Paul Richards wades into segregation row

Monday, 24 August 2009 18:03

Paul Richards - the ex-special advisor to the disgraced former Communities Secretary, Hazel Blears - writes about the wedding segregation row in an article for Progress Online.

Richards uses the opportunity to hark on in similar vein to the articles he recently wrote for the Jewish Chronicle which reveal his particular distaste for the Muslim Council of Britain.

Richards writes of the former secretary general of the MCB:

‘Iqbal Sacranie was swift to condemn Jim Fitzpatrick last weekend. He said Fitzpatrick’s action ‘reflects badly’ on him. He ignored the fact that Mrs Fitzpatrick also left the wedding. Sir Iqbal has a long and illustrious CV. He appears in those lists of ‘most powerful’ and ‘most influential’ people in Britain. He has served on this board and that, advised our Labour government, was secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), and has been knighted by the Queen. But looking at the CV, you are hard-pressed to find any evidence of having been elected by anyone to anything. Not even a parish council. He reminds me of those five questions Tony Benn has for people in power: ‘What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you use it? To whom are you accountable? How do we get rid of you?’ The answers would seem to be: lots, unknown, not clear, no one and we can’t. When an unelected community leader attacks a Labour minister, it is obvious whose side we should be on.’

The fact that Iqbal Sacranie was elected to his post of secretary general of the MCB by the organisation’s own affiliates is something Richards prefers to ignore simply because it doesn’t fit his argument. Better to brush over facts and focus on the fictitious, particularly when you’ve an ideological axe to grind.

And his claims to wanting to establish the ‘electoral credentials’ of Sacranie is laughable given his praise in an earlier JC article for the Muslim Women’s Advisory Group. Might Richards usefully elaborate on who elected these women to their posts? And as former special advisor to Hazel Blears in the Department for Communities and Local Government, one might pose the same Benn questions to Richards himself. Was he elected? What power did he possess and in whose interests did he use it?

This remark is illuminating for those looking for clues to which interests Richards serves:

‘It is entirely reasonable, based on the evidence, that those sections of Britain’s Muslim communities, or any other religious or ethnic group, whose culture is tainted by medieval prejudice and abuse of power, will change. Gay Muslims will be able to openly practice their faith. Women will be able to lead worship in Mosques. These things will happen, but only if progressive forces within Britain’s Muslim communities are able to thrive, and if the rest of our society stops its cultural appeasement.’

Segregating the sexes at Muslim weddings is by no means an example of ‘medieval prejudice’ or ‘abuse of power’, contrary to what Richards argues.

It’s not cultural appeasement that must end, but the condescension of those like Richards who deign to discern for Muslims what is and is not Islamic, looking to malign groups and indivduals who don't fit their idea of 'progressive'.

Comments

Add New