David Cameron’s recent multiculturalism speech contained good and bad bits. His promise to be more aggressive in promoting the best set of values we have - democracy, liberty, freedom, tolerance - was of course very welcome. He also bent over backwards to stress that his concerns about non-violent extremism were not about Islam as a religion, but about a small minority of people who accept the ideology of Islamist extremism.

But there are a couple of slight concerns I have. One is about no-platforming and I have discussed it here. The other is about Prevent, which is currently being reviewed. Prevent is the ever-controversial part of our counter-terrorism programme that aims to stop terrorism before it occurs. The Coalition has made it clear that they plan to split the counter-terrorism aspects of Prevent from integration/cohesion work. Since 2007 the two have often been muddled together. This meant that many decent projects about helping people to integrate became part of counter-terrorism policy and as a result alienated many people, causing no end of controversy.

Splitting them up makes perfect sense. It would mean that Prevent can focus on counter-terrorism - keeping the public safe. Issues of integration, social cohesion and even fighting non-violent extremist ideology deserve to be dealt with on their own merits. Freed from being part of a counter-terrorism agenda would allow a greater focus on creating a more integrated and cohesive society: a smart move.

However, in this speech, the Prime Minister appeared to push them back together again. That might come back to haunt him, because under Prevent the police and other agencies might sometimes have to work with non-violent extremists if they think it can help achieve public safety - and as our research showed, sometimes it can. Refusing to work with any non-violent extremists in achieving this goal could limit the number of potential partners. This is about tactics, not strategy.

New Comment