Denial of the problem

Hainsworth (Reference Hainsworth and Hainsworth1998: 1) drew attention to the whole issue of racism in a collection of research, the aim of which was to counter the suggestion ‘that racism is not a problem in Northern Ireland’. He argued that one of the consequences of the conflict has been ‘the tendency to neglect, ignore or minimise ethnic minority problems, such as individual or institutional racism, as the preoccupation with traditional socio-political matters has left scant room for other agendas’ (Hainsworth, Reference Hainsworth and Hainsworth1998: 3). In the same collection, McVeigh also contended that there was an overt denial that racism existed in Northern Ireland because there were no black people, yet argued that minority ethnic people experienced systematic racism: ‘it is not the absence of racism but rather the relative absence of discussion of racism which makes Ireland different from most European countries’ (Reference Hainsworth and Hainsworth1998: 14). McVeigh goes on to suggest that, because sectarianism pervades Northern Ireland, it also structures the way in which racism is reproduced and experienced. He concluded:

Evidence of institutional racism

Mann-Kler (Reference Mann-Kler1997) conducted action research using 39 focus groups to capture the experiences of minority ethnic groups using public services in Northern Ireland such as health, social services, social security, education and training, housing and policing, and found widespread evidence of institutional racism. Findings included: minority ethnic groups had little knowledge of preventative healthcare services, due to a lack of accessible information; racial harassment of some families had been severe; and many women felt that the police did not take racial attacks seriously. Mann-Kler contended that it has only been since the ceasefires in 1994 that attention to racism began to emerge on the wider public agenda. Connolly (Reference Connolly2002), in an overview of available research evidence on race and racism in Northern Ireland, found that although there is significant diversity within the minority ethnic population, and hence differing needs, there were several common problems that they faced. These problems included: difficulties accessing existing services by those who speak little or no English, general lack of knowledge and/or awareness of particular services offered, the need for more staff training by service providers in relation to issues of ‘race’, the failure to meet the basic cultural needs of minority ethnic people and significant levels of racism and racist harassment experienced by minority ethnic people in Northern Ireland (see also Bell et al.'s research, Reference Bell, Jarman and Lefebvre2004, on the social problems and personal needs of people moving to Northern Ireland to take up employment).

Racism incidents/crimes

Jarman and Monaghan (Reference Jarman and Monaghan2003) reported on the scale and nature of racial harassment based on an analysis of racist incidents recorded by the police between 1996 and 2001. They noted that, although the number of recorded incidents was relatively small, Northern Ireland had a high ratio of racist incidents for the size of the minority ethnic population compared with England and Wales during this period. Precise comparison between Northern Ireland and Great Britain is difficult to make. Home Office police-recorded crime statistics for England and Wales in 2008/09 show a total of 34,231 incidents involving racially/religiously aggravated crime disaggregated by: inflicting grievous body harm (GBH), less serious wounding, harassment/public, assault without injury, actual bodily harm (ABH) or other injury (Home Office, 2009). During 2008/09, Northern Ireland recorded 1,788 sectarian and racist crimes in 2008/09 (PSNI statistics). Taking into account population size, England and Wales had 0.63 and Northern Ireland 1.00 hate crimes per 1,000 population, respectively. The Republic of Ireland does not record hate crime; figures are subsumed under wider categories such as assaults, harassment and related offences. The most numerous forms of racist harassment in Northern Ireland were abuse and attacks on property, but about one-quarter of the incidents involved a form of physical assault. Almost half the incidents occurred in Belfast, most of which were recorded in Protestant working-class areas.

Empirical findings from a detailed study of the incidence of racial crime in the London Borough of Newham indicated significantly higher rates where there was a large white majority and smaller groups of other ethnicities (Brimicombe et al., Reference Brimicombe, Ralphs, Sampson and Yuen Tsui2001). Given the higher per capita influx of migrant workers to Northern Ireland than other parts of the UK (discussed later), the ethnic mix could well be important in understanding the level of racism in loyalist areas. Jarman (Reference Jarman2003) also examined the relationship between racist harassment and children and young people by considering evidence from police records of cases of such abuse and associated violence. He found that young people are more likely to be subjected to physical assault as part of any harassment, but, equally, young people were also significant perpetrators of racism and racist harassment. Jarman concluded ‘the stereotypical perpetrator of racist harassment in Northern Ireland is a young white male over the age of 16 acting in consort with other young white males’ (Reference Jarman2003: 138). An interesting comparison here is with a Home Office study which looked at the perpetrators of racial harassment and violence in two London boroughs and found that: young children, youths, adults and older people, including pensioners (male and female in all groups) were involved. Their views towards minority ethnic groups were shared by the wider communities to which they belonged. Perpetrators saw this as legitimising their actions (Sibbitt, Reference Sibbitt1997). Ray et al.'s study (Reference Ray, Smith and Wastell2004: 364) on the perpetrators of racist violence in Greater Manchester also found that when ‘inherited meanings of territory and neighbourhood become factured and uncertain’, there is an unacknowledged shame which can be transformed into rage against minority ethnic communities. In this case English communities had once shared experience of the manufacturing industry; territoriality in Northern Ireland is quite different and relates to single-identity communities now seen by perpetrators of racial violence as under threat from ‘outsiders’ (ethnic minorities).

The link between sectarianism and racism

It was Brewer (Reference Brewer1992) who first juxtaposed sectarianism and racism. He began by offering a definition of sectarianism and compared it to the concept of racism. He argued that there were points of convergence but also differences. Racism and sectarianism converge in the sense that both involve ‘social stratification, producing inequality in a structured manner rather than randomly’ and there are similarities in the way in which they are experienced ‘at the level of ideas, individual action and social structure’. The key difference is that ‘race’ is a much more visible and deterministic marker than ‘sect’ and overlaps more completely with other important social boundaries such as class’ – sect is more ambiguous, a sub-type of ethnic stratification, whereas religion is one source of ethnic differentiation. As a result, Brewer contended that ‘sect’ has better explanatory power ‘to account for patterns of stratification and life chances that occur under its name’ (Brewer, Reference Brewer1992: 353).

McVeigh and Rolston argue that sectarianism is a form of racism rooted in the process of British imperialism in Ireland, and sectarianism can be directly attributed to ‘the nature of the state rather than the politics it contains’ (Reference McVeigh and Rolston2007: 7). Sectarianism, they contend, prevailed during the Stormont era of Unionist majority rule (1920–72), continued during direct rule by the British Government, is still evident in the post-Good Friday Northern Ireland and is inadequately addressed through a ‘good relations’ model which seeks to conjoin racism and sectarianism. The Good Friday Agreement, they claim, ‘helped create the context in which new levels of racism were to flourish’. A peaceful Northern Ireland and, in turn, economic growth attracted migrant workers who located in less crowded loyalist working-class areas, so ‘post-Good Friday Agreement, new communities of colour found themselves situated in the midst of this volatile situation and became key targets for loyalist rage’ and, as a result, racism became a ‘close ally of sectarianism’ (McVeigh and Rolston, Reference McVeigh and Rolston2007: 12). The researchers argue that explanations for the rise in racism have included ‘the facile logic that there is a finite amount of hate in Northern Ireland and now, given the dying throes of sectarianism in the wake of the Good Friday Agreement, racism has increased’. They challenge what they see as the errors in this assumption:

The link between sectarianism and racism is also recognised at the European level. For example, the European Union adopted two directives (2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC) prohibiting direct and indirect discrimination on grounds of racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation. The Commission has since then set out an overarching strategy for the positive and active promotion of non-discrimination and equal opportunities for all. In the context of Northern Ireland the link between sectarianism and racism and the policy instruments used to address both is made clear by government when it stated that the

This joint approach is justified by government on the basis that the common goal is to create a shared society defined by a culture of tolerance, whether on racial or religious grounds, characterised by equity, respect for diversity and recognition of mutual interdependence. Hence, there are common policy instruments to tackle racism and sectarianism: legal protection, policies and practices aimed at mainstreaming the fight against racism and sectarianism, acting in partnership with civil society to tackle the underlying causes and education and awareness raising to encourage human rights education in the school curriculum and higher education institutions.

There are two things which come out of this review of the literature. First, is the problem, as McVeigh and Rolston contend, of ‘an obvious and problematic correlation between loyalism and racism’? They produce no empirical evidence of this. Second, existing research appears to focus on institutional racism and a gap exists in our understanding as to what motivates or influences people in their racist attitudes and behaviour to earn Northern Ireland this media sobriquet, the ‘race hate capital of Europe’.

Connolly and Khaoury (Reference Connolly, Khaoury, Coulter and Murray2008: 207–8) confirm that much of the research to date has concentrated on institutional racism in Northern Ireland, and, while they acknowledge that this has been important in drawing attention to the structural and routine nature of racial discrimination, there has been too much emphasis on this as a way of conceptualising the problem. They suggest the need ‘to begin naming and interrogating whiteness . . . to address racism at its source’ and highlight different approaches taken by nationalist and unionist politicians, leaders of loyalism and republicanism in their responses to race issues in Northern Ireland, calling for research in this area. A recent example is where a Democratic Unionist Party Member of the Legislative Assembly in a debate in the Northern Ireland Assembly, demanded local jobs for local people:

The comparative example here is the debate in Great Britain that racialised tensions are fuelled by competition for scarce resources. Dench et al. (Reference Dench, Havron and Young2006) examined the hostility directed towards Bangladeshis by white East Enders in London. Initially, tensions emerged over competition for work. While this remains an issue, increasingly it has been replaced by competition between the communities over access to welfare support and public services, including education and housing. Dench et al. explain this as follows: ‘the state reception of new comers has ridden over the existing local community's assumptions about their ownership of public resources’ which ‘precipitated a loss of confidence in the fairness of British social democracy’ (Reference Dench, Havron and Young2006: 229). Hence, minority ethnic groups compete for opportunities and social welfare on equal terms with white Britons without ‘appearing to have earned their rights’ to do so. In other words, a stable democracy demands a ‘fair balance between what citizens put into society and what they get out of it’ (Dench et al., Reference Dench, Havron and Young2006: 224). The researchers contend that middle-class liberals have ‘promoted a swathe of political measures and institutions which consolidate the rights of minorities while multiplying the sanctions against indigenous whites who object to this’ (Dench et al., Reference Dench, Havron and Young2006: 6). In short, the increased emphasis on people's rights has been at the expense of their responsibilities.

Although Dench et al.'s work has been criticised by Moore (Reference Moore2008: 350) as ‘lacking in intellectual coherence’ and being conceptually confusing, issues raised in their work resonate in the Northern Ireland context. For example, there is a protracted debate about the introduction of a Bill of Rights in Northern Ireland, which grapples with tensions between rights and responsibilities. Specifically, there are recommendations to strengthen the right to equality and prohibition of discrimination for national minorities, supplementary to the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention on Human Rights (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, 2008: 33). Against this backdrop, Northern Ireland politicians claiming protection for local jobs can be accused of racism or xenophobia. These comments have been prompted by the economic downturn. Until recently it was recognised that migrant workers filled skills gaps in specific sectors of the Northern Ireland economy (health, food processing, construction, hospitality and retail). Have attitudes to migrant workers changed as threats to ‘local’ jobs increase? Can the rise in racist incidents and crimes be explained (in part) by competition for jobs?

Before addressing the substantive issues raised by existing research, we consider the size of the minority ethnic community in Northern Ireland, what the Government's existing policies are to tackle racism and how they have performed to date.

The minor ethnic population

The 2001 Northern Ireland Census quantified the size of the settled minority ethnic communities as 14,279, or 0.8 per cent of the total population (1.68 million at that time). This figure comprised: Chinese as the largest minority ethnic group (4,100), South Asians (2,500), Irish Travellers (1,700) and African Caribbeans (1,100) (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2005). The census statistics are now dated, and some researchers estimate that the current figure could be as high as 45,000 (Gallagher, Reference Gallagher2007). Transient populations are more difficult to estimate. The number of people who came to live in Northern Ireland was approximately: 25,000 in 2005, 31,000 in 2006, 32,000 in 2007 and 27,000 in 2008, around 5 per cent of the Northern Ireland workforce (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2009). This represents a marked increase in international inflows and is related to the enlargement of the European Union in May 2004, when people from countries in Central and Eastern Europe (the so-called A8 countries) were allowed to come and work in the United Kingdom and Ireland.

One measure of the influx of migrant workers is the Worker Registration Scheme (WRS) managed by the UK Border Agency on behalf of the Home Office. The scheme is used to register migrant workers from the A8 countries. Border Agency statistics show between 1 May 2004 and 31 March 2009, a total of 949,000 people registered with the WRS in the United Kingdom. Of these, 36,500 (or 4 per cent of the UK total) registered to work in Northern Ireland. In contrast, the Northern Ireland population makes up around 3 per cent of the UK population, thus indicating the scale of A8 migration to Northern Ireland. Table 1 shows that between May 2004 and March 2009, Northern Ireland had about one-third more migrant workers registering on a per capita basis than the rest of the United Kingdom, with about 21 WRS registrations for every 1,000 persons in Northern Ireland compared to nearly 16 WRS registrations for every 1,000 persons in the UK as a whole (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency, 2009: 10). Overall, the statistics indicate an increasing number of settled minority ethnic communities in Northern Ireland and a relatively large influx of migrant workers from 2004 onwards.

TABLE 1.

WRS registrations per 1,000 population (May 2004–March 2009)

Source: Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (2009).

Government policy

In July 2005, the (direct rule) Government launched its policy document A Racial Equality Strategy for Northern Ireland 2005–10, which aimed: to tackle racial inequalities in Northern Ireland and to open up opportunity for all, to eradicate racism and hate crime and, together with A Shared Future, to initiate actions to promote good race relations (OFMDFM, 2005b: 5; Hughes, Reference Hughes2008). The strategy defined racism to include: racist ideologies, prejudiced attitudes, discriminatory behaviour, structural arrangements and institutionalised practices resulting in racial inequality. The race strategy was underpinned by, and intended to complement, the existing and developing legislative framework including the Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 and statutory duties set out in Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. The Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 made it unlawful to discriminate, either directly or indirectly, on racial grounds in the areas of: employment and training; education; the provision of goods, facilities or services; and the disposal and management of premises and advertisements. The Northern Ireland Act 1998 (section 75) requires departments and other public authorities in carrying out their functions to have ‘due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity between persons of different racial group’. It also requires them to ‘have regard to the desirability of promoting good relations’ between persons of different racial group. There is an acknowledgement in the strategy that government cannot, by itself, eradicate racism but would play its part alongside other stakeholders in tackling this insidious problem. To achieve the aims as outlined in the Racial Equality Strategy, a follow-on implementation plan was launched in March 2006, which committed government departments and their agencies to a wide range of actions to tackle racism and racial inequalities. The Government's response to racism, according to the First Minister, was robust and well-funded. The problem has been over-hyped by the media and rested with a tiny minority of racist people (Robinson, Reference Robinson2009: 288).

Indicator 1: Number of racial incidents and crimes recorded

The data on racist incidents and crimes have been collected from the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) annual crime statistics beginning with baseline year 2004/05. The PSNI define a racial incident as any incident, which may or may not constitute a criminal offence, which is perceived by the victim or any other person as being motivated by prejudice or hate. In addition, we collected data on sectarian incidents and crimes over the same period to provide some basis for comparison. These data are presented in Figure 1. The data show a trend increase over the five-year period in racial incidents/crimes and corresponding decrease in sectarian incidents/crimes. In short, as sectarian crimes have decreased, racist incidents have increased.

Figure 1.

Racism and sectarian trends

Source: Collated from PSNI annual crime statistics reports; available at: www.psni.police.uk/index/updates/updates_statistics.htm

Note:1Recorded racist crimes (sometimes referred to as notifiable offences) are those which are deemed to be indictable or triable-either-way. In the same way as incidents are identified as having a hate motivation, a crime will be recorded as having the relevant hate motivation where the victim or any other person perceives it as such. Not all incidents will result in the recording of a crime. Crimes with hate motivations are classified according to the Home Office counting rules.

It should, however, be noted that data on the number of racial incidents/crimes must be set within a context of an active campaign by the PSNI to encourage reporting. Minority ethnic groups claimed that they had little confidence in reporting hate crime to the police in an enquiry conducted by the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee. This resulted in a recommendation that the police work closely with other statutory agencies and victim support groups to ‘improve general confidence in the reporting system, address reasons for under-reporting and unwillingness to prosecute’ (House of Commons, Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, 2004: 49). The PSNI published a policy directive in 2006, ‘Police Response to Hate Incidents’, in which they acknowledged the reasons for under-reporting and put in place a series of measures to address this problem. The measures included: improved recording, response and investigation procedures on hate crime incidents; having specialist officers (Minority Liaison Officers) available in every police district; support for victims; partnership working with statutory and non-statutory partners to address the problem; and training for officers in the implementation of the directive. The outworking of this policy can be seen in high-profile publicity campaigns launched by the PSNI and aimed at encouraging the reporting and awareness of hate crimes and incidents under the advertising banner ‘nobody deserves it and nobody deserves to get away with it’.

The remaining indicators (nos. 2–5 in Table 2) for measuring racism are attitudinal data collected via an annual probability survey of inhabitants across Northern Ireland. The Northern Ireland Life and Times Surveys gather information through face-to-face interviews with about 1,200 adults aged 18 years or over. The samples for the annual surveys consist of a systematic random sample of addresses selected from the government's Land and Property Services Agency list of private addresses.Footnote ¹

Data have therefore been extracted from the yearly surveys to provide an overview of racism in Northern Ireland as defined by OFMDFM indicators. The first two indicators we consider here relate to perceptions of racism now and in five years time.

Indicator 2: Percentage of people who believe there is more racial prejudice than there was five years ago

Indicator 3: Percentage of people who believe there will be more racial prejudice in five years time

The results of these two indicators are set out in Figure 2, where the trend lines indicate a reduction in perceptions of prejudice: in other words, people believe there is less prejudice now than previously and this trend will continue into the future.

Figure 2.

Prejudice trends

Source: Calculated from Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey data 2005–2008/09.

Indicator 4: Percentage of people who believe people from a minority ethnic community are less respected than they once were

The results are set out in Figure 3. The data show the percentage of people who ‘strongly agree’ and ‘agree’ that minority ethnic communities are less respected in Northern Ireland than they once were. The trend would seem to indicate a growing acceptance of, and respect for, minority ethnic groups, although it should be borne in mind that these data do not include the recent high-profile racist incidents in 2009.

Figure 3.

Respect for ethnic minorities

Source: Calculated from Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey data 2005–2008/09.

Indicator 5: Percentage of people who are prejudiced against a minority ethnic community

The results are shown in Figure 4 and indicate an increased trend in self-reported prejudice.

Figure 4.

How prejudiced are you?

Source: Calculated from Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey data 2005–2008/09.

So, what do these results, using measures devised by OFMDFM, tell us about the priority theme of government that ‘Northern Ireland is free from racism and prejudice’? Is the government's Racial Equality Strategy successful, based on its own indicators of effectiveness? If the above indicators constitute a ‘shopping basket’ of composite measures devised by government to capture the extent of racism and prejudice in Northern Ireland, then we can conclude the following:

• • There is an upward trend in the number of reported racist incidents/crimes and corresponding decrease in sectarian incidents/crimes officially recorded by the PSNI.

• • Respondents think that there is less racial prejudice now than five years ago, and there will be less prejudice in five years time.

• • The level of respect for minority ethnic communities has improved over the last four years, although the very public events of 2009 are not reflected in the data, and one suspects would significantly change people's viewpoint on this issue.

• • Respondents considered themselves to be increasingly more prejudiced against minority ethnic communities over time – a result which is somewhat at odds with the finding (above) that racial prejudice at the macro level has reduced over time and into the future (but, again, the data do not reflect the events of 2009).

In summary, the Government can take little solace from the implementation of its Racial Equality Strategy. Northern Ireland has some way to go before being described as a country ‘free from racism and prejudice’ – the declared aim of the strategy.

(a) Measuring sectarianism:

• ◾ Would you mind if a close relative were to marry someone of a different religion?

According to Connolly and Keenan (Reference Connolly and Keenan2000:29), unwillingness to accept those from the other religion, be it Catholic or Protestant, as friends, colleagues or as relatives by marriage ‘could be loosely termed as sectarianism’.

(b) Measuring racism:

The variable which we use as a proxy for prejudice or racism is the social distance measure discussed above:

• ◾ Would you be willing to accept people from other minority ethnic groups as a relative by way of marrying a close member of your family?

We cross-tabulate these two variables using data from the Northern Ireland Life and Times Social Attitudes 2008/09 to find if there is an association between sectarian and racist attitudes. The results are presented in Tables 4 and 5.

TABLE 4.

Sectarianism by racism (n = 1,185)

TABLE 5.

Chi-square tests

Notes: ¹ 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5.

The minimum expected count is 13.52.

Summary result: χ² = 85.64, p < 0.001.

Source: Calculated from Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey data 2008/09.

Considering the results in Table 4 we can see that:

• • 82 per cent of those who ‘would not mind’ marrying someone from a different religion would also accept a minority ethnic relative by marriage.

• • Whereas only 54 per cent of those who ‘mind a lot’ or ‘mind a little’ marrying someone from a different religion would also accept a minority ethnic relative by marriage.

The results therefore tell us that there is a significant association (see Table 5) between people's attitudes to marrying someone of a different religion and their willingness to accept a member of the minority ethnic community as a close family member. This highly significant result (χ² = 85.64, p < 0.001) indicates that there is an association between sectarian and racist attitudes which people in Northern Ireland hold: those with sectarian views are more likely to be racist.