A society that is divided

IF one thing has emerged from the Nice conference of the European Union, it is that suspicion between member states is alive and well. Discussion of the implications of enlargement of the European Union - ultimately to a potential 27 members - underlined the resentment of the smaller states against the large ones. In the end, the agreement reached, after a cliff-hanging few days, preserved the ability of the larger states to look after their own interests. The United Kingdom, for example, stood firm on the principle that it should retain a veto on such issues as tax and social security.

One implication is that the concept of a super-state is nowhere on the horizon. The U.K., France, Germany and Italy are certainly most unlikely to agree to the abdication of sovereignty that the creation of a super-state would imply.

To listen to, and read, some of the reactions to the conference in Britain, however, one could be forgiven for believing that the federal states of Europe, ruled from Brussels and submerging the rights of individual member nations, is only months away. The reason is the axe-grinding ignorance and prejudice of much tabloid newspaper coverage of everything European, coupled with the deep paranoia which afflicts much of the thinking (for want of a more accurate word) in the Conservative Party, the official Opposition.

There are of course serious issues about how to achieve the right balance of power and decision-making in an enlarged Europe, incorporating countries of the former communist eastern bloc. There are serious issues, too, about the balance between the political and economic aspects of European collaboration. They are not sensibly addressed by approaching relations with the rest of Europe with knee-jerk xenophobia. That simply reflects a kind of little-Englandism that is one of the least attractive attributes of modern Britain. It is one of the ways in which the country is a divided society.

Another manifestation of the divided society in a sense overshadowed the Nice European Union summit on the domestic news scene. This was the dreadful murder of Damilola Taylor, a Nigerian resident of the London borough of Peckham a few days before his eleventh birthday. It touched the hearts of millions, and has led to a great deal of soul-searching about the appalling conditions in some of Britain's run-down inner cities. Bad housing, high unemployment, lack of social amenities and a culture of violence and (often drug-related) crime are the background to the lives of thousands of citizens.

As the country becomes more affluent, and ever more people receive high pay and have a large disposable income for use on luxuries, the contrast with the urban wastelands grows starker. The Government is committed to doing something about it and has published a White Paper promising an urban renaissance - a White Paper which appeared, paradoxically, within days of Damilola Taylor's violent death.

There is an important question to be asked about the nature of the promised urban renaissance: will the plans envisaged deal realistically with the realities of the situation?

Some of the omens are not encouraging. For example, it is now official policy that the number of people sleeping rough on the streets should be reduced, and suitable accommodation found for them. It is a worthy aim - but until suitable accommodation is found, the fact is that people continue to sleep, in bad conditions, on the streets. That, however, does not fit with official policy, and so official head counts indicate that the problem is smaller than it is, and temporary night shelters for the homeless are not needed.

This is a phenomenon not only of the large cities. In Cambridge, for example, where economic development has been rapid, and where the "Silicon Fen" of high-tech industry has produced huge success, a charity which has provided a night shelter now does not receive funding from the local council for the purpose because official figures indicate that the problem no longer exists. The reality, confirmed by a night tour of the area by someone fully familiar with the scene, and described in an article in The Guardian, is quite different.

Divisions over Britain's position in the international community, and divisions within our own society, both reflecting a refusal to face reality, suggest that there is something wrong. It is a real challenge to the politicians, from all parts of the political spectrum, and a challenge to the electorate, national and local, to force them to meet it.

BILL KIRKMAN

The writer is an Emeritus Fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge. E-mail him at wpk1000@cam.ac.uk

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : The best impression
Next     : Bookshop with a difference