There are 60 million people in France, 6 million of them are Muslims. I always find it strange that there are people who think that all 6 milion are evil people who are rioting and causing eath and destruction. To me that's like saying that there are about 5 million Irish people who prefer to live in a republic who are responsible for blowing up London and other places in the 70s and 80s. Not to put too fine a point on it - it's rubbish. And to those whio say that "they should go back where they came from" then the bulk of them would need to go back to - France!
I'm afraid that one of the reasons why I am more and more finding this forum tiresome is not because of views that people hold that are different to my own - I thrive on debate - it's the blind illogicality of the arguments I find in some places on here, and that's nit even getting into the out and out bigotry worthy of a Tyndall or a Le Pen.
I was following the news in Paris on French television over the weekend and I would suggest that Interior Minister M Sarkozy, who intends to challenge for the presidenct in two years time, cannot have helped the unrest by talking publicly about "cleansing this scum from our suburbs" and "removing these germs".
The Daily Telegraph is not a newspaper with which I would always be in agreement, but yesterday's leader on the subject in that newspaper was absolutely correct:
Broken contract
France has had a week and a half of rioting. It is spreading, there is no end in sight and the government appears powerless to stop it. We are witnessing the breakdown of the contract between the state and Europe's largest immigrant population. That, as the Bill banning the hijab in schools reminded us, is on one side the acceptance by newcomers of a strictly lay entity in which no exception is made for different religious communities. In return, they are supposed to enjoy the benefits of a republic based on the revolutionary ideals of liberty, equality and fraternity.
Despite much controversy at the time, the Bill has been implemented with remarkably little fuss. It is not the hijab that lies at the heart of the present trouble. It is, rather, the failure of the state to fulfil its side of the bargain. The first generation of immigrants came to France to meet a demand for foreign labour. The second and third generations find themselves trapped without work in the estates or cités built for their parents and grandparents. To compound matters, the unemployed have become dependent on welfare. These two factors produce a feeling of helplessness, which in turn engenders a hatred of the state.
Nicolas Sarkozy, the interior minister, goes on about zero tolerance of violence, as if that were a remarkably bold policy. It is, rather, the very least to be expected from a man in his position and one that, over the past week and a half, he has seemed incapable of implementing. But beyond the obvious need to contain the rioting, the state must loosen its rigid labour laws, which make it difficult to sack - and therefore risky to take on - employees. Joblessness is high in France as a whole and about twice the national average among the immigrant communities.
The government should also reconsider a housing policy that has created ghettos with the demographic profile of the Third World and a morale-sapping dependency on welfare. These circumstances are propitious to criminality.
Dominique de Villepin, the prime minister, has held an emergency cabinet meeting, and yesterday President Jacques Chirac called a special meeting of security officials. There is talk of accelerating a social cohesion plan. This sounds, however, like another top-down solution in which alienated communities will be the recipients of public funds, thus strengthening the bonds of dependency.
What is required is the creation of conditions for enterprise that will allow those stuck in the cités to break out of drear desperation through work. This was the advice given by this newspaper during the 2002 presidential election and the 2005 constitutional referendum campaign.
The French government is now learning the cost of ignoring it.