Volume 26 Number 4 October 2000
Editor's introduction to JEMS' review symposium on the
Report of the
Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain
(
It is a sad reflection on the materialism of Western culture that the turn of the millennium was marked more by fears of computer failures than by public debate about the implications of the information age. Similarly, the year 2000 has seen renewed public concern over immigration and asylum claimants with almost no attention being given to the contours of the multi-ethnic societies that represent the present and future reality for all of Europe and North America. The report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, supported by the Runnymede Trust, is an important exception to this generalisation and JEMS is therefore very pleased to include three views on this landmark publication.
The first is by the distinguished sociologist Michael Banton whose work will be well known to readers of these pages. Professor Banton was director of the then Social Science Research Council's Research Unit on Ethnic Relations in the 1970s when this report's predecessor, Colour and Citizenship, was a focal point for public debate on how Britain should respond to the presence of new citizens from the old empire. The second contribution is by Professor Will Kymlicka from Queen's University, Ontario, Canada. Will Kymlicka is, like the chairman of the Commission (Lord Parekh), a political philosopher but he also a leading commentator on the principles involved in managing multi-ethnic societies. For many observers Canada and Australia represent the most advanced examples of how multi-ethnic societies can be made to work. In European terms, apart from Britain, the closest examples are perhaps Sweden and the Netherlands so it is highly appropriate that the third contributor should be Professor Charles Westin, director of the Centre for Research in International Migration and Ethnic Relations at the University of Stockholm.
In Continental Europe the issues with which this report are concerned are rising higher and higher on domestic political agendas. This has prompted a number of official responses but very few countries have produced independent evaluations and to that extent the present report may be an example for others to follow. It is particularly significant, for example, that the Runnymede Commission contains so many commentators and thinkers drawn from the Asian, African and Caribbean British communities whose experiences lie at the heart of the relevant issues. The final contribution to this symposium is a response from the chairperson, Bhikhu Parekh, commission member Professor Stuart Hall and its academic advisor, Professor Tariq Modood. The report deserves a wide-ranging public debate with the same level of commitment and thought that these comments and replies so clearly reveal.
Malcolm Cross
©
2000 Taylor and Francis Ltd