate response to such a request would be to show him the finger.
Nothing wrong with asking the question or expressing the sentiment, per se.
However, it’s pretty clear that Straw is letting out a “dog whistle” to the more unsavoury islamaphobic elements as part of his campaign for the deputy leadership. It says something when Straw thinks this is a vote-winner within the Labour party.
In conclusion, our spokespeople are right to tackle the underlying issue (rather than engage with Straw specifically) and take a Liberal line: no one should be forced to wear a veil but at the same time no one should be required not to.
I don’t think Straw should be criticised on this. I see he has gone further now. According to the BBC:
Cabinet Minister Jack Straw has said he would prefer Muslim women not to wear veils at all.
The Commons leader said he did not want to be “prescriptive” but he believed that covering people’s faces could make community relations more difficult.
I find it hard to disagree with that statement. Is anyone going to say that the veil improves relations between people of different religions and of none?
Call it a dog-whistle issue if you like. But that doesn’t make him wrong.
Give this dog-whistle stuff a rest. Saying things like “it’s not racist to call for limits on immigration” or “let’s have an ‘honest debate’ about asylum” is open to that analysis as the people who use such terms are clearly being evasive about their own views and subject to the criticism that they are legitimising genuinely racist views in the public arena.
Jack Straw’s contribution to this debate, by contrast, has been couched in very precise, very careful language. This isn’t the sort of tub-thumping we take for granted from a thug like Reid or Blunkett.
I can’t help but compare this debate to the debate on ‘hoodies’. The latter debate inevitably results in people standing up for the right for young people to wear what they want, but there is no denial in the debate that the fact that a whole generation seem intent on hiding themselves away from wider society is unfortunate. Yet a lot of voices I’ve heard over the past 24 hours have been saying that Straw is wrong to lament about the same phenomenon amongst a growing number of Muslim women. If we have compassion for these women we should at least be keen to have a public debate on the issue and resist the temptation to bash anyone who makes a contribution to it.
I’m not Jack Straw’s greatest fan by any means, but I respect that he is making a serious contribution to a serious debate that defies lazy stereotyping about Labour politicians having growing problems with multi-culturalism.
Wearing a veil is a deep part of the culture for many Muslims. Who are we to pass comment on the personal choice, culture and dress. If we start to do this then the veil may become a symbol of defiance, fundamentalism even and that will do no good at all for community relations.
I’m disappointed by the knee-jerk criticism of Straw. I won’t reiterate my view on the matter (it’s posted here), but I do think our party spokespeople need to think very carefully before making statements on this kind of thing.
Straw gave a personal view, a view which is entirely legitimate. He’s a free citizen and we’re criticising him for holding a personal view?
What Jack Straw said is correct – of course the veil is a symbol of division. It shouldn’t be, but it is, and it does create a barrier to integration.
It’s also quite scary when you’re walking down the street at night and there’s someone dressed all in black with nothing but their eyes showing. Of course they have every right to dress that way but it doesn’t stop it being scary – just like James said about hoodies. It would make a great outfit for a mugger to hide in.
This reminds me of something. In most of the shops near where I live, there are signs up asking people to remove any hoods, helmets or hats which may be used to avoid identification by CCTV. These are paid for by the police, and the shops have a policy of denying entry to people wearing such clothing.
Whilst they seem perfectly happy to enforce this against hoodie-wearing kids, I very much doubt that they’d enforce it against a woman wearing a burqa.
I think his comments were atrocious to be honest.
You wouldn’t find me in a veil, and I wouldn’t like to see anyone forced to wear one, but if you are going to have reasonable dialogue with someone you have to meet them where they are. And if they are wearing a veil, you’re just going to have to live with it.
Imagine the outrage if this were the other way round, and a Government Minister had said that he would find it difficult to communicate with someone unless they were wearing a veil? Being asked to do that would make us feel very uncomfortable.
I think we should respect diversity – something that the Labour mindset has never been very good at.
Yes, veils can be instruments of oppression – but so can anything if it’s misused. It’s not as if non Muslim men in this country are all respectful souls who treat women as equals at all times.
And as far as the veil being a barrier to communication because you need to see someone’s face – nonsense. You can get so much from tone of voice, body language and eye contact.
I doubt Jack Straw has done much to help community relations – and his comments will be seen as giving legitimacy to all sorts of dodgy extremists – already one woman has had a veil ripped off her.
I think the (lack of) response from some of the Muslim community is what we have all missed.
As some of you may know I am Muslim (by birth rather than choice) and was born in Lebanon.
I have made this point on many sites, basically why is it when anyone questions anything to do with Islam the reaction is always laced with threat?!
Christians (the NI problems left to one side), Hindus, Jews and Sikhs in this country have never reacted with the threat not actual violence when there religions are challenged in any way.
I am amazed that it seems to be becoming a “no go” to say anything about Islam, and in a democracy this is unacceptable. I think that most Muslims just stay quite, which is a disgrace, and let the loonies get their say.
Where are all the normal Muslim spokespersons, not the fringe JUST from Pakistani who seems to think they have Islam all to themselves.
I know many Middle Eastern Muslims who do not wear any such clothing and blame the Asian Muslims for re-enforcing such a stereotype of the religion.
Go to Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan or even Syria and only very small (usually Shite) percentage wear any head covering.
I believe that Islam has been hijacked by people who want to or love to portray it as some backward looking, violent religion for their own ends.
Nothing is further from the truth, as with any Holly book it can be interpreted in any way the reader wants.
I drink, eat pork and have married a Christian, so what? The teaching NOT to do any of these things where from 1500 years ago when pork was dirty, drink caused problems(it still does, but it was not policed at the time) Like anything you can twist things to match your needs, and certain parts of the Muslim community love the new found fear that they hold over this country.
However (and belatedly) people are waking up to this, this country will not sleepwalk in to becoming some Islamic state. How on earth a few hundred people thought they could intimidate 50million people is beyond me, but to date we have let them think they can. If as they claim everyone should believe in Islam the Koran specially says any conversion should be done peacefully NOT forcibly. How can someone you force to believe in anything, not just religion, truly believe it? This is about control and power, pure and simple, why, why, why do these so called Muslim leaders(not ONE from the Middle East) not condemn these people 100%….because deep down they agree with at least some of there sentiments, after being in the background for years they are headline news, and they love it.
What needs to happen is the majority of Muslims show some guts and tell these people to leave their communities, and the rest of the country needs to feel un-afraid to comment and even criticise Islam.
If it as appears the fundamentalist dislike this there is always an exit, and I do wish they would use it…but alas they will not why go to a third world country when you can live off the good will of the very people you profess to hate.
Then again I truly believe that any democratic country can only put up with so much before it fights back, and the Veil issue is just a small start.
I say this to my Muslim friends, learn to live and let live or get out, that simple!
I am confused by Mak’s statement that he is ” Muslim (by birth rather than choice)”. Surely whether you believe that Allah is the one and only god and Mohammed is his prophet IS a choice. You may be an Arab (or Bangladeshi, Indonesian or whatever) by birth, but religion is and MUST BE a choice.
On the wider issue, I agree with James and Chris: Jack Straw is no dog-whistler. My opinion is that people should be welcome to wear the veil if they wish. However, there ARE people who are obliged – actively or passively/socially – to conform. This is something that L/liberals should object to and we should champion those who wish to be liberated from it – it is a liberation struggle like the gender liberation of the 1960s.
Equally, we must also recognise that there are many Muslim women who choose to wear the veil for social-identity reasons, gender-based reasons (they get leered at less!) and Allah-knows what other reasons. We should not throw the baby out with the bath-water.
Interestingly, I once heard a female Islamic academic speak on women in Islam. She argued (inter alia) that the veil was not so much an ISLAMIC tradition as an ARAB one, and that while it had a traditional place in Arabia, its spread to (say) Bangladesh was an example of the habits of a dominant racial group within a wider religious grouping carrying across (a bit like the influence of European culture on Christianity).
Surely our criticism of Jack Straw being “insensitive” wasn’t so much us coming out with an outright disagreeing, but more saying that as a party we don’t want to get caught up into this debate.
It’s been one which has caused a lot of soul-searching in liberal parties in the Netherlands and Denmark – much of which at the time many people in the Lib Dems rather arrogantly dismissed as petty racism.
As to the debate itself, the most insightful views expressed are that the issue of the veil is a distraction. At best we have a society where young women feel threatened by the presence of men they don’t know, and at worst where 90% of female bangladeshi and pakistani immigrants are kept isolated, without english skills and effectively denied their citizenship and political rights.
Let’s talk about either or both of these two issues instead, but ultimately the veil is just a form of cultural clothing, like hoodies on kids.
Maybe Cameron could urge us all to “hug a burkha”?
Big Mak Says:
Christians (the NI problems left to one side), Hindus, Jews and Sikhs in this country have never reacted with the threat not actual violence when there religions are challenged in any way.
This just isn’t true, as the Hindu fuss over Bezhti and the Christian protests over Jerry Springer: The Opera showed.
On the veil issue itself, I didn’t think Straw’s comments were particularly objectionable, but that doesn’t mean I agree with him. I think the key issue here is whether the Muslim women are being forced to wear the veil against their will, in which case we should be shouting loud and clear against it, or whether they are freely wearing it, in which case it’s nobody else’s business but their own.
Whoops, I think in my last comment the “Hindu fuss” should actually read “Sikh fuss”
I don’t understand why an individual should be offended when a women chooses to were a vail, that is the requirement of our Lord, who do these politions think they are , its like one suggesting that all women wear minimul cloths as possible, these men are degreading the women, they actully have no respect for women. just because a women chooses not to expose herself she becomes a threat to whom? the reason are laim.this is not offensive this is the LAW of God, who does Jack Strew think he is, he is clearly a recist against the muslims, because who ever is suggesting that a muslim women should not wear a vail is in other words asking that Muslim are no longer welcome in the UK, there should be a debate about this subject I can suggest that if anyone wishes to have a debate they should check this website IRF. Dr Zakir Naik is the president anyone who has any questions about any religion he will reason with you and provide an answar that will satisfy most human accept those of whom are the friends of the Devil, He has the wisdom to educate some of these ignorant polititions and journalist.