'The laissez faire approach to Britishness citizenship and identity can not continue. We need a new civic contract', argued Sadiq Khan MP in a major Fabian speech on being a British Muslim, in association with The City Circle, Q-News and Fosis, the federation of student Islamic Societies.

Speakers: Sadiq Khan, Mohammed Abdul Bari, John Denham, Shahedah Vawda, Humera Khan.

Being a British Muslim

Tonight I want to lay down a challenge: to come up with a vision of Britain in 10 years time. I want that to be a society in which Britishness is inclusive – bringing together its citizens rather than dividing them – and I want to ask how we will create a road map for getting there.

As a British Muslim I know how important it is to make Britishness an active concept for all its citizens: one based on values, not historical icons that are meaningless to so many of us. What should our key tests be of whether we are making enough progress? How will we engage to make this a reality? How do we persuade fellow citizens to hold a shared vision?

What needs to be done differently by government and parliament and others who hold power – and what needs to stop – if we are to work together to create the progress our communities and out country needs?

The test of such a vision is engaging with citizenship and integration debates, not defensively but to make the promise of equal citizenship a reality; to address both social exclusion and political extremism in Muslim and non-Muslim communities alike.

I am an optimist, so let me start first of all as a football fan. Of course, I am disappointed that England are out of the World Cup. But English football has become much more than just winning or losing matches. The legacy created has not been on the field but in the country. Supporting England at football is no longer a white pursuit, but a national obsession. The flag is held aloft by people of all colours and Ashley Cole is cheered as ferociously as Joe Cole. It wasn't so long ago that it felt very different. The far right tried to dominate the terraces; players like John Barnes were abused for representing their country and black and Asian fans knew our faces didn't fit. But then the majority spoke out, reclaiming the flag and sport began to symbolize something more important, helping to end the era of 'there ain't no black in the union jack'. Black and Asian Britons became increasingly confident in asserting our right to have a voice in these debates.

As an ethnically Asian Muslim, but born and bred in this country, I am unambivalently British. I have never felt a conflict between my country, my religion and my background. My parents came from Pakistan and brought their children up to be good British Muslims – and the values of Islam and Britishness happily morphed together.

But somehow a British born white person is immediately accepted, whatever their parental origins, while people of colour are always different. Recently there have been British voices raised claiming that Islam is incompatible with British values. But being British and Muslim are not at odds, and we have a chance to create a strong and positive British Muslim identity.

We could see how we are moving in the right direction by our bid for the 2012 Olympics. We won those games by making a promise to the world that here in London, we had a vision of ourselves as united by a pride in our diversity and a commitment that, whatever our backgrounds, we all deserve the opportunity to fulfil our potential. If we are honest, we must admit that this is not an accurate picture of either today's London or Britain. Yet it captures a picture of our better selves: the London and the Britain many of us want to create as a reality as well as an ideal. That ideal helps to give us a mission and a vision to live up to._

7th July - one year on

It was only a day after our vision won us the 2012 games that it was put to the test by the bombings on the 7th July last year. In those first hours and days, I think we passed that test.

The initial response from both the Prime Minister and the Mayor of London in refusing to pin the crime on the Muslim community was heartening – and necessary. For this was an attack on Britain and all who live here – the victims were as ethnically diverse as London.

And Muslims were among the dead and injured.

But as numbed shock turned to outrage in the tabloids, the anger and blame directed at the men responsible shifted to pointing the finger at the Muslim community – we had to prove that we were not supporting the bombers.

The very Britishness of the 'home-grown' bombers meant that all British Muslims came under suspicion. Somehow we were all responsible because we were expected to have known of the terrorists in our midst, and as a result, had the guilt of not stopping the attacks placed on us.

All religions have their fanatics – who have lost sight of the fundamental teachings of peace and tolerance as hatred triumphed over love. The bombers may have declared that their work was done in the name of Allah, but such a bloody outrage is no more part of the teachings of Islam than the Christian evangelist bombing of abortion clinics can be attributed to Jesus Christ or IRA massacres can be used to besmirch Catholics. Yet somehow Islam and its very teachings are seen to pose a threat to Britain.

Engagement with British Muslims

Since last year's bombings the Government took a brave and innovative step and set up working groups to work with community leaders, experts and British Muslims from all over the country. This was an innovative approach,. Lots of people gave up their time, energy and enthusiasm over a number of weeks.

However, speaking to members of the taskforce now, almost a year on there is a huge amount of frustration. What has happened to all the good ideas? Why hasn't an action plan been drawn up with time lines?

To be fair, there has been limited progress – a country wide road show of Muslim scholars to challenge the ideology of extremism, and local forums that have discussed tackling Islamophobia. But, there is an air of despondency. Only three recommendations have been implemented, and group members feel let down.

I worry that the government might become the Duke of York – marching all these talented British Muslims up the hill of consultation and dialogue only to march them down again as very little appears to have changed.

The Working Groups came up with a five-pronged strategy to fully integrate Muslim Britains:

• To develop and promote a Muslim leadership appropriate for 21st century multicultural Britain
• To develop a citizenship model that reflects people's multiple identities and allegiances
• To eliminate discrimination against Muslims and guarantee equality of treatment.
• To create cohesion by encouraging mutual understanding and bonding between Muslims and a wider society.
• And finally a British Muslim Citizenship Toolkit – a new vision for a British Islam.

We need to return to these ideas and this strategy. We need to show that it was not a short-term PR exercise, and that the ideas have not been shelved. There has to be determination and leadership with inclusion and listening.

Engaging with the disengaged and disillusioned is good, but counter productive if not done properly. Muslim voices and inputs need to be part of a mainstream and majority debate. It will be a mistake to have, in one area, British Muslims thinking about these issues among ourselves, and coming up with Muslim recommendations for change. If non-Muslims who make up the majority have their own different analysis of the problems and are coming up with their own solutions somewhere separate, then we will not get to where we need to be . There needs to be a deep engagement between us all – to come up with a common analysis and solutions

Being British and Muslim

When we talk about Britishness, it has to be placed in the context of the underlying social problems that many communities in this country face. It must lead to better integration, better equality, more enfranchisement and less exclusion. It cannot be imposed from above, but has to have space for a plurality of identities. Britishness to me is a set of shared values that we can and should all aspire towards rather than geography and DNA.

When people in this country are asked to define Britishness, two words – fairness and tolerance – keep cropping up. The irony is that this is white British people congratulating themselves on tolerating me. I don't want to be tolerated. You tolerate a tooth ache. I should be accepted – like all British citizens regardless of colour.

To create a positive sense of our place in this society, we need also to engage with how others see us. Islam is misunderstood by many. It is too often the few extremists who would make Britain an Islamic republic who grab the headlines – which build up the hatred and fear – while most of us want to practise our religion and live under this country's laws. But those views do not make the papers or TV screens. When Melanie Phillips talks about an artificial division between Muslims who actively espouse violence and those who don't – she feeds the fears of the ignorant.

Being British, I try to be understanding and tolerant but when I hear fears that my religion threatens the values of this country, I begin to despair. We have to counter the myths – most of us are happy to live in a historically Christian country, however secular it now is. For example, we are not offended by Christmas or Easter. As the father of two young girls I am not allowed to escape the chocolate or presents of either.

We are part of this country. Being British does not mean being white and able to trace your ancestry back a few hundred years. It is about citizenship –all citizens should be equal and treated equally regardless of colour or religion. A harmonious, multicultural society is possible.

Properly understood citizenship is a leveller. It not only empowers people to participate more fully whatever their background, but also plays a role in fostering a greater sense of belonging and understanding of the shared values, rights and responsibilities of society.

However the ability of many in our community to be equal is inhibited by the place that they occupy on the bottom rung of the social ladder when they are born – resulting in a lack of connection with mainstream society.

Mirrors of Disadvantage, Mirrors of Extremism

Our vision of Britain must be a vision of social justice If we look for inequality, for disadvantage, for opportunity denied, then we will find far too much of it in Muslim communities. However, a mistake that we sometimes fall into is talking only about inequalities and disadvantages among visible minorities – they are also prevalent in the white working class. We need to have an equal concern with disadvantage wherever we find it.

In 2004, a third of Muslims of working age in Britain had no qualifications, but the statistics showed that class was as much a predictor as race. Three quarters of pupils from a higher professional background achieve good GCSEs compared with just a third from lower socio economic backgrounds. Employment has similar mirrors – Muslims have the highest employment rate in Britain at 13% but lone parents and people with no qualifications have an unemployment rate of at least 10%. Poor health and housing affect all at the bottom of the ladder – regardless of the colour of their skin.

Our challenge is to define common aspirations which can replace the high levels of mistrust between communities and make the goals of integration and equality seem reachable. It is also significant that political extremism and disengagement is mirrored between white and black communities. As young Asian Muslims feel like lesser citizens and become increasingly alienated from mainstream life in Britain, their sense of injustice is mirrored in some white communities, which has led to polarisation and extremism – and the relative attraction of groups like Hizb ut Tahrir (HT) and the BNP.

Look at Barking, a traditional white working class area. Over the past decade the high street changed colour and the white residents felt that the new arrivals, whether Pakistani, African or Kosovan were taking what was rightfully theirs by being assigned council houses, using the hospitals and schools and getting benefits. They felt that they would have more if the new residents had less. This same resentment over scarce resources was also identified in The New East End which examined the East End of London, and the hostility felt by the white community towards the Bangaldeshi community.

As the white working class felt a decline in status, the British National Party were able to exploit their discontent and distrust of authority – in particular, the councils they see as being unwilling to respond to the community's needs. The BNP are good at talking to the white community, sympathising with their problems and preying on their fears. Everything is blamed on the newcomers, and the BNP offer a solution – to get rid of the people who are supposedly causing the problem. For them Britishness has nothing to do with residency and everything to do with roots.

Some of these patterns are mirrored in poor Asian communities – a profound unhappiness with mainstream political processes and disengagement with society. The disaffected young men who failed at school are now out of work. There are far too many young Muslims, disillusioned with British life, who feel that they are not given the chances of white British citizens – that their own country has rejected them. But of course there are people who will listen and sympathise. HT and other offshoots talk about the decadence of Britain and how their version of Islam answers the problems. Using selective teachings of the prophet as a tool, they groom these young men to fight against Britishness in the name of Islam.

Let me be quite clear. H-T quite deliberately have the same effect on race relations as their mirror image the BNP. They encourage hatred and their preaching is used by the BNP to foster fear of Islam.

Just as the disadvantages are mirrored in both the host and minority communities – so the answer is the same: serious policies to promote community adhesion within and between communities.

We need a mission to unite our communities and to campaign for positive change. As the Fabian Society have been arguing, the attack on poverty, and child poverty in particular, has been one of the great unsung agendas of this Labour government since 1997. I now want to see my party put this at the top of the political agenda. It can remind people why politics matters and how it can make a difference. There has been progress – 600,000 children lifted out of poverty – but it is not yet enough. Poverty in British Muslim communities remains shockingly high. If growing up in poverty remains the majority experience in these communities, then talk about integration and equal citizenship will simply seem hollow.

But achieving those goals on child poverty – and ensuring that issue is prioritized when every government department is bidding for funding – will depend on political and public pressure. So I believe that British Muslims should campaign much more vocally on these issues than we do at present. If you asked me to choose the single most important issue facing British Muslim communities today, I would have to argue that it is poverty and inequality which do most to blight life chances and to prevent potential being fulfilled. We have not raised our voices enough on that issue and we need to do much more - to ensure that Making Poverty History at Home becomes a cause for our times just as powerful as the international development campaign we saw last year.

Because disadvantage is often heavily focused in Muslim communities, British Muslims will benefit strongly it we can build that coalition to campaign for change. But only if we work across our society will we mobilize the support and the resources which we need to achieve the goal.

Foreign Policy

Another key strand of my talk tonight is about the role of foreign policy in the debate about being a British Muslim.

Here it is sometimes claimed that faith and citizenship are in conflict – that the global commitments and connections of Muslims are incompatible with loyalty to country. This is not a new argument: for a long time, Catholics in Britain faced similar claims. But it is an outmoded approach which fails to understand the world we now live in. Our society should be strengthened, not weakened, by the global links which our citizens have, in so many ways, around the world. Just look at Make Poverty History. The reason this took off so effectively, is because we have a sense now of our global responsibility and our obligations that cross national borders.

British Muslims have a special interest in foreign policy – not just through our ethnic origins but also because of our religious brothers and sisters overseas. This does not make us fifth columnists. It means we have experiences and views that can provide a different perspective.

However, there is now a challenge in the UK to reengage the Muslim community with foreign policy post Iraq.

A ten year vision also needs to understand how British Muslims can become important assets for British foreign policy. That isn't about how to keep the peace at home. It is a vital test of whether our foreign policy is going to be effective overseas. If we can't convince our own citizens, and British Muslims committed to our society, then how can we hope to win trust and legitimacy around the world?

If British Muslims believe that our commitment to Middle East peace is genuine, then they can be important advocates in the citizen-to-citizen links which play an increasing role in foreign policy in an age where soft power and the power to persuade will become more important.

For Muslims there appear to be double standards. We talk about encouraging democracy in the Middle East, yet the Palestinians have been punished for voting for Hamas – in what was undoubtedly a free and fair election – by having foreign aid frozen. There has been no international outcry over Israel withholding taxes which it owes to the Palestinians, so that people cannot be paid wages. Instead that outcry has been reserved for the winning party. The people are being punished for voting the wrong way. Democracy can only be applauded if the west approves of the result.

Muslims cannot and should not want to dictate British foreign policy, but like the rest of the country our views should betaken into account and we should expect transparency – to understand why actions are being taken.

A space for a more effective engagement over foreign policy decisions needs to be found. Not the PR blitz before the Iraq war, where facts were used selectively to convince us, but an adult engagement between the rulers and the ruled. I am not just talking about Muslims here, my white constituents, working and middle class also feel that they are kept in ignorance and lack an effective voice to influence the role which Britain plays in the world.

We now have an opportunity to push for a foreign policy that plays to our strengths: trade justice, international law and reform of the United Nations. The government needs to harness the passion that people in this country feel about foreign policy and engage with it. Citizens who are confident enough to voice criticism and demonstrate against a policy of its parliament are more active and engaged than those who lack the confidence to do so.

A more open debate about foreign policy will be difficult. But it is possible. Robin Cook won the admiration and respect of a great many people for his eloquence and advocacy for human rights, values in foreign policy, and for his opposition to the Iraq war. More openness and more public engagement and greater consistency in our foreign policy should be an issue on which we can make common cause. It will also be one which will challenge some simplistic arguments about foreign policy within our communities. There is a lot wrong with western foreign policy. But an effective critique needs to engage with the complex realities – not the simplicities about a western 'war on Islam' used to stir up trouble within our communities.

Recommendations

Much has to change for this island to embrace a Britishness of the 21st century - where nationality rides happily alongside a variety of religions and secularity, colour and ethnicity. But I believe that we have to make that change … and will.

So what is the test of this new Britishness – what boxes must be ticked by 2016? I think we face a dual challenge as we seek to make the promise of shared citizenship a reality. We need to make our society more equal rather than life chances depending so strongly, as they still do today, on where you are born and who your parents are.

But there is also a more subjective test of shared citizenship which we need to foster too – to ensure that a sense of belonging to this country and of feeling integral to our society is shared by all, and that no group feels excluded from this.

To achieve this, we need a much stronger understanding of what it means to be a citizen in this country – a stronger understanding of the contract between citizen and country.

The country we aspire to is one of shared values. Those values do not have to be uniquely British – but they do need to help us to describe the country we want to live in and to bind our society together by. We Brits wrote the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and drafted the European Convention of Human Rights – while those values are not uniquely British. The values of human rights are inclusive.– dignity for all, and we should be proud of these rather than nervous.

Our sense of Britishness should be aspirational and embracing. Look at multinational corporations: whether you work in an office in Canary Wharf; are executive director in Dhaka or CEO in Ethiopia, you know the mission statement, which gives a sense of identity and belonging. The corporate ethos might not vary much between one company and another – that is not the point. They are clear where they stand and how they belong.

The laissez faire attitude to Britishness, citizenship and identity cannot continue – the idea that being British just means having a passport. Indeed, change is happening. Citizenship is now being studied in schools and "new arrivals" have to do a course and take a test before they can become naturalised. But what about the vast majority in between, the adults living here – which includes the two polarisations – the white working class and disillusioned British Muslims?

We need a new civic contract – and a public debate about it – with the core goals being equality for all and integration of all.

There needs to be a horizontal contract between citizens - because it will be the quality of the citizen-to-citizen links in our communities which will determine whether we are and feel part of a shared society – and a vertical contract between state and citizen which ensures that the promise of equality is a reality.

Vertical Contract

For the vertical contract the government needs to address people's life chances. Where you are born; who your father is; what religion or race you are should be factors which help to develop your potential not hinder your progress.

This agenda must address communities as well as individuals: run down areas must be regenerated so that the people living there no longer have an environment that perpetuates their sense of hopelessness.

We need to break down the barriers to greater social interaction. We should aim for housing and schools which are as mixed as possible. Where this is not possible there should be interschool and estate relations. Ethnic segregation threatens the values and ideal of a shared society, allowing myths, misunderstandings and fear to flourish. Positive encounters between communities can help to break down the divisions.

Perhaps we could use the new Commission for Equalities and Human Rights to set the tone of any changes. This might bring back to life the idea of human rights being more than an Act – rather a living instrument that sets out the positive rights of all citizens. We made a mistake in 1998 by not getting out and engaging the public on human rights. We mustn't repeat that mistake this time. We have a new Government Department – the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) which could champion community cohesion – rather than being lost in the Home Office alongside policing and immigration. We should seize this opportunity.

We should also look at the BBC. I was shocked when the head of BBC newsgathering was asked why she gave so much air time to the hurricane that destroyed New Orleans compared to the typhoon that lost thousands of lives in the Bay of Bengal, she explained that many listeners and viewers had been to New Orleans. She forgot that far more came from the Bay of Bengal and had family and friends there. For her the BBC audience was white. The BBC – as the leading public service broadcaster – should be encouraged to do a lot more in providing a narrative and useful educational role in this regard.

There has been a long-standing tendency to see ethnic programming as minority outputs for niche audiences. But what is urgently needed is more space for the national conversations that we need to have together – not at the margins but in the mainstream. Perhaps the most important gain would be to demonstrate that nobody can claim to speak monolithically for British Muslims. We need to hear much more of the plurality and richness of the debates now being contested within Muslim communities. I fear that the national media risk missing these.

The government needs to empower citizens to be more active in community groups, in mosques, temples and churches and politics generally. Community work in all its forms helps to make the texture of this country so rich and yet there are so many barriers. This is crucial for young people who are learning about citizenship, but need to reach beyond abstract classroom discussions. We have seen repeatedly the value of volunteering, and we have the opportunity to engage young people through this, strengthening their understanding of rights and responsibilities.

Horizontal Contract

The horizontal contract between citizens should first concentrate on each of us realising our rights and responsibilities as citizens: that together we are Britain, not an assortment of different individuals merely pursuing our own goals. And we need to look at measures that will lead to greater integration.

Of course, for Muslims to be fully part of this country – we have to integrate. That does not mean losing our religion or culture, but we should not exist in ghettos.

We have to understand our country – after all we, or our parents or grandparents, chose to come here, chose to bring up our families here. Having made that choice, or being born into that choice, we need to embrace the better life that people like my parents sacrificed so much for – rather than build Little Pakistans or Little Bangladeshs on British soil. Of course we should keep the best of the old but be prepared to embrace the new, rather than fear it. We must understand that we are not alone in worrying about the effect of the so-called British culture of alcohol, drugs, sex and violence on our children – most white families feel the same.

And we should understand that there are also parts of our cultural practices that are unacceptable in this country. Honour killings are murder and forced marriages are kidnapping. These traditions have no place here. They must be consigned to the past.

As British citizens we cannot ask for respect without showing it. We have to learn the language. English is the passport to participation – jobs, education, even being able to use the health service. Language can be used as a barrier, supposedly to keep us pure when all it does is to keep us poor. We all need to speak English. Without English, no-one can participate fully in British society – in work and the economy, as a citizen of our democracy. So let us put an end to futile debate about that and concentrate on providing good, compulsory classes for all.

The state cannot demand more of new citizens than fellow citizens, but there is an obligation on incomers to show commitment to the UK – through understanding tradition, history and moral sensibilities. Adapting to life in the UK without being defensive will help lead to good relations with fellow citizens.

History can help with this and should be compulsory to the age of 16. We should be learning about our story. While every child doing GCSE knows, quite rightly, all about the rise of the Nazis and the holocaust – they know pitiably little about the story of the British Empire – a story that is at the roots of most British people: white, black and Asian. In Andrea Levy's novel Small Island she tells of a Jamaican who came over here to fight in the Second World War. He was shocked that none of the people he met knew where Jamaica was – when his history lessons had been about the bond between Jamaica and Britain. How many people – let alone schoolchildren – know that many Asians, including Muslims, fought in the First World War? Or that 2.5m men from the Indian Army fought in the Second World War? They have a role in our remembrance and celebration of what this nation stands for.

As knowledge grows, fear disappears and we can begin to tell the positive story about immigration rather than use words like swamp – and always seeing people like me as other. Perhaps it is time to consider having an independent body to oversee immigration statistics, and to report to government and parliament on the facts of immigration and the needs of the economy.

What is still missing is a sense of where we need to be in ten year's time. What is needed is a public process which will bring together Muslims and non-Muslims to help us to identify that vision and how to achieve it. We need to address the causes and consequences of extremism and exclusion; we need to address the barriers to opportunity and equal life chances, and to positive integration between communities. We need to ask how security can be effective and legitimate; and how we need to change our democracy if all citizens and communities are to feel we have a stake and real voice in the decisions that affect our lives.

I think government and parliament should re-engage with these questions. And there is a need too in civic society to do much more to create the space for engagement over these issues. I hope that groups like the Fabian Society and the other organisations involved in tonight's event will help to sustain those links and to create the engagement which we need.

A public inquiry into the July 7th bombings could have provided one way to start the public debate which we need. Very few British Muslims, myself included, have been able to understand why government set itself so strongly against this. We do need to think creatively about what sort of public process will shape and create the sort of debate we need to have.

Conclusion

It is vital that all of us with our many roots are seen as part of our country rather than a threat.

For this island to work together we need to concentrate on where people are going, not where they have come from. While the United States has many faults and its citizens are far from equal – each one has a clear sense of being an American whatever their background.

I want my daughters to grow up as proud British citizens. For their colour and faith to be as much a part as that British identity as their birthplace.

We have to move quickly and surely to bring together the diverse citizens of this country – the alternative is polarisation and violence.

We cannot define this vision overnight. It won't be determined or owned by any politician or community leader. It will need a much deeper form of engagement – amongst ourselves, between Muslim and non-Muslim communities and especially with government. But we need to start this. A sense of our future – as a society, as British Muslim communities within it – is too often missing from our debates. Above all, I believe we must forge a vision of a positive future which does not breed complacency, but challenges it. Mine is not a call to ignore what is ugly in our society but to give us more confidence in challenging injustice, in championing change. It must be a vision which makes the promise of British society a reality not for any one community but for us all.

Sadiq Khan is Labour MP for Tooting. His lecture on Being a British Muslim took place on Monday 3rd July, at a Fabian Society event at Friends House, Euston held in association with The City Circle, Fosis and Q-News. The event included included responses from Mohammed Abdul Bari, the new Secretary-General of the Muslim Council of Britain, John Denham MP, Shahedah Vawda of The City Circle and Humera Khan of An-Nisa