"Inspirational" Paige receives Honoured Citizen award from Lord Mayor

This article is published in today's Leicester Mercury:

"Inspirational" Paige receives Honoured Citizen award from Lord Mayor

An "inspirational" young champion for disabled people has been recognised for her efforts in changing the world for the better.

Paige Murray, who has cerebral palsy, has never been afraid to speak up for her beliefs and has tirelessly campaigned for disabled young people through her youth work in the city.

The 16-year-old, of Winstanley Drive, Braunstone, has now been given an Honoured Citizen award to celebrate her achievements.

It was presented at the Town Hall by the Lord Mayor, Councillor Roger Blackmore.Paige, who wants to be a disabled sports coach, says she has had a good mentor.She said: "I stand up for what I believe in, my mum's taught me to do that.

"I have a lot to do with improving society for young disabled people, it's my goal in life. I want to be heavily involved in making a difference.

"Disability sport is becoming more and more popular and I just think everyone is entitled to do it if they want.

"Getting this award has opened my eyes to what I can achieve, it's made me realise I can do anything if I set my mind to it."

Paige, who has a twin sister, Jade, has been involved in several projects, including the Streetvibe Youth Inclusion Project and Braunstone's youth panel.

She is also involved in the Big Mouth Forum for disabled children, attending conferences and giving presentations on the work being done to address disability access issues.

Mum Debra Murray said: "I'm extremely proud of her, she is so inspirational to other people – if she has something to say she is not afraid to say it.

"She started taking part in the Braunstone youth panel because she was being bullied and didn't want people to go through that."

Paige has also worked within the disabled children's services at the city council and, as a keen sportswoman, she has represented Leicester at both the Stoke Mandeville Youth Disability Games and the Rotary Disabled Games, winning a total of 10 medals.

Braunstone's councillor Anne Glover said: "Paige has quite a personality and that means people listen to her.

"It's very rare to get a child at a ward community meeting talking about getting more ramps for buildings. We were very impressed she turned up at all, let alone spoke to us."

Racism hasn't gone away - it's just changed

This is Manzoor Moghal's First Person Column in today's Leicester Mercury:

Racism hasn't gone away - it's just changed 

Secretary of State John Denham's recent claims about how successfully the Government has tackled racism in the last decade do not match the reality. It is true that the raw racism of the 1970s and early 1980s has receded, but unfortunately some different forms of this malaise have emerged in its place. In the meantime, the ethnic minority communities have successfully advanced themselves in socio-economic terms which has given them a stronger and more confident profile in dealing with racism. 

However, racism has metamorphosed into a different kind of an animal outwardly, whereas its core poison remains. Racism today has become more sophisticated, institutionalised and covert. The Government has attempted to mitigate its effects by introducing policies, some of which have inadvertently precipitated increased levels of racism. The introduction of euphemistic terms like "diversity", "cohesion" and "integration" has done little. On the contrary, this has befuddled the issue. This new mantra which is propagated relentlessly by the Government and its various agencies has become almost meaningless in achieving anything substantial. Moreover, the provision of funding for extra services for some well-heeled ethnic minority communities on the false assumption of their poverty and deprivation often inflames racism against them. 

The rise of the BNP with its electoral success clearly indicates that the racist vote has increased somewhat alarmingly. There certainly is a growing seam of racist vote within the country, and even UKIP are exploiting it by calling for a ban on the wearing of the veil by some Muslim women. The Government and its various agencies have also tried to combat racism through overlaying it with layers of inter-faith activity across the country, but unfortunately that has thrown up its own problems by creating more divisions of a different kind. 

The best way to combat racism seems to lie in increasing awareness of the pernicious way in which it undermines the dignity of human beings and damages the fabric of our society. For this to happen it would be necessary for the Government to step back from some of its ill-advised initiatives of throwing money at the problem and concentrate on legislative protection. Coupled with this the social, economic and cultural interaction between the different communities would have an increased beneficial effect on curbing racism and improving race relations.

Manzoor Moghal is chairman of the Muslim Forum

Leicester City isn't playing fair say disabled couple

From today's Leicester Mercury:

Leicester City isn't playing fair say disabled couple 

A couple say that Leicester City is forcing them out of their season ticket seats and segregating them in a disabled section away from their friends and family. 

Wigston couple Colin and Mary Holden have been told by the club they must give up the Walkers Stadium seats they have held for four years and sit elsewhere if they want to continue to qualify for concessions for disabled supporters. 

Mr Holden, 67, has angina, back condition spondylolysis and arthritis in his hips and knees. His wife, 66, has walked with a cane since she damaged the muscles and nerves in her back in a fall. 

Both are registered disabled but do not use a wheelchair so are able to sit among able-bodied fans.

In a letter to the couple, seen by the Leicester Mercury, the club says it is introducing designated areas manned by "specially trained safety stewards" to provide "better provision, support and assistance on match days".

As a result, they have been informed they must change their current seats in the JCC Lighting Spion Kop if they wish to continue to benefit from reduced prices. They will have to move into the East Stand, three sections away, and sit apart from the friends and family they currently sit near. 

Mr and Mrs Holden pay £140 for two season tickets but if they choose to remain in their current seats they say the season tickets will cost them upwards of £500. 

"To say we are disappointed is an understatement," said Mrs Holden. 

"We have sat in there for the past few seasons with no trouble and now they are telling us either we move or we pay a lot of money to stay where we are. 

"We feel that they are forcing our hand to do what they say. 

"We want to stay in the seats close to our friends and family, but the club is segregating us from them. 

"We have been loyal supporters for several years and they did not even ask our opinion. They just said this is what we have got to do or else." 

Mr Holden said: "We feel we are being victimised and it is wrong to treat disabled people this way. 

"We enjoy the football, but if they want to be like that then they will lose the support." 

Mr and Mrs Holden's daughter, Helen Hodgkinson, 31, and her husband David, 37, from Hamilton, Leicester, act as carers for the couple and qualify for free tickets as a result. 

Mrs Hodgkinson said: "I am absolutely disgusted. It is only last week that the club were talking about respect for the players and the referee, but we feel that we are being shown no respect."
Nobody from the club was available to comment. 

But according to the letter, the changes have been brought in to allow "health and safety officers to audit attendance and, in the event of an emergency situation within the stadium, pay greater attention to the needs of our disabled supporters".

Is British sense of tolerance a myth?

This article is published in today's Northants Evening Telegraph:

Is British sense of tolerance a myth?

Kettering MP Philip Hollobone caused controversy this week with his comments about Muslims wearing the burka in public, suggesting they shouldn't be hiding their faces if they want to integrate into British culture.

His comments sparked hundreds of letters, emails and texts from readers, some agreeing with his views, some saying the burka should be banned.

Others said his comments were unnecessary and that there is no problem with women wearing the burka in public.

The debate raised the question, is wearing a burka a race, religious or cultural issue and also opened up more questions.

Do we live in a tolerant society, are we too tolerant or are we not tolerant enough?

As British citizens, if we travel abroad we are asked to abide by the traditions and social ethos of that country.

For example, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office gives guidelines for tourists travelling to Dubai.

They say: "Emiratis dress conservatively in traditional dress and can be offended when westerners dress inappropriately to Islamic values.

"In public places such as shopping malls, restaurants and parks you are encouraged to dress appropriate, shorts and skirts should be of appropriate length – be aware that if you enter one of these areas dressed inappropriately, you may be asked to leave the larger shopping malls."

Given these guidelines for Dubai, should we expect burkas not to be worn in the UK?

Comments left online were mixed.

Scoleman said: "This idea of England being a multicultural centre for community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity."

Roberto said: "I applaud Mr Hollobone for his bravery in speaking out about this appalling garment which should indeed be banned in public places."

Treacle Tart said: "At the end of the day it's each to their own when it comes to religion. If we go to an Islamic country we have to follow their beliefs and laws so in turn they should follow ours."

Flore said: "Suggesting that all Muslims who wish to practise their religion in their own way should leave the UK would amount to a fundamental breach of human rights.

"It should not be suggested that anyone, of any religion or social group, should leave the country in order to practise their religion. We should respect and value our society's diversity in all its form."

MP says Muslim women should have the right to choose their clothing

Banning women from wearing burkas would go against their freedom of choice, Labour MP for Northampton North Sally Keeble says.

The row over whether the full veil worn by Muslim women should be banned has resurfaced in the light of a proposal in France for the outfits to be outlawed.

It comes as polls have suggested one third of Britain's population would support a ban.

Mrs Keeble said it was important to ensure women were not being forced to wear the burka, but said they should be free to do so if it was their own choice.

She said: "Personally, although I have always done regular advice surgeries for all sections of the community, including for Muslim women, I have never met a woman in Northamptonshire wearing a burka. So this issue should be seen in context.

"Where people's faces need to be seen, for security, work or other similar purposes, then they should remove face coverings.

"However, if it is simply down to personal choice, then people should be able to dress as they like.

"While I don't share the religious beliefs, people are entitled to wear such clothing.

"Some forms of clothing are restrictive for women, and I find those very hard to accept because to me they symbolise discrimination against women.

"I think it is important to challenge the discrimination, which also means ensuring that women who wear such clothing do so of their own free choice."

"MPs have to deal with all their constituents whatever they wear."

Debate rages over the right to wear burkas

This article is published in today's Northants Evening Telegraph:

Debate rages over the right to wear burkas

It is the religious equivalent of going round with a paper bag over your head with two holes for the eyes.

This was the comment from Kettering MP Philip Hollobone in the House of Commons this week as he called for British Muslim women to stop wearing the burka.

During the parliamentary debate, he said: "I have huge sympathy with those who say they want action against those who want to cover themselves up in public.

"How ridiculous would the House of Commons be if we all wore burkas? How would Mr Speaker be able to identify which Member to call next?

"It is offensive in my view to want to cut yourself off from face-to-face contact or recognition with other members of the human race.

"I think we should certainly look at ways to tackle that issue."

His comments come after a poll revealed a third of Britons want to see an outright ban on wearing the burka in public, and two thirds believe wearing it should be illegal in places such as banks and airports.

The UK Independence Party has already called for an outright ban on the burka in Britain and the French parliament is thought to be considering a law banning the full Islamic veil.

But although Conservative Mr Hollobone told the Evening Telegraph he stands by his comments, his party has been keen to distance itself from the comments, saying they do not represent its views.

Yesterday Mr Hollobone hit back, saying the Conservatives were being cowardly and that the burka is 'inappropriate' in modern British society.

So why has this traditional Muslim custom caused such controversy?

Muslim women wear the veil because it is seen in their religion as a way of preserving their modesty in the presence of men.

Wearers of the burka say they are not forced to cover up but rather they choose to wear it as a mark of respect and because it is stated in the Koran.

But opposers of the burka argue it is out of place in modern Britain and makes communication more difficult.

MP and Secretary of State for Justice Jack Straw hit the headlines when he revealed he asked Muslim women in his constituency to remove their burka in meetings with him because he wanted to talk to them 'face-to-face'.

The custom of wearing the burka is also uncomfortable for some people as Muslim men are not subject to the same code of dress.

Mr Hollobone's remarks have sparked widespread debate about the burka on the Evening Telegraph's website and its Facebook page where readers have been posting their views.

One reader, Roberto, of Kettering, said: "I applaud Mr Hollobone for his bravery in speaking out about this appalling garment which should indeed be banned in public places.

"I often wonder why the Marxist feminist lobby in this country, usually so vocal about Western women's rights, say absolutely nothing about their burka-clad sisters?"

Michael Goode, of Kettering, agrees. He said: "People should be entitled to wear what they like, it is a free country.

"However if someone decides to live in the UK then they should be prepared to change to our way of life and not try to impose their views and religions on us."

But Gail McDade, of Corby, describes Mr Hollobone's views as 'serious ignorance'.

She said: "Some people just want to cause trouble. The women who chose to wear a full burka are entitled to do so. If everyone was a little more accepting of others, we would all get on so much better."

Kettering Muslim Association was shocked by Mr Hollobone's comments in the House of Commons.

Secretary Suhel Dudha said: "Mr Hollobone is entitled to his opinion but it's more than a little short-sighted. MPs are not in a poition to be taking moral lead on things."