15/02/2008

It always seems strange to me that even in an increasingly secular society the words and opinions of religious leaders retain such a unique impact.

I would attribute to senior clerics a purely ethical desire to speak the truth were I not as versed as I am in the reality that they too are politicians, playing to a slightly broader constituency with a very slightly different agenda.

Religious leaders are almost as well schooled in the impact of effective messaging as politicians are these days and despite the bookish, academic approach of the present Archbishop of Canterbury, one can rest assured that some effort went into weighing and measuring his words prior to delivery.

In a sense it doesn’t really matter what the Archbishop of Canterbury believes and, in every sense, he is entitled to his opinion.

What is perhaps more important and more instructive in terms of the state of the nation, is the reaction his words have received. I suspect the fury of the reaction was inspired by a soupy mix, part willing ignorance, part real ignorance, all sprinkled with a healthy dose of Anglo-Saxon suspicion.

What is undeniable is that Rowan Williams is not the first high profile figure to make the point that Shariah law is, and will, increasingly become a fact of life in the UK and beyond. Indeed, some, as I will demonstrate, have welcomed it with open arms.

The difference lies only in the method of communication. I said that clerics were almost as well versed as politicians in the art of messaging but, in that margin, is the gap between indifference and headline news.

On June 13 two years ago, Gordon Brown delivered a speech at the Islamic Finance and Trade Conference in London. He knew, as did anyone with a cursory knowledge of financial markets, that Islamic Banking meant big business. Islamic Banking simply means the provision of banking products and services, from bog-standard current accounts to Sovereign Fund activity, which are compliant to Shariah law.

All work-a-day stuff for a Chancellor of the Exchequer, speaking at a conference and shedding a very benign light on something the markets already knew to be lucrative territory.

He started with the usual platitudes before launching the fusillade of statistics, a familiar modus operandi.  

Amongst this firewall of figures was the following phrase: “Second, the foundation for making Britain the gateway to Islamic trade, is to make Britain the global centre for Islamic finance.”

Had he said, as was the meaning of the phrase, “We wish to increase the number of banking products and services which are subject to Shariah law, as well as, our own domestic banking regulations,” the response to this speech would have been different.

Had the Chancellor uttered those somewhat bolder words, the story might have become a political one, exposed to the purveyors of opinion and - through them - the choppy and unpredictable waters of public opinion. This he knew and therefore maintained a tight, dry, economic message, anchored with enough statistics to induce sleep in even the hardiest of agency hacks.

The story was a business one and, inspired by this clever political covering fire, Lloyds TSB launched its first Islamic portfolio, the very next day.

Indeed, there is detailed material on the FSA’s website on Islamic Banking going back as far as 2003.

As an astute politician subject to some excellent counsel, Gordon Brown knew how to sell this story. Rowan Williams, with a politico-religious approach, part spun but divine channelling, failed, only marginally, but that is the difference.

Strangely, he forgot that the English are especially suspicious of laws and legal codes which arrive from foreign parts and always have been.

The error is compounded still further by his own position as head of a church was came into being, in part, as an act of defiance of a foreign religion and its legal and political apparatus. 

He could, as he is now, begun by pointing out that Shariah law is already in force in the UK, obviously in banking and finance and, elsewhere, to any who wish to make themselves subject to it. 

He could also have pointed out the there are other communities in the UK who observe legal codes which sit alongside their acceptance of the law of the land but nevertheless hold huge sway over their every day lives.

The UK’s largest minority, Roman Catholics, acknowledge Canon Law which is a complex, substantial legal code policed by qualified lawyers and applied to certain aspects of every day life.

Catholics, subject to the Act of Settlement, which bars the Sovereign from being or marrying a Roman Catholic, are historically familiar with the indigenous English suspicion of foreign laws and practices.

One might suggest that had the Archbishop employed Catholic advisers he could have side stepped this booby trap. I might suggest it except for the fact that Rowan Williams does have senior Catholics amongst his entourage, Tim Livesey, his principal public affairs adviser is a Catholic who performed the same role for Cardinal Cormac Murphy O Connor, the leader of England’s Catholic community.   

Anyone who has known a separating Catholic couple will know that, in the process of parting, they will seek not only a civil divorce but also an annulment which, under Canon law, means proving retrospectively that there are grounds under which the marriage was never valid.

Military law is another parallel legal code, which possesses even greater impact given that military courts have the power to sentence subjects to imprisonment in military courts.

There are others besides - International Maritime Law, Human Rights legislation, International Air Laws - at different times in the lives of many they are subject, whether they know it or not, to laws which sit alongside the ones they believe they  understand.

The best method to make his, entirely accurate, case would have started with the Archbishop couching his words somewhat causally and, with his first breath, paying respect to Parliament and the laws of the land.

There may be an initial emotional response to talk of foreign laws; however, this could have been defused by mixing Shariah in with a whole heap of other legal codes which are real but, to most, have zero everyday impact on everyday life.

As a politico, Rowan Williams should also have doffed his mitre to the British people and, more especially, their opinion.  Even the producers of Pop Idol have mastered this basic tenet of messaging. His use of the term, ‘unavoidable’, smacks of foregone conclusions and a sense that the public will not be consulted.

When the Prime Minister finally got round to consoling the Archbishop, as well as letting it be known he disagreed (we are not sure what was said exactly but it was reported thus).

He would, I am sure, have shed some light on the point which resonates throughout this rather silly saga and which as a leviathan of New Labour’s spin machine, the Prime Minister would appreciate.

It is a message,  which political spin doctors since the time of Plato have understood: method trumps message, every time.

Mark Morley is a former director of communications for the Catholic Church (England and Wales). He has also worked for VisitScotland, Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Conservative Party.

He currently lives in the Middle East where he works in financial services.

For more, read 'Wherefore Art Thou, Jack Irvine? Rowan Needs You', by Andrew Collier. Here.


* Send your Scottish media news and gossip, in the strictest confidence, to  info@allmediascotland.com