Citizenship Survey

2007-08 Citizenship Survey
Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report
Acknowledgments
First and foremost our thanks go to all of the respondents who gave up their time to take
part in the survey.
We would also like to thank colleagues at NatCen who have made a significant
contribution to the project including: Audrey Hale, Laura Common and the Yellow Team
in the Operations Department, Steve Edwards in the computing department, Sarah
Tipping in the Survey Methods Unit, Steven Finch, Sarah Kitchen; and especially the many
fieldwork interviewers who worked on this study.
Finally we would like to thank Reannan Rottier, Kate Millward, Farzana Bari, Suzanne
Cooper and their colleagues at Communities and Local Government.
Information on the Citizenship Survey and associated publications are available from:
Suzanne Cooper
Communities and Local Government
Zone 7/E8, Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU
Email: citizenship.survey@communities.gsi.gov.uk
For statistical queries please contact:
Janet Dougharty
Communities and Local Government
5th Floor, Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU
Email: janet.dougharty@communities.gsi.gov.uk

Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report
Chris Ferguson, Steven Finch and Ola Turczuk, NatCen

December 2009
Department for Communities and Local Government
Department for Communities and Local Government

Eland House
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU
Telephone: 0303 444 0000
Website: www.communities.gov.uk
Crown Copyright, 2009
Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown.
This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research,
private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately
and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of
the publication specified.
Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence
for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp, or by writing to the Office of Public Sector
Information, Information Policy Team, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU.
e-mail: licensing@opsi.gov.uk
If you require this publication in an alternative format please email alternativeformats@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Communities and Local Government Publications
Tel: 0300 123 1124
Fax: 0300 123 1125
Email: product@communities.gsi.gov.uk
Online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk
75%
This is printed on
75% recycled paper
December 2009
Ref. no. 09 RFC 06183
ISBN: 978-1-4098-2091-8
Contents
Acknowledgments
inside front cover
Contents
Executive summary
Chapter 1
Introduction
12
RACE
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Perceptions of racial discrimination by

public service organisations
Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public
service organisations
Perceptions of racial discrimination by at least
one of eight key public service organisations
Groups expected to be treated better
Perceptions of racial prejudice
Group perceived to be experiencing more
racial prejudice
15
16
22
27
29
35
RELIGION
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Profile of religion
Profile of religious practice
Whether people feel able to actively practise
their religion
38
39
Religious prejudice
Perceptions of the level of religious prejudice
in Britain today
Perceptions of changes in the amount of religious
prejudice in Britain over the last five years
Groups experiencing more religious prejudice
43
41
43
46
50
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Perceptions of the extent to which the Government

protects the rights of different religious groups
Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be
protected too much and too little
52
56
Religious discrimination
Organisations perceived to be discriminatory on
the basis of religion
59
Chapter 8
How religion affects day-to-day life
64
Chapter 9
Racial and religious harassment and fear of attack

Perceptions of racial or religious harassment
in the local area
Fear of being attacked due to ethnicity or religion
69
62
69
75
EQUALITIES
Chapter 10 Experiences of discrimination in the labour market
Reasons for being refused a job and for being
discriminated against regarding promotion
79
Chapter 11 Formal volunteering and civic engagement across

equalities groups
84
Chapter 12 Respect
87
Annex A
Methodology
90
Annex B
Multivariate Outputs
93
Annex C
Definitions and Terms
114
Annex D
Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and

Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs)
118
Tables
120
Annex E
79
Executive summary | 5
Executive summary
This summary presents findings from the 2007-08 Citizenship Survey. This is the fourth in
a series of surveys carried out previously in 2001, 2003 and 2005.
The Citizenship Survey is designed to contribute to the evidence base across a range of
important policy areas including cohesion, community empowerment, race equality,
volunteering and charitable giving. The Survey contains questions about a number of
topics which include: views about the local area; fear of crime; local services;
volunteering and charitable giving; civil renewal; racial and religious prejudice and
discrimination; identity and values; and interactions with people from different
backgrounds. It also collects socio-demographic data on respondents.
The Survey is based on a nationally representative sample of approximately 10,000 adults
in England and Wales with an additional sample of around 5,000 adults from ethnic
minority groups. Face-to-face fieldwork was carried out with respondents from April 2007
to March 2008 by interviewers from the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen).
This summary reports findings on race, religion and equalities. Other published reports,
available on the CLG website, cover Volunteering and Charitable Giving, Community
Cohesion, Identity and Values and Empowered Communities.
Communities and Local Government has overarching responsibility for race equality for
Government, working with other departments, public bodies and third sector partners to
tackle inequalities experienced by many ethnic minority groups. Communities and Local
Governments vision is of a fair society where there are no barriers to participation or
ambition based on race, colour or ethnicity and where talent and effort decide how well
you do.
Communities and Local Government also work to improve expectations of fairness in the
delivery of public services and in employment amongst all ethnic groups as well as raising
levels of representation and participation in public life in under-represented groups.
Communities and Local Government lead on engagement between government and the
UKs faith communities, with responsibility for ensuring that faith communities and
representative organisations for people of goodwill without a religious belief are properly
consulted on religion and belief equalities issues, and on the development and
implementation of other policy areas that affect them.
A thriving inter faith scene, in which people from different religious backgrounds come
together to build understanding or tackle shared problems, is an important driver of
improved community cohesion locally. Communities and Local Government is therefore
responsible for fostering inter faith dialogue and activity locally, regionally and nationally
though a programme of targeted funding and facilitation as set out in the 2008 Inter
Faith Framework, Face to Face and Side by Side.
6 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report
The Government Equalities Office has responsibility within government for equality
strategy and legislation and takes the lead on issues relating to women, sexual
orientation and transgender equality matters. The Government Equalities Office aims to
improve equality and reduce discrimination and disadvantage for all, at work, in public
and political life, and in peoples life chances.
The Government Equalities Offices commitment to equality is based on the belief that
equality is good for:
The individual: no-one should be discriminated against on the grounds of gender,
race, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion and belief, or being transsexual.
Our society: a more equal and fairer society is one from which we all benefit.
Our economy: a modern successful knowledge based economy needs to make the
most of all our talents.
The summary begins by highlighting overall key findings on race, religion and equalities.
It goes on to examine perceptions of racial discrimination and racial prejudice. The
second section looks at religion; in particular perceptions of religious prejudice and views
on how much the Government is doing to protect the rights of people belonging to
different religions. It goes on to present findings on perceptions of religious
discrimination and views on how religion is perceived to affect aspects of day-to-day life.
The next section looks at perceptions of racial or religious harassment and fear of attack.
The summary closes by presenting findings on labour market discrimination, equal
opportunities in formal volunteering and engagement in civic institutions, and
perceptions of the respect with which people are treated.
Key findings
In 2007-08, the proportion of people who expected to be treated better than other
races by at least one of eight key public service organisations1 fell from 33 per cent in
2005 to 28 per cent.
The proportion of people who expected to be treated worse than other races by at
least one of eight key public service organisations also increased slightly, from 28 per
cent in 2005 to 30 per cent in 2007-08.
In 2007-08, there was an increase in the proportion of people who thought that there
was more racial prejudice in Britain today than there had been five years ago, from 48
per cent in 2005 to 56 per cent.
There was also an increase in the proportion of people who thought that there was
more religious prejudice in Britain today than there was five years ago, from 52 per
cent in 2005 to 62 per cent in 2007-08.
The proportion of people who thought that there was a lot of religious prejudice in
Britain today increased from 24 per cent in 2005 to 31 per cent in 2007-08.
In 2007-08, 94 per cent of people who practised a religion felt they could practise
their religion freely in Britain.
Across all religions, the majority of people did not feel that their religion affected
where they live (17% of people with a religion said that their religion did affect this),
where they work (10%), who their friends are (14%) or the school they would send
their children to (32%).
These are: local schools, local doctors surgery, council housing department or housing association, the police, the Prison Service, the
courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Probation Service.
Race
In 2007-08, Black Caribbean (55%), Black African (39%), Pakistani (36%) and Mixed
Race (38%) people were more likely than White (29%) people to say that at least one
of the eight key public service organisations would treat them worse than other races.
The proportion of Asian people who expected to be treated worse than other races by
at least one of eight key public service organisations fell from 34 per cent in 2005 to
29 per cent in 2007-08.
The organisations people most commonly expected discriminatory treatment from
both positive and negative were a council housing department or a housing
association (29%), the immigration authorities (28%), a private landlord (27%) and
the police (25%). White people were more likely than people of other ethnic groups to
say that they would expect to be treated worse than other races by a council housing
department or housing association, with 25 per cent of White people thinking this.
Fifty-six per cent of people thought that there was more racial prejudice in Britain
today than there had been five years ago while 11 per cent thought that there was
less. The proportion of people who thought there was more racial prejudice in Britain
today increased from 2005 when 48 per cent of people thought this.
White people were much more likely than any other ethnic group to have said that
there is more racial prejudice in Britain today than there was five years ago, with 58
per cent of White people saying this.
Compared with 2005, there was an increase in the proportion of White people who
thought that there was more racial prejudice than five years ago (from 50% to 58%),
and a decrease in the number of people in the Chinese/other group who answered in
this way (from 32% to 25%). There was no statistically significant change in the
proportion of Asian, Black, or Mixed Race people who said that there is more racial
prejudice today than five years ago.
The groups most commonly perceived to be experiencing more racial prejudice today
than they had five years ago were Muslims (44%), Asians (39%) and Eastern
Europeans (29%).
Religion
Seventy-six per cent of Muslims said they actively practised their religion, as did 70 per
cent of both Hindus and Sikhs, and 31 per cent of Christians.
Thirty-one per cent of people thought that there was a lot of religious prejudice in
Britain today and 39 per cent that there was a fair amount.
Muslim (35%) people and people in the other religion category (41%) were more
likely than Christians (30%) to perceive a lot of religious prejudice in Britain today.
Christians (63%) were more likely than Sikhs (49%), Buddhists (47%) or Hindus (44%)
to think that the amount of religious prejudice in Britain had increased in the last five
years, while Muslims (59%) answered this way in similar proportions to Christians.
Eighty-nine per cent of those who thought that there was more religious prejudice
today relative to five years ago said that this was associated with Muslims.
Thirty-five per cent of people felt that the Government was doing about the right
amount to protect the rights of people belonging to different religions while 26 per
cent thought they were doing too much and 30 per cent too little.
Muslims (46%) were more likely than Christians (29%) to say that the Government
was doing too little to protect the rights of people belonging to different religions.
Eighty-four per cent of people who said that the Government was doing too much
to protect the rights of people belonging to different religions related this to Muslims,
as did 60 per cent of those who said the Government was doing too little.
Three per cent of people said that they had been discriminated against because of
their religion by one or more of the organisations on the list presented to them. This
represents a small increase since 2005 (2%).
Seventeen per cent of people said that their religion affects where they live, while
ten per cent said it affects where they work, 14 per cent said that this affects who
their friends are and 32 per cent said it affects what school they would send their
children to.
Christians (33%) were more likely than Muslims (26%), Hindus (14%), Sikhs (10%),
and Buddhists (7%) to say that their religion affected what school they send (or sent
or would send) their children to.
Muslims were more likely than Christians to say that their religion affected where they
live (40% compared with 15%), where they work (25% compared with 9%) and who
their friends are (30% compared with 13%).
Racial and religious harassment and fear of attack

Sixty-one per cent of people in England said that racial or religious harassment is not a
problem at all in their local area, 30 per cent said that it is not a very big problem, six
per cent state said that it is a fairly big problem and two per cent said that it is a very
big problem.
White people were less likely than people from all other ethnic groups (except for
Chinese people) to say that racial and religious harassment was a fairly or very big
problem in the local area. Proportions were highest among Mixed Race (25%) and
Bangladeshi (24%) people, compared with seven per cent of White people.
Sixteen per cent of people living in London thought that racial or religious harassment
was a problem in their local area, a higher proportion than in all other regions.
Ten per cent of ethnic minority people said that they were very worried about being
attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion.
Fifteen per cent of Bangladeshi people and 11 per cent of Black African people said
that they were very worried about being attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic
origin or religion.
Equalities
In 2007-08, seven per cent of people who had been refused a job in the last five years
thought that this was because of race; unchanged from 2005. Sixteen per cent of
people who had been discriminated against regarding promotion thought that this
was because of race, an increase from 2005 when this figure was 12 per cent.
Age was the most common form of discrimination mentioned in relation to being
refused a job (mentioned as a reason by 23% of those who said they had been
refused a job in the last five years) and promotion (mentioned by 29% of those who
said they had been discriminated against in relation to a promotion).
Among people from ethnic minority groups, race and colour were mentioned in
relation to being refused a job by 20 per cent and 18 per cent respectively, and in
relation to being discriminated against regarding promotion by 49 per cent and 45 per
cent respectively.
White people were more likely to have participated in civic engagement or formal
volunteering in the last 12 months than people from all other ethnic groups, except
for Mixed Race people for whom proportions were similar to those of White people.
Sixty-four per cent of White people and 61 per cent of Mixed Race had participated in
civic engagement or formal volunteering, compared with 60 per cent of Black
Caribbean people, 57 per cent of Black African people, 52 per cent of Pakistani
people, 50 per cent of Indian people and 47 per cent of Bangladeshi people and
Chinese people.
Sixty-four per cent of Christians had taken part in civic engagement or formal
volunteering in the last 12 months. This was higher than the proportions of Muslims
(51%), Hindus (50%) and Sikhs (41%) who had done so. The proportion of Christians
who had taken part in these activities was similar to the proportions of Buddhists
(63%), people with other religions (67%) and people with no religion (64%).
The proportion of White people who said that they would be treated with respect all
of the time while shopping (28%) was lower than the proportion of people from most
other ethnic groups who answered in this way. However, the proportions of White
people who said that they would be treated with respect all of the time when using
public transport (26%), when using the health service (44%) or at work, school, or
college (44%) were similar to the proportions of people from most other ethnic
groups who gave these answers.
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1
This report presents findings from the 2007-08 Citizenship Survey. This is the
fourth in a series of surveys carried out previously in 2001, 2003 and 2005.
In 2007 the Citizenship Survey moved to a continuous design with key indicators
made available every quarter (by way of a statistical release), and in March 2008
was given National Statistics status.
1.2
The Citizenship Survey is designed to contribute to the evidence base across a

range of important policy areas including cohesion, community empowerment,
race equality, volunteering and charitable giving. Evidence from the Survey is
also used both by Communities and Local Government and other government
departments to monitor progress against a range of Public Service Agreement
(PSA) and Departmental Strategic Objective (DSO) indicators2. A full list of
Communities and Local Governments indicators can be found at Annex D.
The survey also provides a wealth of information for wider social research and
analysis. The anonymised dataset is publicly available from the ESRC data archive:
www.data-archive.ac.uk/.
1.3
The Survey contains questions about a number of topics which include: views
about the local area; fear of crime; local services; volunteering and charitable
giving; civil renewal; racial and religious prejudice and discrimination; identity and
values; and interactions with people from different backgrounds. It also collects
socio-demographic data on respondents.
1.4
The Survey is based on a nationally representative sample of approximately

10,000 adults in England and Wales with an additional sample of around 5,000
adults from ethnic minority groups. Face-to-face fieldwork was carried out with
respondents from April 2007 to March 2008 by interviewers from the National
Centre for Social Research (NatCen).
Public Service Agreements (PSAs) set out the key priority outcomes the Government wants to achieve in the next spending period.
Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs) set out the departments objectives for the contributions they will make both to the PSAs
they lead on, and those that they contribute to.
Chapter 1 Introduction | 13
1.5
Five reports have been produced which set out the 2007-08 Survey findings.
1.6
The five reports are:

Race, Religion and Equalities
this, the current report, explores views about racial and religious prejudice,
perceptions of racial discrimination by public service organisations, and
experiences of religious and employment-related discrimination.
Volunteering and Charitable Giving
looks at peoples involvement in volunteering activities and charitable giving.
Community Cohesion
examines community cohesion, attitudes towards the neighbourhood and the
local area, belonging to the neighbourhood, fear of crime, social networks, and
peoples interactions with people from different backgrounds.
Identity and Values
examines attitudes to immigration, values, identity and sense of belonging to
Britain.
Empowered Communities
looks at the extent to which people actually participate in and influence local
or national conditions and decisions and the extent to which they feel able to
influence decision making.
1.7
Each report begins with text and charts describing the findings, with the
supporting data given in tables at the end. Key elements of the survey
methodology are highlighted in Annex A (there is also a separate technical report
giving details of the methodology in full).
1.8
The current report focuses on the topic of race, religion and equalities, and in so
doing, facilitates the measurement of PSAs 153 and 214, and DSO 45.
1.9
The report begins by examining peoples expectations of how they would be

treated, compared to people of other races by various public service organisations6
and which groups were identified as being treated better. This is followed by an
examination of how people perceive the level of racial prejudice today compared
with five years ago and, where people thought that this had increased which
groups in particular they perceived there to be more prejudice against than before.
4
5
6
PSA 15: To address the disadvantage that individuals experience because of their gender, race, disability, age, sexual orientation,
religion or belief.
PSA 21: To build more cohesive, empowered and active communities.
Communities and Local Government DSO 4: To develop communities that are cohesive, active and resilient to extremism.
These are: local schools, local doctors surgery, council housing department or housing association, the police, the Prison Service, the
courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Probation Service.
1.10 The second section of the report looks at issues to do with religion. It examines
peoples views on the level of religious prejudice in Britain today, their perceptions
of changes in the amount of religious prejudice in Britain over the last five years,
and, where people thought that this has increased, which groups they perceived
there to be more religious prejudice against than before. It then looks at peoples
perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people
belonging to different religions, and, where people answered that the rights of
religious groups were protected too much, which groups in particular they were
thinking of. This is followed by sections on peoples perceived experiences of
religious discrimination by various public service organisations, on whether people
who practise a religion feel free to do so in Britain, and on the extent to which
religion affects certain aspects of peoples day-to-day life.
1.11 The final sections of the report examine peoples perceptions of racial and religious
harassment and how worried they were about being the victim of a physical attack
because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion. It examines peoples
experiences of and perceived reasons for discrimination in the labour market.
It reports the level to which people from different groups are involved in formal
volunteering and engagement in civic institutions. Finally, it examines the level of
respect that people feel they are treated with in different public places or while
using public services.
1.12 The report mostly covers England and Wales to reflect Communities and Local
Governments policy responsibilities in this area. However, some of the data
presented relates to England only to facilitate the measurement of policy
outcomes on some issues. Section 11, which examines volunteering and civic
engagement across equalities groups, and Section 12, on respect cover England
only in order to reflect Government Equalities Office policy responsibilities in this
area. Meanwhile, Section 9, on racial and religious harassment and fear of attack,
initially presents figures for England only, but then goes on to present data for
both England and Wales.
Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 15
RACE
Chapter 2
Perceptions of racial discrimination by
public service organisations
2.1
This section explores perceptions of racial discrimination by public service

organisations using Citizenship Survey questions which ask people whether, as a
member of the public using a range of services, they would expect to be treated
better, worse or about the same as people of other races. Respondents were told
that they did not need to have any direct contact with the organisations to answer
the questions. The list of 15 organisations was as follows:
a local doctors surgery
a local hospital
the health service
a local school
the education system
a council housing department or housing association
a local council
a private landlord
the courts
the Crown Prosecution Service
the police
your local police
the immigration authorities
the Prison Service
the Probation Service.
2.2
This section presents detailed analysis of responses to this question. It begins

by examining which public service organisations were most frequently perceived
to be discriminatory. It then investigates the differences in these perceptions
according to ethnic group, gender, age and country of birth. The section ends by
looking at the proportion of people who perceived that they would be treated
worse by at least one of eight key public service organisations7 and which other
groups they thought would be treated better than them.
Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

organisations
2.3
Analysis of all the public service organisations listed shows that the most common
view was that each of the organisations would treat them the same as people of
other racial backgrounds. However, as observed in previous years, the proportion
of people who expected to be treated better or worse varied quite a lot by the
type of organisation (Table 1; Figure 1). The four types of organisations that were
felt to be most likely to discriminate (either positively or negatively) were:
A council housing department or housing association: 29 per cent of
people expected some form of discrimination and most (23% of people)
expected that they would be treated worse than people of other races.
Immigration authorities: 28 per cent of people expected some form of
discrimination, and of these, most (19% of people) expected to be treated
better than people of other races.
Private landlords: 27 per cent of people expected some form of discrimination,
and of these, most (23% of people) expected to be treated better than people
of other races.
The police: 25 per cent of people expected some form of discrimination,
and of these, most (17% of people) expected to be treated better than people
of other races.
2.4
In 2005, the same four organisations were perceived as being the most
discriminatory from the list provided. However, in 2007-08, for three of these
organisations, fewer people than in 2005 expected some form of discrimination.
The proportion of people who expected this for immigration authorities fell from
31 per cent in 2005 to 28 per cent in this year, the proportion who felt this for
private landlords fell from 31 per cent to 27 per cent and the proportion who felt
this for the police fell from 29 per cent to 25 per cent.
2.5
Other criminal justice organisations such as local police, the courts, the Crown
Prosecution Service, the Prison Service and the Probation Service were mentioned as
discriminatory by between 11 and 17 per cent of people. Twelve per cent of people
thought the education system would treat them better or worse than people of
other races.
The eight key public service organisations were: local schools, a local doctors surgery, a council housing department or housing
association, the police, the Prison Service, the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Probation Service.
2.6
Health service organisations, such as a local doctors surgery, a local hospital

and the health service in general, were perceived to be least discriminatory:
the proportion of people saying that they would be treated better or worse by
these is between four and six per cent.
2.7
The types of organisations that people said would be most likely to give them
better treatment than people of other races were a private landlord (23% of
people said this), the immigration authorities (19%) and the police (17%). At the
other end of this spectrum, 23 per cent of people said that a housing department
or housing association would treat them worse than people of other races,
11 per cent of people said this about a local council, and nine per cent about
the immigration authorities (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Proportion of people who expect to be treated better or worse than other
races by public service organisations
A local doctors surgery 2 2
A local hospital 3 2
The Probation Service 3
The health service 3
A local school
The Prison Service
A private landlord
4
14
23
Your local police
The Crown Prosecution Service
The education system
The courts
11
The police
The immigration authorities
A local council
(apart from a housing department)
A council housing department or
housing association
17
19
11
4
23
10
20
30
40
Per cent
Expect worse treatment than other races
Base: Core sample, England & Wales (9,336)
Expect better treatment than other races
50
2.8
Most of the 2007-08 findings in relation to peoples perceptions of being treated

worse than people of other races by public service organisations were very similar
to those recorded in 2005. There was no statistically significant change in the
proportion of people saying that they would be treated worse by any of the
criminal justice organisations8, a private landlord, and the immigration authorities.
There was an increase of between half and three percentage points for all other
organisations, including a three percentage point increase in the proportion
expecting to be treated worse by a housing department or housing association
(from 20% in 2005 to 23% in 2007-08) and a two percentage point increase in the
proportion answering in this way for a local council (from 9% to 11%) (Figure 2).
Figure 2 Proportion of people who expect to be treated worse than other races by
public service organisations, 2005 and 2007-08
1
A local doctors surgery

A local hospital
The Probation Service
The health service
A local school
The Prison Service
A private landlord
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
Your local police

The courts
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
The police
A local council
(apart from a housing department)
11
10
A council housing department or

housing association
20
10
23
20
30
40
Per cent
2005
2007-08
Base: Core sample, England & Wales (2005: 9,670, 2007-08: 9,336)
These are: the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service, the police, the local police, the Prison Service, and the Probation Service.
50

organisations, by ethnicity
2.9
Twenty-nine per cent of people said that they would be treated either better or
worse than people of other races by a council housing department or housing
association. White (25%) people were more likely than people from ethnic
minority groups (11%) to say that they would expect to be treated worse than
other races by this type of organisation (Table 1).
2.10 Another public service judged by some to treat people worse than other races was
the local council. Indian (6%), Pakistani (6%), Bangladeshi (7%), and Mixed Race
(7%) people were less likely than White (11%) people to expect to be treated
worse than people of other races by this type of organisation.
2.11 White people were less likely than people from ethnic minority groups to think that
the immigration authorities would treat them worse than other races. The highest
levels were amongst Black Caribbean and Black African people, 27 and 22 per cent
of who thought this compared with eight per cent of White people. In contrast,
a high proportion of White people expected the immigration authorities to treat
them better than other races. For example, one per cent of Black Caribbean
people, three per cent of Black African people and two per cent of both Indian and
Pakistani people answered in this way, compared with 22 per cent of White people.
2.12 A similar pattern was observed with the police. Groups that were most likely to
think the police would treat them worse than other races were Black Caribbean
(41%), Black African (29%), Pakistani (25%) and Bangladeshi (24%) people.
Six per cent of White people thought this.
2.13 Black Caribbean people in particular were more likely than White people to say that
criminal justice organisations such as the local police (33% compared with 4%), the
courts (27% compared with 6%), the Crown Prosecution Service (25% compared
with 5%), the Prison Service (26% compared with 2%) and the Probation Service
(21% compared with 2%) would treat them worse than other groups.
2.14 On the other hand, a considerably higher proportion of White people, compared
with any other ethnic group, thought that the criminal justice organisations would
treat them better than people from other races. For example, 19 per cent of White
people mentioned the police, 13 per cent the local police, 15 per cent the Prison
Service and nine per cent the Probation Service as an organisation that would treat
them better than other races, compared with two per cent of people from ethnic
minority groups who answered this way for the police and local police, and one
per cent of people from this group who mentioned the Prison Service and the
Probation Service.
2.15 A higher proportion of White people perceived that they would be treated better
by a private landlord compared with all other ethnic groups (25% compared with
7% or fewer among other ethnic groups).

organisations, by sex
2.16 Expectations of treatment by public services tended not to vary by sex, although
some differences were found. Men were more likely than women to say that they
would be treated worse than people of other races by all of the criminal justice
organisations except for the probation service, the education system, a council
housing department or housing association, and the immigration authorities,
although the differences were not more than three percentage points for any
organisation. There was no statistically significant difference between the
proportions of the two sexes answering in this way for any of the other seven
public service organisations (Table 2). There were, however, some larger variations
by sex within particular ethnic groups.
2.17 There were relatively large differences between the sexes in the proportions of
people in some ethnic minority groups who expected that they would be treated
worse than other races by the police. For example, 48 per cent of Black Caribbean
men said this compared to 35 per cent of Black Caribbean women while 32 per cent
of Black African men said this compared to 26 per cent of Black African women.
Similarly, 29 per cent of Pakistani men and 28 per cent of Bangladeshi men said this
compared to 20 per cent of Pakistani and Bangladeshi women. Among Mixed Race
people, 32 per cent of men said this compared to 21 per cent of women.
2.18 These patterns were also reflected in perceptions of treatment by the local police.
For example, among Black Caribbean people, 41 per cent of men expected to be
treated worse by the local police compared to 26 per cent of women. Meanwhile,
25 per cent of Pakistani men said this compared to 15 per cent of Pakistani
women.
2.19 However, among some ethnic groups, women were more likely than men to
expect to be treated worse than people of other races by the health service, a local
school and a council housing department or housing association. The proportion
of women who thought that they would be treated worse by the health service
was higher than that for men for Bangladeshi people (8% compared with 5%)
and Chinese people (6% compared with 3%). For local schools and a housing
department or housing association, there were differences between the sexes
in the expectations of Bangladeshi and Mixed Race people. Six per cent of
Bangladeshi women and seven per cent of Mixed Race women thought that they
would be treated worse than other races by a local school (compared to 1% of
men from both ethnic groups), while 18 per cent of Bangladeshi women and
17 per cent of Mixed Race women answered in this way for a council housing
department or housing association compared to 10 per cent of Bangladeshi men
and 11 per cent of Mixed Race men.

organisations, by age
2.20 For five of the public service organisations mentioned (the police, local police,
the prison service, a local school and a council housing department or housing
association), younger people (aged 16-29) were more likely to expect worse
treatment than people aged 50 and over. For the remaining organisations,
no statistically significant difference was found between these age groups.
2.21 There were also variations between ethnic groups. For example, Black Caribbean
people aged 16-29 (65%) were more likely than Black Caribbean people aged
30-49 (44%) and those aged 50 (19%) and over to expect to be treated worse
by the police. Similarly, Black African people aged 16-29 (43%) were more likely
to say this than those who were aged 50 and over (28%). The same pattern was
observed between the younger and older age groups for Bangladeshi people
(31% of those aged 16-29 compared to 18% of those aged 50 and over expected
to be treated worse by the police) and Indian people (18% of those aged 16-29
compared to 11% of those aged 50 and over). However, among Pakistani people
there was no statistically significant difference according to age in expectations of
being treated worse by the police (27% for those aged 16-29 years and 28% of
those aged 50 and over said this).
2.22 The proportion of White people who expected to receive worse treatment from
the police than other races was both much lower than for ethnic minority groups
(6% compared to 22%) and more consistent across the different age groups.

organisations, by country of birth
2.23 People who were born in the UK were more likely than those not born in the UK
to think that they would be treated worse than other races by a council housing
department or housing association (25% compared with 12%). This group were
also more likely to think that they would be treated worse by a local council (11%
compared with 6%). In contrast, people who were not born in the UK were more
likely than those born in the UK to think that they would be treated worse than
other races by the police (9% compared with 7%), the local police (7% compared
with 5%) and the Prison Service (5% compared with 3%). Aside from these
findings, there were few differences in perceptions of racial discrimination
according to peoples country of birth for the total population.
2.24 Among ethnic groups. Black people who were born in the UK were more likely
than Black people not born in the UK to think that they would be treated worse
than other races by most of the organisations. In particular, 55 per cent of Black
people born in the UK expected to be treated worse by the police compared to
25 per cent of Black people not born in the UK. Similar differences were observed
in expectations of being treated worse by other criminal justice organisations such
as the local police (43% compared with 19%), the courts (38% compared with
11%), the Crown Prosecution Service (35% compared with 12%) and the Prison
Service (37% compared with 15%).
2.25 Similar patterns of results were observed for Asian people with respect to the
criminal justice organisations. For example, Asian people who were born in the UK
were more likely than Asian people not born in the UK to think that they would
be treated worse by the police (30% compared with 13%), local police (23%
compared with 10%), the courts (13% compared with 4%), the Crown Prosecution
Service (14% compared with 4%) and the Prison Service (22% compared with 7%).
2.26 Black people born in the UK were also more likely than Black people born outside
the UK to think that the education system (29% compared with 12%) and a local
school (14% compared with 6%) would treat them worse than other races.
Although Asian people born in the UK were similarly more likely than those not
born in the UK to think that they would be treated worse by these organisations,
the differences were much less (7% compared to 4% for the education system
and 6% compared to 4% for schools).
2.27 Black and Asian people who were born in the UK were also more likely than those
born outside the UK to think that they would be treated worse by the immigration
authorities (36% of Black people born in the UK compared to 19% of those not
born in the UK; 22% of Asian people born in the UK compared to 11% of those
not born in the UK).
Perceptions of racial discrimination by at least one of eight

key public service organisations
2.28 The remainder of this section examines expectations of treatment by eight key
public service organisations. These are: local schools, a local doctors surgery,
a council housing department or housing association and the five criminal justice
organisations the police, the Prison Service, the courts, the Crown Prosecution
Service and the Probation Service.
2.29 The proportion of people who expected to be treated better than people of other
races by at least one of these organisations fell from 33 per cent in 2005 to 28 per
cent in 2007-08. Meanwhile, the proportion who expected to be treated worse
than other races increased from 28 per cent in 2005 to 30 per cent in 2007-08.
2.30 Comparing these figures with those for previous years, the proportion of people
who expected to be treated worse than people of other races by at least one of
these organisations was 27 per cent in 2001 and 23 per cent in 2003. The
proportion of people who expected to be treated better by one of eight key public
service organisations was 27 per cent in 2001 and 38 per cent in 2003 (Figure 3,
Table 1).
races by at least one of eight key public service organisations,
2001 to 2007-08
100
Per cent
80
60
38
40
33
27
27
28
30
28
23
20
0
2001
2003
Treated worse
2005
2007-08
Treated better
Base: Core sample, England & Wales (2001: 10,015, 2003: 9,486, 2005: 9,691, 2007-08: 9,336)
Perceptions of racial discrimination by at least one of eight key

public service organisations, by ethnicity
2.31 Black Caribbean (55%), Black African (39%), Pakistani (36%) and Mixed Race
(38%) people were more likely than White (29%) people to say that at least one
of the eight key public service organisations would treat them worse than other
races. (Figure 4, Table 1).
2.32 The proportion of White people who said that they expected to be treated better
than other races by at least one of the eight key public service organisations was
similar to the proportion who expected to be treated worse by any organisation
(30% and 29% respectively). In contrast, all ethnic minority groups were less likely
to say that they would be treated better by any of these organisations than to say
that they would be treated worse by any of them.
races by at least one of eight key public service organisations, by ethnicity
4
Black Caribbean
55
6
Black African
39
10
Mixed Race
38
Pakistani
36
9
Bangladeshi
35
30
29
White
8
Chinese
Indian
All ethnic minority groups
26
25
34
28
30
All
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Expect better treatment by at least one organisation
Expect worse treatment by at least one organisation
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (14,095); Core sample, England & Wales (9,336)
2.33 Relative to 2005, 2007-08 findings show a few small changes in perceptions of
discrimination by any of the eight key public service organisations by people of
different ethnic groups. The proportion of White people who said that they would
expect to be treated worse than other races has increased from 26 per cent to
29 per cent. In contrast, the proportion of Asian people who expected to be
treated worse than other races has decreased from 34 per cent in 2005 to
29 per cent in 2007-08. The proportion of Black people who expected to be
treated worse has remained the same, at 46 per cent (Figure 5).
Figure 5 Proportion of people who expect to be treated worse than other races by
at least one of eight key public service organisations, by ethnicity,
2005 and 2007-08
46
46
Black
38
41
Mixed Race
29
Asian
Other
26
White
29
26
26
Chinese
20
34
33
34
37

30
28
All
20
All
40
60
80
100
Per cent
2007-08
2005
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (2005:14,081; 2007-08:14,095);

Core sample, England & Wales (2005: 9,670; 2007-08: 9,336)
Characteristics of people who feel that they would be treated

worse than other races by at least one of eight key public service
organisations
2.34 A multivariate analysis was carried out to look at the socio-demographic and
attitudinal factors that predict perceptions of racial discrimination by public service
organisations when the impacts of other variables (eg age, sex, deprivation and
ethnicity) are taken into account. Further methodological detail of this analysis is
provided at Annex B.
2.35 This analysis found that people from the following groups, and with the following
characteristics, were more likely to feel that they would be treated worse by at
least one of eight key public service organisations:
men (compared to women)
people aged 16-24 years (compared to people aged 75 years and over)
Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean, Black African, Other Black and Mixed
Race people (compared to White people)
people born in the UK (compared to those not born in the UK)
non-practising Christians, practising and non-practising Buddhists (compared to

practising Christians)
people with a limiting long-term illness or disability (compared to those without
a limiting long-term illness or disability)
people with qualifications below degree level that are not foreign qualifications
(compared to those with a degree)
people with no qualifications and people over the age of 70 with no
qualifications (compared to those with a degree)
people who were in employment (compared to those who were economically
inactive)
people living in the East of England (compared to people in the North East)
people who did not think that their local area was cohesive (compared to
people who thought their local area was cohesive)
people who were fairly, not very or not at all proud of their local area
(compared to people who were very proud)
people who use the internet (compared to those who do not)
people who regularly read national newspapers (compared to those who do not).
2.36 Those from the following groups, and with the following characteristics, were less
likely to feel that they would be treated worse by at least one of eight key public
service organisations. People:
living in England in areas of medium deprivation (the fifth decile) (compared to
people living in England in the least deprived areas)
living in areas with the highest ethnic density and people living in low to
medium density areas (wards in the third and fourth deciles) (compared to
people living in areas with the lowest ethnic density)
with more than half of their friends from a different ethnic group (compared to
people who say all their friends are from the same group)
who perceived there to be low levels of anti-social behaviour in their local area
or did not respond to this question (compared to those who perceived high
levels of anti-social behaviour)
who are not very or not at all worried about crime (compared to people who
were very worried).
2.37 The model also tested a number of other variables, which were found to have no
impact (either positive or negative) on peoples views on the amount of racial
prejudice. These variables are listed in Annex B.
Groups expected to be treated better

2.38 People who stated that they would expect any of the public service organisations
to treat them worse than other races (30% of people said this) were asked which
groups they thought would be treated better than them. This question was asked
unprompted, without a list of potential groups to avoid leading peoples
responses.
2.39 Overall, the group that people most commonly identified as receiving better
treatment than them was Asian people (identified by 42% of people). Twenty-six
per cent of people identified Black people, while 24 per cent identified Eastern
Europeans, 23 per cent identified new immigrants, 16 per cent identified asylum
seekers or refugees, 15 per cent identified Muslims and 13 per cent identified
White people. Chinese people and Mixed Race people (each mentioned by 5% of
people), Hindus and Sikhs (each mentioned by 3% of people) and Buddhists and
Jews (each mentioned by 2% of people) were mentioned by fewer people in this
context (Figure 6).
Figure 6 Groups perceived to be treated better than respondent
Asian people
42
Black people
26
Eastern Europeans
24
New immigrants
23
Asylum seekers/refugees
16
Muslims
15
Other group
14
White people
13
Mixed Race people
Chinese people
Hindus
Sikhs
Buddhists
Jews
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Per cent
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, People who said that they would expect to be treated worse than other races by at least
one public service organisation (3,019)
Groups expected to be treated better, by ethnicity

2.40 Most people from ethnic minority groups who expected public service
organisations to treat them worse than other races identified White people as
the group that would be treated better than them (82% of people from ethnic
minority groups said this). Eighty-four per cent of Asian people, 87 per cent of
Black people, 78 per cent of Mixed Race people and 64 per cent of people in the
Chinese or other ethnic groups identified White people in this way (Table 3).
2.41 After White people, Asian people were most commonly identified by people
from ethnic minority groups as people who would receive better treatment
(being identified in this way by 10% of people from all ethnic minority groups).
This ethnic group was mentioned by 46 per cent of White people who expected
to receive worse treatment and by between 14 and 15 per cent of other ethnic
minority groups.
2.42 Twenty-nine per cent of White people who expected to receive worse treatment
than other races identified Black people as people who would receive better
treatment. Among people of other ethnic minority groups who expected to
receive worse treatment, Black people were mentioned by between six and
10 per cent.
2.43 White people who expected to receive worse treatment than other races also
commonly identified new immigrants and Eastern Europeans as groups that
were likely to receive better treatment than them (both were mentioned by 26%).
In contrast, among people in ethnic minority groups who expected to be treated
worse than other races, four per cent identified new immigrants as a group that
would be treated better, while seven per cent identified Eastern Europeans.
2.44 People aged 16-29 years who felt that they would be treated worse than other
races by public service organisations were less likely than those aged 30-49 or 50
and over to identify Muslims and Eastern Europeans as the group that would be
treated better (11% compared with 15% and 17% respectively for Muslims and
18% compared to 27% and 24% respectively for Eastern Europeans). Aside from
this finding, there were few variations to be noted by age or sex in peoples
perceptions of who might be treated better than them (Tables 4 and 5).
Chapter 3 Perceptions of racial prejudice | 29
RACE
Chapter 3
Perceptions of racial prejudice
3.1
This section examines perceptions of racial prejudice. Respondents were asked

whether they thought that there was less, more or about the same amount of
racial prejudice in Britain today than there was five years ago. In addition, people
who felt that there was more or less racial prejudice now, compared with five
years ago, were asked which groups they thought there was now more or less
racial prejudice against.
3.2
In 2007-08, 56 per cent of people thought that there was more racial prejudice
today than five years ago. Twenty-five per cent thought the level of racial prejudice
had stayed the same, 11 per cent thought that it had decreased while 8 per cent
did not know (Figure 7, Table 6).
Figure 7 Perceptions of racial prejudice today compared with five years ago
Dont
know
8%
Less
11%
Same
25%
More
56%
3.3
The proportion of people who thought that there is more racial prejudice today
than five years ago has increased from 48 per cent in 2005. In 2001, 43 per cent
of people expressed this view, while 47 per cent of people said this in 2003
(Figure 8, Table 6).
Figure 8 Proportion of people saying there is more racial prejudice today compared
with five years ago, 2001 to 2007-08
100
Per cent
80
60
56
43
47
48
2003
2005
40
20
0
2001
2007-08
Base: Core sample, England & Wales (2001: 10,015; 2003: 9,482; 2005: 9,671; 2007-08: 9,333)
3.4
In 2007-08, the proportions of people who thought that the level of racial
prejudice had stayed the same (25%) or decreased (11%) were lower than
the proportions for 2005 (30% and 16% respectively).
Perceptions of racial prejudice, by ethnicity

3.5
White people were more likely than any other ethnic groups to have said that
there is more racial prejudice today than five years ago (58%). Forty-eight per cent
of Pakistani people, 32 per cent of Indian people and 29 per cent of Bangladeshi
people answered in this way, as did 28 per cent of Black Caribbean people,
22 per cent of Black African people, and 36 per cent of Mixed Race people.
(Figure 9, Table 7). When other factors (eg age and sex) were taken into account in
a regression analysis, these differences remained statistically significant for Indian,
Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean, Black African and Mixed Race people.
3.6
The proportion of people who thought there was less racial prejudice today than
five years ago was the highest among Black African (28%) people and lowest
among White people (10%). Meanwhile, 27 per cent of Black Caribbean people
and 26 per cent of Bangladeshi people thought that racial prejudice had decreased.
3.7
Views on racial prejudice varied by ethnic group. Among White, Indian, Pakistani
and Mixed Race people, the proportion of people who said that there is more racial
prejudice today than five years ago was higher than the proportion who said that
there was less. In contrast, among Black African people, the proportion of people
who said that there is less racial prejudice today than five years ago was higher
than the proportion who said that there was more. Among Black Caribbean,
Bangladeshi and Chinese people, there was no statistically significant difference
between the proportions of people who said that there was more prejudice today
than five years ago and the proportions who said that there was less.
Figure 9 Proportion of people saying there is more or less racial prejudice today
compared with five years ago, by ethnicity
22
Black African
Black Caribbean
Bangladeshi
16
Chinese
28
28
27
29
26
21
Indian
21
Mixed Race
32
36
20
Pakistani
48
17
White
58
10
22
All
32
56
11
20
40
60
Per cent
More racial prejudice
Less racial prejudice
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (14,087); Core sample, England & Wales (9,333)
80
100
3.8
Compared with the 2005 findings, there was an increase in the proportion of
White people who thought that there was more racial prejudice than five years
ago (from 50% to 58%), and a decrease in the number of people in the diverse
Chinese/other group who answered in this way (from 32% to 25%). There was
no statistically significant change in the proportion of Asian, Black, or Mixed Race
people who said that there is more racial prejudice today than five years ago
Figure 10 Proportions of people saying that there is more racial prejudice today
compared with five years ago, by ethnicity, 2005 and 2007-08
25
Chinese or other
32
36
33
Mixed
25
22
Black
36
35
Asian
White
50
58
32
31

All
48
20
40
56
60
80
100
Per cent
2007-08
2005
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (2005:14,039, 2007-08: 14,087);

Core sample, England & Wales (2005: 9,671, 2007-08: 9,333)
Perceptions of racial prejudice, by sex

3.9
Women (57%) were more likely than men (54%) to think that there is more racial
prejudice today than five years ago (Table 8).
3.10 The difference between the sexes was particularly apparent with regard to Black
Caribbean people (32% of Black Caribbean women thought there was more racial
prejudice than five years ago, compared with 23% of men), White people (59%
compared with 57%) and people from other ethnic groups (32% compared with
26%). Differences between the sexes were not statistically significant for other
ethnic groups, except for Chinese people for whom more men (18%) than
women (15%) said that there was more racial prejudice today than five years ago.
Perceptions of racial prejudice, by country of birth

3.11 People who were born in the UK (59%) were more likely than people not born in
the UK (35%) to think that there was more racial prejudice today than five years
ago (Table 9). Despite this, there was no significant difference between the groups
in the proportion who said that there was less racial prejudice today than five years
ago (10% and 17% respectively). The lower proportion of people not born in the
UK who said that there is more racial prejudice than five years ago partly reflects
the fact that 21 per cent of this group felt unable to answer this question,
compared with just six per cent of people born in the UK.
3.12 This pattern of higher reporting of increased racial prejudice among those born in
the UK was reflected across all ethnic groups. Sixty per cent of White people who
were born in the UK said that there was more racial prejudice today than five years
ago, compared with 41 per cent of White people not born in the UK. Forty-seven
per cent of Asian people born in the UK, 33 per cent of Black people born in the
UK, and 40 per cent of Mixed Race people born in the UK answered in this way,
compared to 31 per cent, 21 per cent and 30 per cent respectively of people from
these ethnic groups who were not born in the UK.
Perceptions of racial prejudice, by religion

3.13 Compared with people from other religious groups, Christians had the most
negative views on racial prejudice, with 58 per cent saying that there was more
racial prejudice today than five years ago. This compares with 40 per cent of
Muslims, 35 per cent of Sikhs and Buddhists, and 28 per cent of Hindus. Similarly,
people with no religion were less likely than Christians to believe that there was
more racial prejudice than five years ago (52%). However, there was no statistically
significant difference between the proportion of Christians and the proportion of
people from the Other religious group (56%) answering in this way (Table 13).
3.14 Overall, people who did not actively practise their religion were more likely than
people who practised their religion to think that there is more racial prejudice
today than five years ago (59% compared to 54%).
3.15 Among the individual religious groups, Hindu (24%) people tended to have the
most positive views on this issue compared with Christians (11%).
3.16 When other factors such as ethnicity and country of birth were taken into account
in a regression analysis (see below), these differences among religious groups were
no longer statistically significant. Furthermore, the regression analysis identified
that, practising Muslims were more likely than practising Christians to feel that
there was more racial prejudice than five years ago.
Perceptions of racial prejudice, by age, education and socio-economic

status
3.17 People in older age groups were more likely than those aged 16-24 to think that
racial prejudice had increased. This view was expressed by 58 per cent of people
aged 75 and over, 66 per cent of people aged 65-74, 60 per cent of people aged
50-64, and 56 per cent of people aged 35-49, compared to 42 per cent of those
aged 16-24 (Table 10).
3.18 People who had no qualifications or had GCSEs or equivalents as their highest
qualifications were more likely than those with a degree or equivalent to have said
that there is more racial prejudice today compared with five years ago. Sixty-three
per cent of people with GCSE grades D-E thought this compared with 49 per cent
of people with a degree or equivalent (Table 11). However, further analysis shows
that once other factors were taken into account (eg age, sex and ethnicity) this
difference does not remain statistically significant.
3.19 People in intermediate occupations and small employers (59%) and those in lower
supervisory, technical and semi-routine occupations (58%) were more likely than
those in the higher or lower managerial and professional group (55%) to think
that there was more racial prejudice today than five years ago (Table 12). Full-time
students (32%) were less likely than those in other socio-economic groups
(between 44% and 59%) to say racial prejudice had increased. However, when
other factors were taken into account in the multivariate analysis, socio-economic
classification did not have a statistically significant impact on perceptions of racial
prejudice.
Characteristics of people who feel there is more racial prejudice than

there was five years ago
3.20 A multivariate analysis was carried out to look at the socio-demographic and
attitudinal factors that predict perceptions of racial prejudice when the impacts
of other variables (eg age, sex, deprivation and ethnicity) are taken into account.
Further methodological detail of this analysis is provided at Annex B.
3.21 The analysis found that people from the following groups, and with the following
characteristics, were more likely to feel there was more racial prejudice today
compared with five years ago:
women (compared to men)
people aged over 25 (compared to people aged 16-24)
practising Muslims (compared to practising Christians)
people with incomes between 5,000 and 9,999 or between 15,000 and
29,999 and people who would not give their income (compared to people
with incomes less than 5,000)
people who do not think their local area was cohesive (compared to those who
thought their local area was cohesive )
people who were fairly, not very or not at all proud of their local area
(compared to people who were very proud)
people who regularly listen to local radio (compared to those that do not)
people who regularly read national newspapers (compared to those that do not).
3.22 People from the following groups, and with the following characteristics, were less
likely to feel there is more racial prejudice today compared with five years ago:
Indian, Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean, Black African, Mixed Race, Chinese and
other ethnic groups (compared to White people)
people living in the West Midlands and London (compared to people living in
the North East)
people living in England in more deprived areas (in the seventh most deprived
decile and above) and people living in England in areas of medium deprivation
(in the fourth decile) (compared to those in England in the least deprived decile)
people who say about a half or less than a half of their friends are from a
different ethnic group (compared to those that say their friends are all from the
same ethnic group)
people who are not very or not at all worried about crime (compared to
people who were very worried).
3.23 The model also tested a number of other variables, which were found to have
no impact (either positive or negative) on peoples views on the amount of racial
Groups perceived to be experiencing more racial prejudice

3.24 People who said that there was more racial prejudice today compared with five
years ago were asked which groups they thought that there was more prejudice
against. People were not given any prompts, to avoid leading their answers, and
interviewers coded their responses into a concealed on-screen list. The list of
groups reported below has been designed to cover the wide range of answers
obtained and so includes racial groups, religious groups and generic groups such
as new immigrants or Eastern Europeans (Figure 11, Table 14).
3.25 As in 2005, the groups that were most often thought to experience more racial
prejudice today were Muslims (44%) and Asian people (39%). The third most
frequently mentioned group in 2007-08 was Eastern Europeans (29%), which
was mentioned by far fewer people in 2005 (12%; Figure 12).
3.26 Groups that were least frequently mentioned as those against whom there is now
more racial prejudice were Chinese, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs and Mixed Race people
(Figure 11).
Figure 11 Groups experiencing more racial prejudice today, compared with five years ago
Muslims
44
Asian people
39
Eastern Europeans
29
Black people
17
New immigrants
17
13
White people
Other groups
Mixed Race people
Sikhs
Jews
Chinese people
Hindus
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Per cent
Base: Core sample, England and Wales, People who say that there is more racial prejudice (5,233)
3.27 Compared with 2005, in 2007-08 the following groups were mentioned by a
greater proportion of people as experiencing more racial prejudice today than
five years ago: Muslims (37% in 2005, 44% in 2007-08), Eastern Europeans
(12%, 29%) and new immigrants (14%, 17%). On the other hand, asylum
seekers or refugees (29% in 2005, 13% in 2007-08) were mentioned by smaller
proportions of people than in 2005 (Figure 12).
Figure 12 Main groups experiencing more racial prejudice today, compared with
five years ago, 2005 and 2007-08
41
39
37
44
Asian people
Muslims
13
16
17
14
17
12
Black people
New immigrants
Eastern Europeans
7
White people
29
29
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
2005
2007-08
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, People who said that there is more racial prejudice (2005: 4,733, 2007-08: 5,233)
3.28 White people, Asian people and those in the Chinese or other ethnic group all
identified Asian people and Muslims as groups that were experiencing more racial
prejudice today (Table 14).
3.29 Asian people were most likely to mention their own group as one which was
experiencing more racial prejudice today 57 per cent did so compared to
38 per cent of White people. Similarly, Black people were most likely to mention
their own group as one which was experiencing more racial prejudice today.
Forty-nine per cent of Black people said that Black people experienced more
racial prejudice than five years ago, compared to 17 per cent of White people.
RELIGION
Chapter 4
Profile of religion
4.1
The Citizenship Survey asked people to identify what their religion was even if they
were not currently practising it. People were then asked whether they considered
themselves to be actively practising their religion. In the reporting of results in this
chapter, these questions are used to distinguish between those who said they had
a religion (have a religious affiliation) and those who were practising their religion.
The former category includes both those who are actively practising their religion,
and those who are not.
4.2
Overall, 84 per cent of people reported having a religion while 16 per cent
reported having no religion. Among those with a religious affiliation, three
quarters (74%) identified as Christian. Much smaller proportions identified as
Muslim (4%), Hindu (1%), Sikh or Buddhist (both less than 0.5%). Three per cent
of people mention an other religion. These proportions are broadly similar to
those found in the 2001 Census9 (Figure 13, Table 15).
Figure 13 Religious affiliation, 2007-08 Citizenship Survey and 2001 Census

Christian
74
78
3
4
Muslim
Hindu 1
1
Sikh *1
Buddhist **
Other religion 1
3
16
16
No religion
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
2001 Census
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, excluding those with missing religion data (9,336)
2001 Census figures exclude the 7.7% of people that did not state their religion. While figures were broadly similar to those found
in the 2007-08 Citizenship Survey, the Citizenship Survey does show a higher proportion of people in the other religion category
(3% compared with 1%). The proportions of Muslims and Sikhs are slightly lower in the survey than in the Census.
Chapter 4 Profile of religion | 39
Profile of religious practice

4.3
Religious practice varied considerably between the different religious groups.

Among people who were Christian, 31 per cent said that they were practising
while 69 per cent said that they were not practising. Among Muslim people,
76 per cent were practising and 24 per cent were not practising. The pattern
for Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists were similar to that for Muslims, with 70 per cent
of Hindus and Sikhs and 66 per cent of Buddhists actively practising their religion.
Among people in the other religion group, 49 per cent said that they were
actively practising (Figure 14, Table 15b).
Figure 14 Proportion of people actively practising, by religion

Muslim
76
Sikh
70
Hindu
70
Buddhist
66
Other religion
49
31
Christian
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales, excluding those with no religion or with missing religion data (12,362)
Religion, by ethnicity
4.4
Seventy-nine per cent of White people in England and Wales said they were
Christians, including 24 per cent who actively practised and 55 per cent who did
not. Three per cent of White people cited an other religion. Seventeen per cent
of White people had no religion (Table 16).
4.5
There was wide variation in religion among Asian people. Overall, 50 per cent of
Asian people said they were Muslims, 26 per cent were Hindus, 12 per cent were
Sikhs, seven per cent were Christians, two per cent were Buddhists and two per cent
had an other religion. Only two per cent of Asian people did not have a religion.
4.6
Forty-seven per cent of Indian people were Hindu, while 24 per cent were Sikh,
16 per cent were Muslim and eight per cent were Christian. One per cent were
Buddhist, three per cent had an other religion, and one per cent had no religion.
4.7
Ninety-six per cent of Pakistani and Bangladeshi people were Muslim. Amongst
Pakistani people, one per cent were Christian, one per cent had an other religion
and one per cent had no religion. Amongst Bangladeshi people, two per cent
were Hindu, one per cent were Christian, and one per cent had an other religion.
4.8
Eighty per cent of Black people were Christians, 12 per cent were Muslims, three
per cent had an other religion and six per cent had no religion. The proportion of
Black people who were Christians was 85 per cent for Black Caribbean people and
76 per cent for Black African people. The proportion of Black people who were
Muslims was two per cent for Black Caribbean people and 20 per cent for Black
African people. Five per cent of Black Caribbean people and one per cent of Black
African people had an other religion. Nine per cent of Black Caribbean people
and three per cent of Black African people had no religion.
4.9
Amongst Mixed Race people, 63 per cent were Christian, nine per cent were
Muslim, two per cent were Hindu, one per cent were Buddhist, six per cent were
in the other religion category, and 18 per cent had no religion.
4.10 Amongst Chinese people, 24 per cent were Christian, 18 per cent were Buddhist,
one per cent were Muslim, three per cent were in the other religion category, and
55 per cent had no religion.
4.11 For people in the Other ethnicity category, 41 per cent were Christian,
30 per cent were Muslim, seven per cent were Hindu, six per cent were Buddhist,
five per cent had an other religion, and 10 per cent had no religion.
4.12 In contrast to White Christians, most Black Christians are actively practising
(57% of Black people were practising Christians, compared to 24% of White
people). The proportion of Black people who were practising Christians was
47 per cent for Black Caribbean people and 64 per cent for Black African people.
Religion, by sex and age

4.13 In general, women were more likely than men to say that they actively practised
their religion (40% of women who had a religion were actively practising
compared with 28% of men). For example, 37 per cent of Christian women said
that they actively practised their religion compared with 25 per cent of Christian
men, 83 per cent of Muslim women said that they actively practised their religion
compared with 70 per cent of Muslim men, and 79 per cent of Hindu women said
that they actively practised their religion compared with 63 per cent of Hindu men
(Table 17).
Chapter 4 Profile of religion | 41
4.14 Overall, people aged 16-29 who had a religion were less likely to actively practise
their religion than those aged 50 or over (28% compared with 39%). This pattern
was also true for Christians (22% compared with 37%), Hindus (65% compared
with 80%), and people in the other religion category (42% compared with 62%).
Amongst Christians, people aged 16-29 were also less likely to actively practise
their religion than those aged 30-49 (22% compared with 28%; Table 18).
Whether people feel able to actively practise their religion

4.15 People who said that they actively practised their religion (34% of those who said
they had a religion) were asked whether they felt able to do so freely in Britain.
Overall, 94 per cent of these people felt that they could while four per cent felt
that they could partly do so, and three per cent felt that they could not practise
their religion freely in Britain (Figure 15).
Figure 15 Proportion of people that actively practise a religion who feel they are
able to practise their religion freely
Partly No
4% 3%
Yes
94%
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, People who actively practise a religion (2,869)
4.16 Ninety-four per cent of practising Christians said they felt able to freely practise
their religion. This was similar to the proportions of practising Hindus and
Buddhists answering in this way (96% and 95% respectively). Practising Sikhs
(98%) were more likely than practising Christians to say that they felt able to
practise their religion freely. Practising Muslims and people who practised other
religions were less likely than Christians to answer in this way, with 88 and
90 per cent of these groups respectively saying so (Table 53).
Whether people feel able to actively practise their religion,

by ethnicity
4.17 There were no statistically significant differences between the different ethnic
subgroups of practising Muslims in terms of the proportion of people saying
that they felt free to practise their religion. Eighty-seven per cent of Pakistani
Muslims who practised their religion answered in this way, as did 85 per cent
of Bangladeshi Muslims, 88 per cent of Indian Muslims and 88 per cent of Black
African Muslims who practised their religion (Table 54).

by country of birth
4.18 Overall, there was no statistically significant difference between the proportions
of people born in the UK and the proportions of people not born in the UK
saying that they felt free to practise their religion. There was also no statistical
difference between these groups for White people and Mixed Race people.
However, Asian and Black people who were born in the UK and actively practised
a religion were less likely to say that they were able to practise it freely than those
within the same ethnic groups who were born outside the UK. Ninety-three per
cent of Asian and Black people who were not born in the UK and who practised
their religion felt that they were free to practise their religion, compared with
86 per cent of Asian people and 89 per cent of Black people who were born in
the UK and who practised their religion (Table 56).

by age and sex
4.19 People aged 50 and over who practised a religion were more likely than people
aged 16-29 to say that they felt able to do so freely. Ninety-six per cent of people
aged 50 and over who practised a religion said that they felt free to do so,
compared with 91 per cent of those aged 16-29 (Table 55).
4.20 The difference in perceptions by age was particularly apparent for Muslims: 94 per
cent of practising Muslims aged 50 and over and 89 per cent of practising Muslims
aged 30-49 felt they could practise their religion freely compared with 83 per cent
of practising Muslims aged 16-29.
4.21 There was no difference in how free people felt to practise their religion according
to sex (Table 57).
Chapter 5 Religious prejudice | 43
RELIGION
Chapter 5
Religious prejudice
Perceptions of the level of religious prejudice in Britain today
5.1
Most people (89%) felt that there was some degree of religious prejudice in Britain
today: 31 per cent thought that there was a lot of religious prejudice, 39 per cent
thought that there was a fair amount and 20 per cent thought that there was
a little. Three per cent thought that there was no religious prejudice while seven
per cent did not know (Figure 16, Table 19).
Figure 16 Perceptions of the level of religious prejudice in Britain

Dont
know/
None cant
say
3% 8%
A lot
31%
A little
20%
A fair amount
39%
5.2
Overall perceptions of religious prejudice are unchanged from 2005 when

89 per cent of people thought that there was some degree of religious prejudice
in Britain. However, the proportion who said that there is a lot of religious
prejudice rose from 24 per cent in 2005 to 31 per cent in 2007-08.
5.3
There were some differences in the proportions of people from different religions
who felt that there was a lot of religious prejudice. Muslims (35%) and people
from other religions (41%) were more likely than Christians (30%) to think that
there was a lot of religious prejudice, while Hindus (18%) were less likely than
Christians (30%) to do so (Table 20). These patterns were reflected in multivariate
analysis which is reported at the end of this section.
5.4
A similar pattern was also observed in 2005: Muslims (33%) were most likely to
say that there was a lot of religious prejudice in Britain and Hindus (20%) were
least likely to say this.
5.5
Among Christians, perceptions of religious prejudice were higher for Black

Caribbean Christians, 38 per cent of whom said that there is a lot of religious
prejudice, than for White Christians, 30 per cent of whom said this. There were
no other notable differences in perceptions of religious prejudice between ethnic
sub-groups for the main religions (Table 19).
5.6
Peoples views about the amount of religious prejudice in Britain did not vary
according to whether or not they actively practised religion, or have no religion
(Table 20). This finding was also the case in 2005.
5.7
There was a strong relationship between country of birth and views about
religious prejudice in Britain, with people born in the UK perceiving greater levels
of prejudice than those born outside the UK. Overall, 31 per cent of people born
in the UK said that there is a lot of religious prejudice compared with 25 per cent
of those born outside the UK. This pattern of difference between UK and non-UK
born people was observed for all ethnic groups. Thirty-eight per cent of Asian
people born in the UK and 47 per cent of Black people born in the UK answered in
this way, compared with 23 per cent and 31 per cent of people from these ethnic
groups not born in the UK. Thirty-one per cent of White people born in the UK felt
that there is a lot of religious prejudice, compared with 26 per cent of White
people not born in the UK (Table 22). These findings are in line with a multivariate
analysis described below.
5.8
There were no statistically significant differences in perceptions of religious

prejudice according to gender, age or socio-economic group (Table 20, Table 23,
Table 24 and Table 25).
Characteristics of people who feel that there is a lot of religious

prejudice in Britain today
5.9
A multivariate analysis was carried out to examine in more detail the associations
between whether people feel that there is a lot of religious prejudice in Britain
and a number of social demographic and other factors. This analysis tested which
factors have a statistically significant association with perceptions of religious
prejudice, over and above the effects of other factors. Further methodological
detail of this analysis is provided at Annex B.
characteristics, were more likely to feel that there is a lot of religious prejudice
today:
people aged 25-64 (compared to people aged 16-24)
Black Caribbean, Black African and Mixed Race people (compared to
White people)
practising and non-practising Muslims and people from other religions,
both practising and non-practising (compared to practising Christians)
people living in England in the third least deprived decile and people in Wales
(compared to people living in England in the least deprived areas)
people who either did not think that their local area was cohesive or did not
know if their local area was cohesive (compared with people who thought their
local area was cohesive)
people who were not at all proud of their local area (compared to people who
were very proud).
likely to feel that there is a lot of religious prejudice in Britain today. Those who:
say that about a half or more than half of their friends have similar incomes
to them (compared to those that say all their friends have similar incomes)
are fairly, not very or not at all worried about crime (compared to those
who are very worried)
perceive there to be low or no anti-social behaviour in their local area
(compared to those that say levels are high).
impact (either positive or negative) on peoples views on the amount of religious
Perceptions of changes in the amount of religious prejudice

in Britain over the last five years
5.13 Respondents were also asked whether they thought there was now more, less or
about the same amount of religious prejudice now compared with five years ago.
Sixty-two per cent of people said that there was now more religious prejudice,
24 per cent said that there was the same amount, six per cent said that there was
less while eight per cent could not say/did not know (Figure 17, Table 26).
Figure 17 Perceptions of religious prejudice in Britain today compared to five years ago
Less
6%
Dont
know/
cant say
8%
Same
amount
24%
More
62%
5.14 Between 2005 and 2007-08, the proportion of people who said that there was
more religious prejudice increased from 52 per cent in 2005 to 62 per cent in
2007-08. This may be a continuation of a trend noted in 2005 whereby the
proportion of people who perceived that there was more prejudice increased from
47 per cent for people interviewed before the 7 July 2005 London bombings to
59 per cent among those interviewed after the bombings.
Variations in perceptions of changes in religious prejudice,

by religion
5.15 Perceptions of changes in the level of religious prejudice over the last five years
differed notably for people from different religions (Table 26). Christians (63%)
were more likely than Hindus (44%), Sikhs (49%) and Buddhists (47%) to think
that religious prejudice had increased. However, there was no statistically
significant difference between Christians (63%) and Muslims (59%), people in
the other religion group (61%) or people without a religion (61%) who felt that
religious prejudice had increased in the last five years.
5.16 The finding that Christians were more likely than Hindus to think that the level
of religious prejudice had increased over the last five years was also observed in
2005 (52% compared with 42%). However there were no statistically significant
differences between the proportions of Christians and people of any other
religions who answered in that way in 2005.
5.17 Between 2005 and 2007-08 the proportion of Christians who felt that there was
more religious prejudice compared to five years ago rose from 42 per cent to
52 per cent while the proportion of people with no religion who answered in
this way rose from 52 per cent to 61 per cent. There were no other statistically
significant differences between 2005 and 2007-08 for any other religious group.
5.18 Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs who did not actively practise their religion were more
likely than people of these religions who were actively practising to say that
religious prejudice has increased. For example, 68 per cent of Muslims who did
not actively practise their religion said that there is more religious prejudice now,
compared with 57 per cent of practising Muslims. This difference was not seen
among Christians.
5.19 Perceptions of change in the amount of religious prejudice did not vary according
to whether people had a religion or not.
Variations in perceptions of changes in religious prejudice, by

ethnicity and ethno-religious group
5.20 There were some notable differences in views about changes in the level of
religious prejudice according to ethnic group. Sixty-three per cent of White people
felt that there was more religious prejudice today than five years ago. This was
higher than the proportions of Indian people (47%), Bangladeshi people (54%),
Black African people (49%), Chinese people (36%) and people of other ethnic
groups (38%) who felt this way (Table 29).
5.21 Putting religion and ethnicity together, 63 per cent of White Christians believed
that religious prejudice had increased in the past five years. This proportion was
higher than for Black African Christians (50%), Black African Muslims (46%),
Bangladeshi Muslims (54%), Indian Hindus (43%) and Indian Sikhs (50%).
However, there was no statistically significant difference between the proportion
of White Christians (63%) who answered this way and the proportions of Black
Caribbean Christians (61%), Pakistani Muslims (62%) or Indian Muslims (64%;
Figure 18, Table 30).
Figure 18 Perceptions of religious prejudice today, compared with five years ago,
by ethno-religious groups
White Christian
63
Black Caribbean Christian
61
11
Black African Christian
50
Pakistani Muslim
9
62
Bangladeshi Muslim
54
Indian Muslim
11
64
Black African Muslim
46
Hindu Indian
12
43
Sikh Indian
13
50
Other religions and ethnic groups
10
57
No religion
61
All
62
20
8
5
40
60
80
Per cent
More racial prejudice
Less religious prejudice
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (14,080); All figures based on core sample, England and Wales (9,331)
100
Variations in perceptions of changes in religious prejudice, by sex,

age, country of birth and socio-economic group
5.22 Men were more likely than women to say that there was more religious prejudice
today than five years ago (64% compared with 59%). This was also the case in
2005. Although this gender difference was observed among Christians (66% of
men compared with 59% of women), it was not for other religion groups
(Table 26).
5.23 Forty-nine per cent of people aged 16-24 felt that there was more religious
prejudice today than five years ago, making this age group less likely than all other
age groups (except those aged 75 and over 53%) to think this. Sixty per cent of
people aged 25-34, 65 per cent of those aged 35-49, 67 per cent of people aged
50-64 and 66 per cent of people aged 65-74 thought that religious prejudice had
increased. This pattern was also observed in 2005 (Table 27).
5.24 There was a strong association between country of birth and views on religious
prejudice. Just as people who were born in the UK were more likely than those
born outside the UK to believe that there was a lot of religious prejudice in Britain
today, they were also more likely to think that religious prejudice had increased in
the past five years (64% of people born in the UK, compared with 50% of people
not born in the UK).This trend was observed for all ethnic groups. Sixty-three per
cent of White people born in the UK thought religious prejudice had increased
compared with 54 per cent of White people not born in the UK; 66 per cent
compared with 45 per cent amongst Asian people, 71 per cent compared with
47 per cent for Black people, 69 per cent compared to 46 per cent for Mixed Race
people, and 59 per cent compared with 32 per cent for Chinese people and
people from an Other ethnic group (Table 31).
5.25 People in higher or lower managerial and professional occupations had more
negative views about religious prejudice than people in all other socio-economic
groups except for those in intermediate occupations and small employers
(69% and 66% of people in these groups felt that religious prejudice had
increased since five years ago). Fifty-eight per cent of those in lower supervisory,
technical and semi-routine occupations, 52 per cent of those in routine
occupations and 47 per cent of those who had never worked or were long-term
unemployed said this. This pattern was also observed in 2005 (Table 32).
Groups experiencing more religious prejudice

5.26 People who said that there was now more religious prejudice than five years ago
were asked which groups they felt there was more prejudice against. Most people
(89%) felt that religious prejudice had increased towards Muslims. Other groups
were only mentioned by a minority of people (Figure 19).
Figure 19 Groups that would experience more religious prejudice now than five years ago
Muslims
89
Christians
11
Religions generally
Jews
Sikhs
Hindus
Another group
Roman Catholics
Anglicans/Church of England 1
Protestants 1
Buddhists 1
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% respondents
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, People who said there was more religious prejudice today than five years ago (5,636)
5.27 Ninety-seven per cent of Muslims, 96 per cent of Sikhs and 94 per cent of Hindus
thought that religious prejudice against Muslims had increased. Meanwhile,
89 per cent of Christians, and similar proportions of other religious groups and
of people with no religion also said that the increase in religious prejudice was
associated with Muslims. Among people who had a religion, those who practised
their religion were less likely than those who did not to identify Muslims as a
group experiencing increased religious prejudice (87% compared with 90%).
5.28 Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs were more likely than people of other religions to
identify their own religious group as one that there was more religious prejudice
against compared with five years ago. For example, 97 per cent of Muslims cited
their own religious group as experiencing more religious prejudice compared with
89 per cent of people overall. Twelve per cent of Hindus mentioned their own
religious group compared with four per cent of people overall. Seventeen per cent
of Sikhs mentioned their own religious group compared with four per cent of
people overall (Table 33).
5.29 Indian (95%) and Pakistani (96%) people were more likely than White (89%)
people to say that there was more religious prejudice against Muslims. Other
ethnic groups did not differ in their views from White people. For example,
91 per cent of Black Caribbean people, 89 per cent of Black African people, and
92 per cent of Mixed Race people thought that religious prejudice against Muslims
had increased (Table 34).
RELIGION
Chapter 6
Perceptions of the extent to which the
Government protects the rights of different
religious groups
6.1
For the first time in 2007-08, people were asked about the extent to which they
thought the Government protected the rights of people belonging to different
religions. Peoples views were quite evenly divided on this issue: 35 per cent said
that Government gives religious rights the right amount of protection, 26 per cent
said that it gives them too much protection and 30 per cent said that it gives them
too little protection; eight per cent said that they did not know (Figure 20,
Table 35).
Figure 20 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights
of people belonging to different religions
Dont
know/
cant say
8%
Too little
30%
Too much
26%
The right amount

35%
Chapter 6 Perceptions of the extent to which the Government protects the rights of different religious groups | 53
Views about the protection of religious rights, by religion and

ethnicity
6.2
Twenty-nine per cent of Christians felt that the Government was doing too little
to protect religious rights. Muslims (46%) and people with other religions (36%)
were more likely than Christians (29%) to feel this way. Meanwhile, Hindus (24%)
were less likely than Christians to think this. There were no statistically significant
differences between the proportions of Sikhs (31%) and people without a religion
(31%) who felt this way and the proportion of Christians.
6.3
Christians who actively practised their religion (32%) were more likely than those
who were not practising their religion (28%) to say that the Government protects
religious rights too little. People who actively practised an other religion (41%)
were also more likely than those who did not practise their religion (33%) to say
this. However, among Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs, there was no statistically
significant difference between the views of those who were practising and those
who were not practising on whether the Government was doing too little to
protect religious rights (Table 38).
6.4
Overall, the proportion of people who felt that the Government gave too little
protection to religious rights was higher than the proportion saying that it gave
too much protection (30% compared with 25%). This balance of opinion was
reflected for each of the religious groups, although the proportions differed
considerably. For Christians, 29 per cent said that the Government gave too little
protection while 28 per cent said that it gave too much protection. In contrast,
46 per cent of Muslims said the Government gave too little protection compared
with three per cent that said it gave too much protection. Twenty-four per cent
of Hindus and 31 per cent of Sikhs said that the Government gave too little
protection to religious rights compared with 12 per cent of each group who said
that it gave too much. Similar patterns of answers were seen for Buddhists (22%
compared with 6%) and people of an other religion (36% compared with 20%).
6.5
Christians were more likely than all other religious groups to say that the
Government was doing too much to protect religious rights: 28 per cent of
Christians said this compared with 12 per cent of Hindus and Sikhs, six per cent of
Buddhists, three per cent of Muslims and 20 per cent of people of an other religion.
6.6
Multivariate analysis (described below) found that when other characteristics were
taken into account, including ethnic group, Muslims were more likely than practising
Christians to say that there is too little protection of religious rights, while nonpractising Christians were less likely than practising Christians to say this (Table 38).
6.7
White people were generally more likely than ethnic minority people to think that
the Government was doing too little to protect the rights of people belonging
to different religions: 30 per cent of White people said this compared with
50 per cent of Pakistani people, 42 per cent of Bangladeshi people, 45 per cent
of Black Caribbean people, 36 per cent of Black African people and 46 per cent
of Mixed Race people. In contrast the proportions of Indian (29%) and Chinese
(29%) people who felt that the Government did too little to protect religious
rights was similar to that for White people (30%), while the proportion of people
in an other ethnic group who felt this was lower (24%). White people were more
likely than all other ethnic groups to say that the Government did too much to
protect religious rights (Table 39).
6.8
A multivariate analysis (described below) found that when other characteristics

were taken into account, including religion, Black Caribbean or Mixed Race people
were more likely than White people to think that the Government was doing too
little to protect religious rights.
6.9
As with perceptions of religious prejudice, people who were born in the UK had
more negative views on this issue than people who were not born in the UK.
Among people who were born in the UK, 31 per cent said that there was too
little protection of religious rights while 28 per cent said there was too much and
34 per cent said there was the right amount. Among people who were not born
in the UK, 28 per cent said that there was too little protection of religious rights
while 15 per cent said there was too much and 46 per cent said there was the
right amount. Among all ethnic groups, people born in the UK were more likely
than people who were born elsewhere to say that there is too little protection of
religious rights (Table 41).
Variations in views about the protection of religious rights, by sex,

age and socio-economic group
6.10 Men had more positive views about the Governments protection of religious
rights than women: 29 per cent of men said that the level of protection is too
little compared with 32 per cent of women (Table 35).
6.11 Forty-two per cent of people aged 16-24 said that the Government gave too little
protection to religious rights, which was a higher proportion than for all other age
groups. Conversely, 17 per cent of people aged 16-24 said that the Government
gave too much protection to religious rights, which was a lower proportion than
for all other age groups (Table 36).
6.12 The proportion of people in higher or lower managerial and professional

occupations thought that the Government gives too little protection to religious
rights (28%) was higher than for people in lower supervisory, technical and semiroutine occupations (34%), people who had never worked or were long-term
unemployed (35%) and full-time students (38%). (Table 37). However, when other
factors were controlled for in the multivariate analysis, socio-economic classification
had no statistically significant impact on peoples views on this question.
Characteristics of people who feel that the Government is doing too

little to protect peoples religious rights
6.13 A multivariate analysis was carried out to examine in more detail the associations
between whether people feel that the Government is doing too little to protect
peoples religious rights and a number of social demographic and other factors.
This analysis identifies those factors with a statistically significant association with
views about religious rights, over and above the effects of other factors. Further
methodological detail of this analysis is provided at Annex B.
characteristics, were more likely to feel that the Government is doing too little to
protect peoples religious rights:
women (compared with men)
people aged 16-24 years (compared to people aged 25 or over)
Black Caribbean and Mixed Race people (compared to White people)
practising and non-practising Muslims (compared to practising Christians)
people with a limiting long-term illness or disability (compared to people without)
people living in the West Midlands and South East (compared to those living in
the North East)
people did not think that their local area was cohesive (compared to those who
did think that their local area was cohesive)
people who feel very unsafe walking alone in their neighbourhood at night
(compared to people who feel very safe).
6.15 People from the following groups, and with the following characteristics, were
less likely to feel that the Government is doing too little to protect peoples
religious rights:
non-practising Christians (compared to practising Christians)
people who are fairly, not very or not at all worried about crime (compared
to those who are very worried).
impact (either positive or negative) on peoples views on the amount of religious
Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be

protected too much and too little
6.17 People who said that religious rights were protected either too much or too
little by the Government were asked which religious group or groups they were
thinking of.
6.18 Muslims were most commonly mentioned by both those who thought the
Government did too little and too much to protect religious rights: 84 per cent
of people who thought that religious rights were protected too much specified
Muslims, while 60 per cent of those who said that religious rights were protected
too little mentioned Muslims (Figure 21).
Figure 21 Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much
and too little
60
Muslims
Any other
16
Christians (general)
Sikhs
Jews
5
5
Hindus
Anglicans/Church or England 1
21
21
Roman Catholics
84
Protestants 1 3
Buddhist 23
20
40
60
Per cent
Too little
Too much
Base: Core sample, England & Wales (too little: 2,632; too much: 2,399)
80
100
Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too little

6.19 After Muslims, the second most commonly mentioned group whose rights people
felt to be protected too little was Christians. Twenty-one per cent of people who
felt that religious rights were protected too little mentioned Christians (in general)
while six per cent mentioned Catholics, four per cent mentioned Anglicans and
three per cent mentioned Protestants.
6.20 After Muslims and Christians, the next most commonly mentioned groups perceived
as having their religious rights protected too little were Hindus, Sikhs and Jews, each
of which were mentioned by five per cent of people who felt that religious rights
were protected too little. Buddhists were mentioned by two per cent of this group.
Twenty-one per cent mentioned miscellaneous other religions (Table 43).
6.21 Ninety-two per cent of Muslims who thought that religious rights are protected
too little said that they were thinking of the rights of Muslims. Few Muslims
mentioned other religious groups at this question: five per cent of Muslims
mentioned Hindus, four per cent mentioned Sikhs and four per cent mentioned
Jews (Table 42).
6.22 Among Christians, Hindus and Sikhs who felt that religious rights were protected
too little, 55 per cent, 68 per cent and 67 per cent respectively mentioned Muslims
as a group they were thinking of while much smaller proportions mentioned their
own religion (25% of Christians, 23% of Hindus and 30% of Sikhs).
6.23 Amongst White people who thought that religious rights were protected too little,
57 per cent mentioned Muslims. Muslims were also mentioned by 82 per cent of
Asian people, by 75 per cent of Black people and by 72 per cent of Mixed Race
people (Table 43).
6.24 Among White, Black and Mixed Race people who said that religious rights were
protected too little, Christians were the second most commonly cited group
(mentioned by 23% of White people, 19% of Black people and 18% of Mixed
Race people).
6.25 Amongst people aged 16-24 who said that religious rights were protected too
little, 67 per cent mentioned Muslims. A variety of other religious groups were also
mentioned, for example, Christians (15%), Sikhs (10%), Hindus (9%), and Jews
(8%). In contrast, amongst older people (aged 65 and over) who said that religious
rights were protected too little, there were fewer mentions of Muslims (50%),
Sikhs (2%), Hindus (1%), and Jews (2%) than for the younger age group but more
mentions of Christians (26%; Table 44).
Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much

6.26 Among Christians who said that religious rights were protected too much,
86 per cent said they were thinking of Muslims; eight per cent mentioned Hindus
and seven per cent mentioned Sikhs (Table 42).
6.27 The proportion of Hindus (12%), Sikhs (12%) and Muslims (3%) who said that
religious rights were protected too much by the Government was much lower
than for Christians (28%). Among Hindus who thought that the Government was
doing too much to protect religious rights, 76 per cent were thinking of Muslims.
Among Sikhs, 88 per cent thought this while among Muslims, 67 per cent
thought this.
6.28 Among those who felt that religious rights were protected too much, people with
a religion (86%) were more likely than those without a religion (75%) to specify
Muslims. In contrast, those who had a religion were less likely to specify Christians
or people of other religions in this context (3% and 14% respectively) than those
who did not have a religion (9% and 25% respectively) (Table 42).
6.29 Young people (aged 16-24 years) who said that religious rights were protected
too much were more likely than people aged 65 and over who had the same views
to mention other non-Christian religious groups in addition to, or instead of,
Muslims. For example, Hindus and Sikhs were mentioned by 12 per cent of those
aged 16-24 who thought that religious rights were protected too much; six per
cent and four per cent respectively of those aged over 65 who thought this.
Similarly, Buddhists and Jews were mentioned by six per cent and five per cent
of those aged 16-24 who thought that religious rights were protected too much;
but by only one per cent of people aged over 65 who thought this (Table 44).
Chapter 7 Religious discrimination | 59
RELIGION
Chapter 7
Religious discrimination
7.1
The Citizenship Survey asked people whether, as a member of the public using
a range of services at both local and national level, they would expect to be
discriminated against by these services because of their religion. The organisations
were as follows:
a:
local doctors surgery
local hospital
local school
council housing department or housing association
local council
private landlord or letting agent
and the:
courts
Crown Prosecution Service
police
immigration authorities
Prison Service
Probation Service.
7.2
Three per cent of people said that they had been discriminated against because of
their religion by one or more of the organisations. This represents a small increase
since 2005 (2%; Table 45).
7.3
Two per cent of Christians said that they had been discriminated against by one or
more of the organisations because of their religion. This proportion is lower than
that for people of all other religions with the exception of Buddhists. Meanwhile,
16 per cent of Muslims, six per cent of Hindus, seven per cent of Sikhs and people
with other religions said that they had been discriminated against because of
their religion. When other factors were taken into account, Muslims, Hindus and
people with other religions were still more likely to feel they had been
discriminated against (see multivariate analysis below).
7.4
Among the different ethnic subgroups of Muslims, Bangladeshi Muslims (21%)

and Pakistani Muslims (16%) were more likely than Indian Muslims (11%) to
report religious discrimination. There was no statistically significant difference
between the proportion of Indian Muslims (11%) and the proportion of Black
African Muslims thinking this (12%; Table 47).
7.5
Although the proportion of Indian Muslims reporting religious discrimination

was less than that for Bangladeshi and Pakistani Muslims, it was higher than the
proportion of either Indian Hindus or Indian Sikhs (both 6%).
7.6
Similarly, although the proportion of Black African Muslims who reported religious
discrimination was lower than for Pakistani or Bangladeshi Muslims, it was higher
than the proportion of Black African Christians who did so (6%).
7.7
People who actively practised their religion (4%) were more likely to report
religious discrimination than those who did not actively practise their religion
(3%; Table 45). In particular, practising Muslims (18%) were more likely than
non-practising Muslims (9%) to report discrimination. There was no difference
between practising and non-practising Christians (2% for both groups; Table 45).
7.8
Overall, men and women were equally likely to have experienced religious
discrimination by one or more of the public service organisations listed
(3%; Table 48). For people who were Christian, Muslim or Hindu the levels
of experience of religious discrimination were similar between the sexes.
Amongst Sikhs, men were more likely to say that they had experienced religious
discrimination than women (10% compared with 5%). For people in the other
religion category, women reported higher levels of discrimination than men
(12% compared with 2%) but this finding is difficult to interpret as the group
includes a range of different religions. Similarly, amongst people with no religion,
more women (5%) than men (2%) reported experiencing religious discrimination.
7.9
Muslim men who practised their religion (20%) were more likely than those who
were not practising (8%) to report experience of religious discrimination by one
or more of the organisations. However, there was no statistically significant
difference in the proportions reporting discrimination between practising and
non-practising Muslim women.
7.10 Young people aged 16-29 (5%) were more likely to have experienced religious
discrimination than people aged 50 and over (2%). This pattern was observed
for Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and people with no religion (Table 49). However,
when other factors (eg ethnicity and sex) were controlled age did not have a
statistically significant impact on peoples experiences of religious prejudice.
7.11 The proportion of people born in the UK who said they had experienced religious
discrimination by one or more of the organisations was lower than that of those
born outside the UK (3% compared with 5%) (Table 50). However, once other
factors were controlled for in multivariate analysis (see below), people born in the
UK were more likely than those born outside the UK to say they had experienced
religious discrimination.
Characteristics of people who feel that they have been discriminated

against because of their religion, by one or more of the public service
organisations
7.12 A multivariate analysis was carried out to examine in more detail the sociodemographic and attitudinal factors that predict peoples perceptions of religious
discrimination by public service organisations when the impact of other factors are
taken into account. Further methodological detail is provided at Annex B.
7.13 The analysis found that people from the following groups, and with the following
characteristics, were more likely to feel that they had been discriminated against
because of their religion by one or more of the public service organisations:
Black Caribbean and Chinese people (compared to White people)
practising and non-practising Muslims, practising Hindus, non-practising
Buddhists and those practising an other religion (compared to practising
Christians)
and people:
who rent their homes (compared to owner occupiers)
living in the 20 per cent of wards with the highest ethnic density (compared to
those living in wards with the lowest ethnic density)
who do not think that their local area is cohesive (compared to those who think
their local area is cohesive)
who are not very or not at all proud of their local area (compared to people
who are very proud)
who were very worried about crime (compared to those that were not at all
worried)
who regularly listen to local radio (compared to those who do not).
likely to feel that they had been discriminated against because of their religion by
one or more of the public service organisations:
practising Buddhists (compared to practising Christians).
7.15 The model also tested a number of other variables, which were found to have
no impact (either positive or negative) on whether people felt they had been
discriminated against because of their religion. These variables are listed in Annex B.
Organisations perceived to be discriminatory on the basis

of religion
7.16 Of the 12 organisations, one per cent of people mentioned each of the following:
a local school, a council housing department or housing association, the police
and a local doctors surgery. The remaining eight organisations were mentioned
by less than half a per cent of people (Table 51).
7.17 There were variations according to religion. Among Christians, two per cent of
whom reported any experience of discrimination because of their religion, a local
school was mentioned by more than one per cent.
7.18 In contrast, among Muslims, 16 per cent of whom reported having experienced
religious discrimination, the police were mentioned by eight per cent, a local
doctors surgery by five per cent, a local hospital by four per cent, a council
housing department or housing association by four per cent and several of the
other organisation types by more than one per cent.
7.19 Among Hindus, six per cent of whom reported any experience of religious
discrimination, a local school was mentioned by two per cent of people and
several of the other organisation types by one per cent.
7.20 Among Sikhs, seven per cent of whom reported any experience of religious
discrimination, the police and a local hospital were mentioned by three per cent of
people, a local doctors surgery was mentioned by two per cent, and a few other
organisations types were mentioned by one per cent.
7.21 Amongst people with no religion, one per cent of people reported experience of
religious discrimination from a local school and a council housing department or
housing association, while other organisations were mentioned by less than half
a per cent.
7.22 The previous section established that 16 and 21 per cent respectively of Pakistani
and Bangladeshi Muslims reported religious discrimination. Amongst these
groups, the police were reported as discriminatory by eight and 12 per cent
respectively. Four per cent of Pakistani Muslims mentioned a local school, while
three per cent mentioned a local doctors surgery and a local hospital, and
two per cent a council housing department or housing association and a local
council. A local doctors surgery was reported by seven per cent of Bangladeshi
Muslims, while a local hospital and a local school were reported by six per cent of
this group and a council housing department or housing association and a local
council by five per cent.
7.23 Overall, one per cent of people who practised their religion reported experience of
discrimination because of their religion by a local doctors surgery, a local hospital,
a local school, a council housing department or housing association, and the
police. For people who did not practise their religion, only a local school was
mentioned by one per cent of people.
7.24 Muslims who practised their religion reported more religious discrimination than
non-practising Muslims. For example: nine per cent of practising Muslims
mentioned the police, compared to six per cent of non-practising Muslims; six per
cent of practising Muslims mentioned a local doctors surgery as discriminatory,
compared with one per cent of non-practising Muslims; five per cent of practising
Muslims mentioned a local hospital and a council housing department or housing
association, compared with one and less than 0.5 per cent of non-practising
Muslims. Amongst Hindus, two per cent of practising Hindus mentioned the police,
as did one per cent of non-practising Hindus.
RELIGION
Chapter 8
How religion affects day-to-day life
8.1
Citizenship Survey respondents who had a religious affiliation were also asked
to what extent they felt that it affected four aspects of their day-to-day life:
where they live
where they work
who their friends are
what school they send (or sent or would send) their children to.
8.2
Across all religions, most people did not think that their religion affected these
aspects of their life. Overall, 17 per cent of people with a religion said that it
affected where they lived, 10 per cent said it affected where they worked and
14 per cent said it affected who their friends were. A larger proportion (32%)
said that their religion affected where they would send their children to school
Figure 23 Proportion of people who say that their religion affects certain aspects
of their day-to-day life
100
Per cent
80
60
40
20
33
17
10
14
0
Where you live
Where you work
Who your friends are
What school you would

send your children to
Base: Core sample, England & Wales, Respondents who have a religion (Where you live: 7,504; Where you work: 5,509;
Who your friends are: 7,543; What school: 6,187)
Chapter 8 How religion affects day-to-day life | 65
8.3
Few Christians said that their religion affected where they lived (15% of Christians
said this), where they worked (9%) or who their friends were (13%). However,
33 per cent of Christians said that their religion affected what school they would
send their children to. This proportion was higher than for Muslims (26%), Hindus
(14%), Sikhs (10%) and Buddhists (7%; Table 63, Figure 27).
8.4
The proportion of Christians who said that their religion affects where they work
(9%) was lower than for Muslims (25%), Hindus (14%), Buddhists (18%) and
people of other religions (20%; Figure 25).
8.5
The proportion of Christians who said that their religion affected who their friends
were (13%) was lower than for Muslims (30%), Hindus (18%), Sikhs (20%) and
people of other religions (23%; Figure 26).
8.6
Similarly, a lower proportion of Christians said that their religion affected where
they lived. Fifteen per cent of Christians said this compared with 40 per cent of
Muslims, 30 per cent of Hindus, 29 per cent of Sikhs, 27 per cent of Buddhists
and 26 per cent of people with an other religion; Figure 24).
Figure 24 Proportion of people who feel that religion affects where they live, by religion
Muslim
18
Hindu
13
Sikh
11
Buddhist
18
17
Other religion
19
14
Christian 4
22
12
11
40
30
29
27
26
15
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales, Respondents who have a religion (Christian: 8,453; Muslim: 1,700; Hindu: 728;
Sikh: 330; Buddhist: 119; Other religion: 418)
Note: Figures at the end of each row is the combined figure for Tend to agree and Strongly agree.
In some cases this may appear larger or smaller than expected due to rounding.
Figure 25 Proportion of people who feel that religion affects where they work, by religion
Muslim
Other religion
17
25
12
Buddhist 5
20
13
Hindu 4
Sikh 4
18
10
14
13
Christian 3 6 9
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
Figure 26 Proportion of people who feel that religion affects who their friends are, by religion
Muslim
11
Other religion
20
15
Sikh 5
14
Buddhist 5
10
Christian 3
23
14
Hindu 4
10
30
20
18
15
13
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
Chapter 8 How religion affects day-to-day life | 67
Figure 27 Proportion of people who feel that religion affects what school they
would send their children to, by religion
Christian
12
Other religion
21
17
Muslim
14
Hindu 4
18
10
Sikh 2 8
33
31
26
14
10
Buddhist 2 5 7
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
8.7
People who actively practised their religion were more likely to say that it affected
aspects of their day-to-day life than people of the same religion who were not
practising. For example, 25 per cent of practising Christians and 44 per cent of
practising Muslims said that their religion affects where they lived compared
with 10 per cent of non-practising Christians and 27 per cent of non-practising
Muslims. This pattern was observed for all aspects of day-to-day life listed above
(Table 58).
How religion affects peoples day-to-day life, by ethnicity, country of

birth, sex, age and socio-economic group
8.8
Black Caribbean Christians and Black African Christians were more likely than
White Christians to say that their religion affects where they lived (22% and 30%
of Black Caribbean and Black African Christians said this, compared with 14% of
White Christians), where they worked (16% and 22% compared with 8%) and
who their friends were (23% and 31% compared with 12%). Black African
Christians, but not Black Caribbean Christians, were more likely than White
Christians to say that their religion affects which school they would send their
children to (43% of Black African Christians said this, compared with 33% of
White Christians).
8.9
Among Muslims, Pakistani Muslims were less likely than Bangladeshi Muslims or
Indian Muslims to say that their religion affected where they lived (38% compared
with 47% and 49% respectively) and what school they would send their children
to (21% compared with 32% and 28% respectively). Pakistani Muslims were
also less likely than Indian Muslims to say that their religion affected where they
worked (25% compared with 35%). The views of Black African Muslims on these
questions were similar to those of Pakistani Muslims (Table 59).
8.10 People who had a religion and were born outside the UK were more likely than
those who were born in the UK to say that their religion affected where they lived
(26% compared with 15%), where they worked (15% compared with 9%) and
who their friends were (21% compared with 13%). However, people who had a
religion and were born outside the UK were no more likely than those born in the
UK to say that their religion affects which school they would send their children to
(Table 60).
8.11 There was no statistically significant difference between the sexes in views about
how religion affects peoples day-to-day life (Table 61).
8.12 Among the different age groups, there were no differences in the proportions of
people saying that religion affects where they live or which school they send (or
sent or would send) their children to. However, younger people were more likely
than older people to say that their religion affected where they worked (13% of
those aged 16-29, 10% of people aged 30-49 and 9% of people aged 50 or over)
and who their friends were (17% of those aged 16-29, 13% of people aged
30-49 and 14% of people aged 50 or over; Table 63).
8.13 Among the different socio-economic groups, a higher proportion of those who
had never worked or were long-term unemployed and full-time students said that
their religion affected where they lived and who their friends were, compared with
those in higher or lower managerial and professional occupations (24% and 27%
respectively compared with 17% for where they lived; 27% and 23% respectively
compared with 14% for who their friends were). People who had never worked or
were long-term unemployed were also more likely than those in higher or lower
managerial and professional occupations to say that their religion affected where
they worked (21% compared with 10%).
8.14 People in lower supervisory, technical and semi-routine occupations and people in
routine occupations were less likely than those in higher or lower managerial and
professional occupations to say that their religion affected where they would send
their children to school (30% and 26% respectively, compared with 35%;
Table 62).
Chapter 9 Racial and religious harassment and fear of attack | 69
RELIGION
Chapter 9
Racial and religious harassment and fear of
attack
Perceptions of racial or religious harassment in the local area
9.1
In 2007-08, the Citizenship Survey contained a series of questions about things

that can cause problems for people in their local area. Among factors such as
vandalism or noise, people were asked how much of a problem racial or religious
harassment was in their local area. The local area was defined as within 15-20
minutes walking distance. In answering the question, people were also asked to
focus on their perceptions of the area as a whole, rather than just focusing on
personal experience. Since these questions were introduced to the Citizenship
Survey in 2007-08 no comparisons with previous years can be made10.
9.2
Sixty-one per cent of people in England said that racial or religious harassment was
not a problem at all in their local area, 30 per cent said that it was not a very big
problem, six per cent said that it was a fairly big problem and two per cent said
that it was a very big problem (Figure 28, Table 65).
10
In order to facilitate the measurement of policy outcomes, figures quoted for perceptions of racial and religious harassment at the
start of this section, including Figure 28, exclude Wales. However, as there is generally little difference between the proportions for
England only compared with England and Wales, figures in the rest of this section have been based on the England and Wales
sample.
Figure 28 Proportion of people saying how much of a problem racial or religious

harassment is in the local area
Not a very
big problem
30%
Not a
problem at all
61%
Fairly big problem
30%
Very big problem
2%
Base: Core sample, England (8,101)
Note: Figures do not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Perceptions of racial or religious harassment in the local area, by

ethnicity
9.3
Seven per cent of White people thought racial or religious harassment was a fairly
or very big problem in their local area. This was lower than the proportion of
people from all other ethnic groups who said this except for Chinese people for
whom the proportion was similar to White people (6%). The highest level of
people answering in this way, compared with White people, was amongst Mixed
Race people, 25 per cent of whom said this. Twenty-four per cent of Bangladeshi
people, 19 per cent of Pakistani people and 12 per cent of Indian people perceived
racial or religious harassment to be a fairly or very big problem, as did 17 per cent
of Black African people and 13 per cent of Black Caribbean people (Table 64).
Figure 29 Perceptions of racial or religious harassment, by ethnicity

Mixed Race
25
75
Asian
16
84
Black
16
84
Chinese or other
12
88
White
93
All
92
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
A very big or a fairly big problem
Not a very big or not a problem at all
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (13,089); All figure based on core sample, England & Wales (8,590)
9.4
Perceptions of racial or religious harassment also varied by country of birth. Asian,

Black and Mixed Race people who were born in the UK were more likely to express
negative views on this issue than people from the same ethnic groups who were
born elsewhere. Twenty-two per cent of UK-born Asian people said that
harassment was a very or fairly big problem compared with 13 per cent of Asian
people not born in the UK. Among Black people, 18 per cent of those born in the
UK said that harassment was a very big or fairly big problem compared with 14
per cent of those born outside the UK. Twenty-seven per cent of Mixed Race
people born in the UK gave this answer, compared with 20 per cent of Mixed Race
people who were not born in the UK (Figure 30, Table 66).
9.5
In contrast, there was no statistically significant difference in perceptions of

harassment between UK-born White people and non-UK born White people. Seven
per cent of White people who were born in the UK and nine per cent of White
people who were born outside the UK said that it is a very or fairly big problem.
Figure 30 Proportion of people saying that racial or religious harassment is a very big problem
or a fairly big problem in their local area, by ethnicity and country of birth
Mixed Race
Asian
13
Black
14
13
11
Chinese or other
7
White
20
22
27
18
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (13,070)
Perceptions of racial or religious harassment in the local area,

by religion and ethno-religious group
9.6
Muslims (19%) were more likely than Christians (6%) to think that racial or
religious harassment was a very or fairly big problem in their local area (Table 68).
9.7
Among Muslims, 24 per cent of Pakistani Muslims, 20 per cent of Black African
Muslims, 19 per cent of Bangladeshi Muslims and 15 per cent of Indian Muslims
said that racial or religious harassment was a very or fairly big problem in their
local area. However, low respondent numbers among these ethno-religious groups
means that these apparent differences are not statistically significant.
9.8
Black Caribbean Christians (12%) and Black African Christians (16%) were more
likely than White Christians (6%) to think that racial or religious harassment was
a very or fairly big problem in their local area.
9.9
Indian Sikhs (13%) and Indian Hindus (10%) were also more likely to report racial
or religious harassment than White Christians (6%).
Perceptions of racial or religious harassment in the local area, by age,

sex and socio-economic group
9.10 People aged 16-29 (16%) were more likely than those aged 30-49 (9%) and 50
and over (4%) to think that racial or religious prejudice was a very or fairly big
problem in their local area. This trend was seen for all ethnic groups. Amongst
White people, 13 per cent of people aged 16-29 answered in this way compared
with eight per cent of people aged 30-49 and four per cent of people aged 50 or
over. Amongst Asian people, these figures were 19 per cent of people aged 16-29,
16 per cent for those aged 30-49 and 10 per cent for those aged 50 or over, while
for Black people they were 20 per cent, 14 per cent and 14 per cent respectively
(Table 64).
9.11 Variations between male and female perceptions of racial or religious harassment
were also observed. Overall, women (10%) were more likely than men (7%) to
think that racial or religious harassment was a very or fairly big problem. This
pattern was observed amongst White and Asian people. Apparent differences by
sex for other ethnic groups were not found to be statistically significant (Figure 31,
Table 70).
Figure 31 Proportion of people saying that racial or religious harassment is a very big
problem or a fairly big problem in their local area, by ethnicity and sex
23
Mixed Race
Bangladeshi
20
Pakistani
20
18
15
Black Caribbean
11
13
Black African
9
Indian
6
7
5
Chinese
White
21
15
14
All
28

7
27
18
10
20
40
60
80
Per cent
Men
Women
Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (12,779); All figure based on core sample, England & Wales (8,588)
100
9.12 Six per cent of people in managerial and professional occupations and people in
intermediate positions and small employers said that racial or religious harassment
was a very or fairly big problem in their local area. The proportions of people in
other socio-economic groups who gave this answer were higher, at 10 per cent for
people in lower supervisory, technical and semi-routine occupations, 11 per cent
for those in routine occupations, 14 per cent for those who had never worked or
were long-term unemployed, and 19 per cent for full-time students (Figure 32,
Table 72).
Figure 32 Proportion of people saying that racial or religious harassment is a very
big problem or a fairly big problem in their local area, by socio-economic
classification
Higher/lower managerial
and professions
Intermediate occupations/
small employers
Lower supervisory and technical/
semi-routine occupations
Routine occupations
94
94
10
90
11
89
Never worked/long-term
unemployed
86
14
Full time students
81
19
88
12
Not stated/classified
92
All
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
A very big or a fairly big problem
Not a very big problem or not a problem at all
Base: Core sample, England and Wales (8,590)
9.13 There was also a relationship between the level of deprivation in the area and
perceptions of racial or religious harassment. Just three per cent of people in the
least deprived areas and similar proportions of people in the next three least
deprived areas said that racial or religious harassment was a problem in their local
area. People from the more deprived areas were more likely to think that
harassment was a very or fairly big problem in their local area. In particular,
between 16 and 20 per cent of people in the three most deprived areas said that
racial or religious harassment was a fairly or very big problem in their area
(Table 74).
9.14 People living in urban areas (10%) were much more likely to perceive harassment
as a very or fairly big problem than those from rural areas (2%; Table 75).
In particular, people living in London were more likely than people living in all
other regions to have negative perceptions of the amount of harassment (16%
said this). Five per cent of people living in the South West and Wales, six per cent
of people living in the East Midlands, and seven per cent of people living in the
North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, the East of England and the South East
answered in this way, as did eight per cent of people living in the North West and
10 per cent of those living in the West Midlands (Table 77).
Fear of being attacked due to ethnicity or religion

9.15 The 2007-08 Citizenship Survey also contained a series of questions asking people
how worried they were about becoming the victim of a number of different
crimes. Among these, people were asked how worried they were about being the
victim of a physical attack because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion11.
9.16 Overall, 58 per cent of people said that they were not worried at all about being
subject to a physical attack because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion,
31 per cent said that they were not very worried, seven per cent that they were
fairly worried while three per cent report that they were very worried (Tables 78
and 79, Figure 33).
Figure 33 Proportion of people who are worried about being physically attacked
because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion
Very
worried Fairly
3% worried
7%
Not at
all worried
59%
Not very
worried
31%
Base: Core sample, England (8,762)
11
Figure 33 and its accompanying text exclude the Wales sample to facilitate the measurement of policy outcomes. However, figures
in the rest of this section are based both on the England and the Wales sample for consistency throughout the report.
9.17 Compared with 2005, in 2007-08 people were less worried about being physically
attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion. The proportion of
those who said that they were very worried or fairly worried decreased from
14 per cent in 2005 to 10 per cent in 2007-08. The proportion of people who
said that they were very worried was six per cent in 2005 and three per cent in
2007-08. The proportion of people who said that they are not at all worried about
being attacked has increased from 47 per cent to 59 per cent (Figure 34).
Figure 34 Proportion of people who are worried about being physically attacked
because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion in 2005 and 2007-08
100
Per cent
80
59
60
47
39
40
31
20
8
0
Not at all worried
Not very worried

2005
Fairly worried
Vey worried
2007-08
Base: Core sample, England and Wales (2005: 9,592, 2007-08: 9,286)
Fear of being attacked, by ethnicity

9.18 Whether people were worried about being the victim of a physical attack because
of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion varied by ethnicity.
9.19 Overall, people from an ethnic minority background (10%) were much more likely
to express a worry about being attacked than White (2%) people. Among the
individual ethnic groups, Pakistani (11%) and Indian (11%) people were more
likely than White (2%) people to say that they were worried about being the
victim of a physical attack because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion.
9.20 Among Black people, 11 per cent of Black African people and four per cent of
Black Caribbean people that they were very worried about being attacked. Eight
per cent of Mixed Race people and six per cent of Chinese people also gave this
answer (Figure 35, Table 78).
Figure 35 Proportion of people who are very worried or fairly worried about being
physically attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion,
by ethnicity
Asian
11
Other
Black
17
Mixed Race
16
Chinese
19
24
19
White 2 6
10
21
All 3 7
20
40
60
80
100
Per cent
Very worried
Fairly worried
Base: Combined sample, England and Wales (14,020); All figure based on core sample, England (8,762)
Fear of being attacked by age, sex and socio-economic group

9.21 Overall, younger people were slightly more worried about becoming a victim of
attack than older people. Four per cent of those aged 16-29 said that they were
very worried, compared with three per cent of those aged 30-49 and two per cent
of older people aged 50 and over. Amongst Asian people, those aged 16-29
(13%) were more likely to say that they were very worried about being attacked
than those aged 50 or over (8%; Figure 36, Table 78). For other ethnic groups,
differences between age groups were not statistically significant. Also, no
statistically significant difference was found overall between these age groups
in the proportion of people saying that they were fairly worried about being
physically attacked.
Figure 36 Proportion of people who are very worried about being physically attacked
because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion, by age
Asian
11
8
7
Black
Chinese or other
12
Mixed Race
13
2
2
2
White
All
10
10
10
20
30
40
50
Per cent
16-29 years
30-49 years
50+ years
Base: Combined sample, England and Wales (14,022); All figure based on core sample, England (8,762)
9.22 Women (3%) were more likely than men (2%) to say that they were very worried
about being attacked. This difference between the sexes was observed amongst
White (2% of women compared with 1% of men); Asian (13% compared with
10%); and Black (11% compared with 5%) people (Table 82).
9.23 People born outside the UK (7%) were more likely to say that they were very
worried about being attacked than those who were born in the UK (2%; Table 84).
9.24 Two per cent of people in higher or lower managerial and professional
occupations said that they were very worried about physical attack due to their
skin colour, ethnic origin or religion. This proportion was lower than the
proportions of people in lower supervisory, technical and semi-routine occupations
(4%), people who had never worked or were long-term unemployed (7%) and full
time students (7%) who gave this answer. One per cent of people in intermediate
occupations and small employers and three per cent of people in routine
occupations answered in this way (Table 86).
Chapter 10 Experiences of discrimination in the labour market | 79
EQUALITIES
Chapter 10
Experiences of discrimination in the
labour market
10.1 In 2007-08, people who were working as employees or had looked for work over
the previous five years were asked if they had been refused or turned down for a
job in the UK in the last five years. People who were working as employees were
also asked if they thought they had been discriminated against at work with
regard to a promotion or a move to a better position in the past five years. People
who said yes to either question were asked on what basis they thought they had
been discriminated against.
10.2 Overall, 17 per cent of people said that they had been refused or turned down for
a job, and 9 per cent said that they had been discriminated against at work with
regard to promotion or progression in the last five years. There was no statistically
significant difference between these proportions and those reported in 2005
(18 and 10 per cent respectively).12
Reasons for being refused a job and for being discriminated

against regarding promotion
10.3 People who said that they had been refused a job or discriminated against
regarding promotion or progression in the last five years were shown a card with a
list of possible reasons and asked to indicate if they thought this had happened for
any of the reasons shown13. The reasons listed were the same as in the 2005 and
2003 surveys (Figure 37, Table 88).
10.4 People who had been refused a job most commonly gave age as a reason (23%
said this). No other reason was mentioned in more than seven per cent of cases.
People who had been refused a promotion also most commonly mentioned age
as a reason (29% said this). Twenty-one per cent of people who had been refused
a promotion named gender as a reason, while 16 per cent mentioned race, and
12 per cent mentioned skin colour.
12
13
The 2005 figures for these questions are not directly comparable to 2003 and 2007-08 figures due to a routing error in the 2005
questionnaire (please see Annex A).
These were: your gender, your age, your race, your religion, your colour, where you live, other reason please specify.
10.5 Age was mentioned as a reason by 23 per cent of people who had been refused
a job and by 29 per cent of those who said they had been discriminated against
regarding a promotion. This is unchanged from 2005.
10.6 Gender was mentioned as a reason by four per cent of people who had been
refused a job and by 21 per cent of those who said they had been discriminated
against regarding a promotion. Again, this was not a statistically significant
change from 2005.
10.7 Race and skin colour were mentioned reasons for being refused a job by seven
per cent and five per cent respectively, unchanged from 2005. Between 2005 and
2007-08, there was increase in people mentioning race (12% to 16%) and skin
colour (7% to 12%) as reasons for being refused a promotion.
10.8 One per cent of people mentioned religion as a reason for being refused a job;
three per cent mentioned this as reason for being turned down for promotion.
This is unchanged from 2005.
10.9 A large proportion of given at this question were classified in a miscellaneous
other reason category14, that is the reason for being discriminated against did
not have anything to do with age, gender, race, skin colour, religion or where the
person lived. Thirty-three per cent of people who had been refused a job and
forty per cent of people who said they had been discriminated against regarding
a promotion gave reasons that were classified in this way (Figure 37).
14
The other reason category includes the following reasons: experience/qualifications, lack of transport, family circumstances,
disability, health problems, sexual orientation, interview/work interaction related reason, caring responsibilities. The 2008-09 survey
draws out disability and sexual orientation as options on the showcard.
Figure 37 Reasons for being refused a job and for being treated unfairly regarding
a promotion
Age
23
Race
16
Colour
12
Gender
Where you live
Religion 1
29
21
4
4
4
3
Other reason
33
10
20
30
40
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Per cent
Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion
Reasons for being refused a job
Base: Core sample, England and Wales (Refused a job: 913; Discriminated against regarding a promotion: 497)
Reasons for being refused a job and for being treated unfairly
regarding a promotion, by age
10.10 Equal proportions of people aged 16-24 and aged 25-64, who had been refused
a job, gave age as a reason (23%; Table 89)15.
10.11 Among people who said they had been discriminated against regarding a
promotion, people aged 16-24 (51%) were more likely than those aged 25-64
(23%) to give age as a reason (Table 90). People aged 16-24 (11%) were less likely
than people aged 25-64 (23%) to give gender as a reason.
regarding a promotion, by sex
10.12 Three per cent of men and five per cent of women gave gender as a reason for
being refused a job. There is no statistically significant difference between these
proportions.
10.13 Men (26%) were more likely than women (20%) to give age as a reason for being
refused a job. Men (5%) were also more likely than women (2%) to give where
they live as a reason for being refused a job (Table 91).
15
Results for the category Aged 65+ have been omitted due to a very small base size.
10.14 Women (32%) were more likely than men (11%) to give gender as a reason for
being discriminated against regarding promotion. Three other possible reasons
for being treated unfairly regarding promotion age, race and skin colour were
more commonly mentioned by men than by women (33% compared with 23%
for age, 21% compared with 11% for race, and 17% compared with 7% for skin
colour; Table 92).
regarding a promotion, by ethnicity
10.15 Among ethnic minority people who had been refused a job, race and skin colour
were mentioned as a reason by 20 and 18 per cent respectively. These proportions
were higher than the proportions of White people who gave these answers
(4% for race and 1% for skin colour). Ethnic minority people who had been
refused a job were also more likely than White people to mention religion as
a reason (5% compared with 1%). White people who had been refused a job
were more likely than people of ethnic minority groups to give age as a reason
(25% compared with 14%; Table 93).
10.16 Race and skin colour were given as reasons for being discriminated against by
49 per cent and 45 per cent respectively of ethnic minority people who said that
they had been treated unfairly regarding a promotion. These proportions were
higher than those for White people (8% for race and 4% for skin colour).
Ethnic minority people who said that they had been treated unfairly regarding
a promotion were also more likely than White people to mention religion as
a reason (13% compared with 2%). Meanwhile, White people who said that
they had been treated unfairly regarding a promotion were more likely than
ethnic minority people to give age (31% compared with 12%) or gender
(23% compared with 12%) as a reason (Table 94).
regarding a promotion, by religion
10.17 Among people who were refused a job, religion was given as a reason by
one per cent of Christians and eight per cent of people from other religions16.
Twelve per cent of people who actively practised a religion other than Christianity
gave religion as a reason for being refused a job, compared with just two per cent
of people of these religions who were not practising (Table 95).
16
Due to small base sizes, statistically significant differences could not be found for individual religions, except for Christianity.
10.18 Among people who said they were discriminated against regarding a promotion,
religion was given as a reason by one per cent of Christians and 18 per cent of
people from other religions. Twenty-two per cent of people who actively practised
a religion other than Christianity, gave religion as a reason for being discriminated
against regarding promotion, compared with eight per cent of people from
religions other than Christianity who were not practising (Table 96).
regarding a promotion, by long-term limiting illness or disability
10.19 People who had a long-term limiting illness or disability and had been refused a
job were more likely than people who did not have a long-term limiting illness or
disability to mention a miscellaneous other reason (which is where answers about
illness or disability are classified). Forty-nine per cent of people who had a longterm limiting illness or disability gave this answer compared with 30 per cent of
other people. They were also more likely than people who did not have an illness
or disability to mention age as a reason for being refused a job (31% compared
with 22%), race (11% compared with 6%) and gender (8% compared with 3%).
However, they were less likely than other people to mention where they lived as a
reason for discrimination in this way (1% compared with 4%; Table 97).
10.20 Among people who said that they had been discriminated against regarding a
promotion, people with a long-term limiting illness or disability were more likely
than other people to mention a miscellaneous other reason for why this had
happened (this is where answers about illness or disability are classified; 47 per
cent compared with 38 per cent). People with a long-term limiting illness or
disability were also more likely than other people to mention religion as a reason
for this discrimination (8% compared with 2%; Table 98).
EQUALITIES
Chapter 11
Formal volunteering and civic engagement
across equalities groups
11.1 In 2007-08, people were asked a series of questions about whether they had done
any formal volunteering or taken part in any form of civic engagement in the last
12 months. For formal volunteering, activities included a variety of ways of giving
unpaid help to groups, clubs or organisations17. For civic engagement, activities
included being involved in a consultation about local services or issues, being
involved in direct decision-making about local services or issues, taking on a role such
as a local councillor or a school governor, attending a public meeting or a rally18,19.
11.2 Overall, 63 per cent of people had participated in at least one of the forms of
formal volunteering or civic engagement in the past 12 months.
Formal volunteering and civic engagement, by age and sex

11.3 Fifty-five per cent of people aged 16-24 had taken part in civic engagement or
formal volunteering in the last twelve months. This is lower than the proportion of
people from all other age groups except for people aged 75 and over, 51 per cent
of whom had taken part in these activities. Sixty-one per cent of people aged 2534, 70 per cent of people aged 35-49, 65 per cent of people aged 50-64 and 64
per cent of people aged 65-74 had taken part in these activities in the last twelve
months (Table 99).
11.4 Women (64%) were more likely than men (62%) to have taken part in these sorts
of activities in the last 12 months than men (Table 100).
17
18
19
The options for unpaid help provided were: raising or handling money/taking part in sponsored events; leading the group/member
of a committee; organising or helping to run an activity or event; visiting people; befriending or mentoring people; giving
advice/information/counselling; secretarial, admin or clerical work; providing transport/driving; representing; campaigning; other
practical help (eg helping out at school, shopping); any other help.
The Citizenship Survey measures levels of participation in three broad strands of civic engagement: civic activism; civic consultation;
and civil renewal. A fuller definition of these three concepts is provided at Annex C.
Findings in this section are based on the England sample only to reflect Communities and Local Governments policy responsibilities
in this area.
Chapter 11 Formal volunteering and civic engagement across equalities groups | 85
Formal volunteering and civic engagement, by ethnicity

11.5 Sixty-four per cent of White people had participated in civic engagement or formal
volunteering in the last 12 months. This is higher than the proportion of people
from all other ethnic groups that did so except for Mixed Race (61%) people.
Sixty per cent of Black Caribbean people had taken part in these activities, as had
57 per cent of Black African people. Fifty-two per cent of Pakistani people had
taken part in these activities, as had 50 per cent of Indian people, 47 per cent of
Bangladeshi people, 47 per cent of Chinese people, and 46 per cent of people
from other ethnic groups (Figure 38, Table 101).
Figure 38 Proportion of people who have taken part in civic engagement or formal
volunteering in the last 12 months, by ethnicity
White
64
Mixed Race
61
Black Caribbean
60
Black African
57
Pakistani
52
Indian
50
Bangladeshi
47
Chinese
47
53
All
63
20
40
60
Per cent
Base: Combined sample, England (13,533); All figure based on Core sample, England (8,804)
80
100
Formal volunteering and civic engagement, by religion

11.6 Sixty-four per cent of Christians had taken part in civic engagement or formal
volunteering in the last 12 months. This was higher than the proportions of
Muslims (51%), Hindus (50%) and Sikhs (41%) who had done so. The proportion
of Christians who had taken part in these activities was similar to the proportions
of Buddhists (63%), people with other religions (67%) and people with no
religion (64%; Table 102).
Formal volunteering and civic engagement, by long-term limiting

illness or disability
11.7 People who had a long-term limiting illness or disability (58%) had lower levels of
participation in civic engagement and formal volunteering than people who did
not have a long-term limiting illness or disability (64%; Table 103).
Formal volunteering and civic engagement, by sexual identity

11.8 Gay, lesbian or bisexual people (68%) had participated in civic engagement and
formal volunteering in the last 12 months in similar proportions to those who
identified themselves as heterosexual (63%20; Table 104).
20
The difference between these proportions is not statistically significant.
Chapter 12 Respect | 87
EQUALITIES
Chapter 12
Respect
12.1 In 2007-08, people were asked whether they felt they were treated with respect
in public places or while using public services. These places and services included:
work, school or college; public transport; shopping; and health services. People
were asked whether they were treated with respect all of the time, most of the
time, some of the time, rarely or never.21
12.2 Forty-six and forty-five per cent of people respectively felt that they would be
treated with respect all of the time at work, school or college or when using health
services (Figure 39, Table 105).
12.3 People were less likely to think that they will be treated with respect all of the time
while using public transport (27%) or when shopping (29%). Six per cent of people
said that they were rarely or never treated with respect while using public transport.
Figure 39 Perceptions of respect
100
8
46
45
45
46
When using health services
All work,
school or college
13
15
Per cent
80
60
57
52
40
20
27
29
When using public transport
When shopping
0
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Base: Core sample, England (At work/school: 6,164; When using public transport: 8,067; When shopping: 8,743;
When using health services: 8,744)
21
Findings in this section are based on the England sample only to reflect the Government Equalities Office policy responsibilities in
this area.
Respect, by age and sex

12.4 People aged 16-24 were less likely than those aged 50 and over to say that they
were treated with respect all the time at work, school or college or when using
public transport. For example, 22 per cent of people aged 16-24 said that they
were treated with respect all the time on public transport compared with 26 per
cent of people aged 50-64, 36 per cent of people aged 65-74 and 45 per cent
of people aged 75 and over. People aged 16-24 were also less likely than people
aged 65 and over to say that they were treated with respect all the time when
shopping or when using health services (Table 105).
12.5 Women (49%) were more likely than men (44%) to say that they were always
treated with respect at work, school or college. There were no other differences
between the sexes in experiences of treatment for the other three situations
presented (Table 106).
Respect, by ethnicity
12.6 There were some variations in perceptions of respect according to ethnicity. In
particular, White people were less likely than most other ethnic groups to feel that
they were treated with respect while shopping. Twenty-eight per cent of White
people thought this compared with 39 per cent of Indian people, 36 per cent of
Pakistani people, 38 per cent of Bangladeshi people, 37 per cent of Black African
people, 32 per cent of Black Caribbean people, 35 per cent of Mixed Race people,
and 43 per cent of people from other ethnic groups.
12.7 Twenty-six per cent of White people said that they would be treated with respect
all of the time when using public transport. This proportion was lower than the
proportions of Indian people (32%) and people from other ethnic groups (37%)
that answered in this way.
12.8 Forty-four per cent of White people said that they would be treated with respect
all of the time when using health services. This proportion was higher than that for
Black Caribbean people (39%) but lower than that for people from other ethnic
groups (51%).
12.9 Ethnicity did not have a statistically significant effect on the proportion of people
who said that they would always be treated with respect at work, school, or
college (Table 107).
Chapter 12 Respect | 89
Respect, by religious affiliation

12.10 Compared to Christians, Muslims and Hindus were more likely to say that they
would be treated with respect all of the time when shopping or using public
transport, while people with no religion were less likely than Christians to say this.
Twenty-nine per cent of Christians said that they would be treated with respect
all of the time when shopping compared with 39 per cent of Muslims, 40 per cent
of Hindus and 22 per cent of people with no religion. Similarly, 27 per cent of
Christians said that they would be treated with respect all of the time when using
public transport compared with 34 per cent of Muslims, 33 per cent of Hindus and
22 per cent of people with no religion (Table 108).
12.11 Religion did not have a statistically significant effect on the proportion of people
who said that they would be treated with respect all of the time when at work,
school or college or when using the health service.
Respect, by socio-economic classification

12.12 Forty-eight per cent of people in higher or lower managerial and professional
occupations said that they would be treated with respect all of the time when
at work, school or college. This proportion was higher than for people in lower
supervisory, technical and semi-routine occupations (44%) and people who had
never worked or were long-term unemployed (31%).
12.13 In contrast, the proportion of people in higher or lower managerial and
professional occupations who said that they would be treated with respect all of
the time when shopping (26%) was lower than for people in routine occupations
(36%) and people who had never worked or were long-term unemployed (34%).
Similarly, the proportion of people in higher or lower managerial and professional
occupations who said that they would be treated with respect all of the time when
using health services (42%) was lower than for people in lower supervisory,
technical and semi-routine occupations (47%), people in routine occupations
(51%) and people who had never worked or were long-term unemployed (49%).
12.14 Socio-economic group did not have a statistically significant impact on the
proportions of people saying that they would always be treated with respect when
using public transport (Table 109).
Respect, by sexual identity

12.15 Heterosexual people were more likely than gay, lesbian or bisexual people to say
that they are treated with respect all of the time when using public transport.
Otherwise, these groups reported broadly similar experiences (Table 110).
Annex A
Methodology
This annex outlines the key elements of the methodology used in carrying out the survey,
with a particular focus on elements relating to the analysis of the data. For a fuller
description of the technical details, please see the Technical Report of the 2007-08
survey, which is available from the Citizenship Survey pages of the Communities and
Local Government website.
Sample
The survey sample comprised a core sample and an ethnic minority boost sample.
The core sample comprised a representative sample of people aged 16 and over in
England and Wales. Respondents for this sample were selected via random selection of
postal addresses (using the Postcode Address File). At each selected address, an interview
was attempted with one person aged 16 or over. Where there was more than one person
aged 16 or over living at an address a random method was used to select the
respondent. In 2007-08, 9,336 interviews were yielded in the core sample.
The boost sample comprised an additional sample of ethnic minority respondents aged
16 and over, achieved through focused enumeration screening in areas with a relatively
low density of the ethnic minority population and direct screening in areas with a higher
density of the ethnic minority population. As with the core sample, one interview was
attempted at each address where eligible respondents were identified. The combined
focused enumeration and direct screening approaches yielded 4,759 interviews in the
boost sample.
The core sample gives the most accurate estimates relating to the population as a whole,
and is therefore used for the majority of the analysis in this report. Adding the boost
sample to the core sample produces the combined sample which provides larger
numbers of respondents within ethnic and religious sub-groups. The combined sample
has therefore been used for analysis which splits the sample by country of birth, ethnic
or religious group. However, tables which are split by ethnic or religious sub-group also
contain a row or column of data for the total population which is based on the core
sample, as this is more accurate.
Questionnaire and fieldwork

The survey was carried out via Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI), with
fieldwork conducted from April 2007 to March 2008. The questionnaire covered:
household composition, views of the local area, social networks, fear of crime, local
Annex A Methodology | 91
services, volunteering and charitable giving, involvement in civil renewal activities, racial
and religious prejudice and discrimination, identity, values, interactions with people from
different backgrounds and respondent characteristics.
Weighting
To correct for different chances of selection due to the number of people living at an
address and different rates of response among different population groups, weights
were calculated which were applied to the data during analysis. All estimates
(percentages and means) cited in this report are based on weighted data. The number
of respondents in the groups on which the estimates are based are unweighted (called
Respondents in the tables).
Confidence intervals and significance

As with all sample surveys, the estimates given in this report represent the mid-point of a
range given by their confidence intervals which indicate the range within which the true
population value falls. The standard errors for key survey estimates, which can be used to
calculate confidence intervals, are given in Chapter 8 of the 2007-08 Technical Report.
All differences commented on in this report have been found to be statistically
significant at the 95 per cent level. This means that there is a 95 per cent chance that
the observed difference has arisen due to a true difference in the population rather than
via random variation.
Analysis
Much of the report focuses on associations between pairs of variables, where a change
in one variable (for example, highest qualification) is associated with a change in another
(for example, involvement in volunteering). Where the report states that two variables
have a relationship this is what is meant. However, in some cases an association of this
sort can change or disappear when the effects of other variables are taken into account.
Therefore, as well as testing associations between pairs of variables for statistical
significance, a number of regression analyses have been carried out for key variables.
This type of analysis examines the associations between a particular factor and a variable
of interest while holding other factors associated with that variable constant. It therefore
attempts to test whether one particular factor has a significant association with the
variable, over and above the effects of other factors on that variable. Where it is found
that a factor is not significantly associated with the key variable in a regression, this is
reported in the main text in terms such as this relationship was not significant when
other factors were taken into account.
Area-based data
The data used in the analysis for this report include both information gathered during
the survey and area-based indicators, which have been attached based on where
the respondents lives. These include indicators such as the density of ethnic minority
households in a local area, an area deprivation indicator and Government Office Region.
Respondent religion
Analysis by religion uses answers to the question What is your religion even if you are
not currently practising? in order to define respondents religion. This means that
respondents are defined as belonging to a religion with which they identify, but do not
necessarily actively practise. Respondents who said that they had a religion were then
also asked Do you consider that you are actively practising your religion? The answers
to this question are used to compare those who said they were practising a religion and
those who said they were not.
Calculation of data on reasons for being refused a job or

discriminated against regarding promotion
The 2005 figures for these questions are not directly comparable to the 2003 and
2007-08 figures due to a routing error in the 2005 questionnaire. This error meant that
the question was not asked to people who had been in employment in the past five years
but were no longer employees (with the exception of those who were now selfemployed). These people should have been asked these questions and were included in
2003 and 2007-08 surveys, so are subsequently included for the 2003 and 2007-08
figures but not for 2005. Please note the 2003 and 2007-08 figures in this report were
calculated on a different basis to those figures in the 2007-08 statistical releases (this
different methodology was used to ensure that the 2003 and 2007-08 figures would be
comparable to the 2005 figures).
Annex B Multivariate outputs | 93
Annex B
Multivariate outputs
B1
Characteristics of people who feel that they would be treated

worse by at least one of eight key public service organisations
Summary
The modelling was undertaken in two stages. First, a stepwise logistic regression model
was used to identify the covariates that predicted whether or not an individual felt they
had been treated worse by one of eight key public service organisations22 (compared to
those who had not). The stepwise model identified the variables that were most
significantly related to the outcome variable. This step was used to narrow down the
range of variables that were entered in the model at the second stage. At the second
stage, a logistic regression model was run using the svy commands in Stata. This
approach allows elements of the sample design (such as the clustering and stratification)
to be taken into consideration when generating standard errors. Those variables that had
been retained in the stepwise model were entered at the second stage. The covariates in
the second stage models were checked and the models further refined by dropping any
variables that were not significant (had a p-value more than 0.1).
Variables removed after Stage 1

(stepwise logistic regression)
The following variables were removed from the analysis after forwards stepwise logistic
regression found that they were not significant:
Socio-economic group
Rural/Urban area
Income
Length of residence
Friends with different incomes
Number of close friends
Tenancy (home owner, social tenancy etc.)
Regularly reads a local newspaper
Regularly listens to national radio
Regularly listens to local radio.
22
These are local schools, local doctors surgery, council housing department or housing association, and the five CJS organisations
the Courts, the Crown Prosecution Service, the police, their local police, and the prison service.
Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) was not included in the Stage 1 modelling as there
was co-linearity between this variable and Government Office Region (GOR); one of the
IMD categories exactly matched one of the categories for GOR (Wales). This causes the
stepwise procedure to not run and return an error. IMD was dropped from the stepwise
model to enable it to run. The variable was re-introduced to the analysis after stage 2,
where it was added to the final model. If IMD was significantly related to the outcome
(if it had a p-value less than 0.1) it would be retained in the final model, otherwise it
would be discarded.
Variables removed from Stage 2 (logistic regression)

The following variables were dropped from the svy model:
Enjoy living in neighbourhood
Feels safe in local area.
Summary of results from Stage 3 (logistic regression)

At Stage 3 IMD was added to the Stage 2 model. This variable was significant and was
included in the final model.
Regression output: Think one of eight organisations would treat them worse
than people of other races
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
Country of birth
Born in UK (Ref)
Not born in UK
0.64
0.063
-4.5
Local area is cohesive

Agree (Ref)
Don't Know
Disagree
1.07
1.62
0.091
0.126
0.81
Perceived anti-social behaviour in local area

High (Ref)
Low/none
Missing
Limiting long-term illness
No (Ref)
Yes
Sex
Male (Ref)
Female
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.000
0.53
0.78
**
0.8
6.2
0.417
0.000
0.91
1.39
1.27
1.89
NS
**
0.042
-4.1
0.000
0.73
0.90
**
0.72
0.57
0.054
0.057
-4.4
-5.6
0.000
0.000
0.62
0.47
0.83
0.70
**
**
1.30
0.091
3.8
0.000
1.13
1.49
**
White (Ref)
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Mixed Race
Chinese
Other
1.45
2.37
2.37
1.23
4.31
2.73
2.51
1.54
1.49
1.48
0.311
0.619
0.696
0.294
0.581
0.427
1.020
0.257
0.404
0.303
1.7
3.3
2.9
0.9
10.9
6.4
2.3
2.6
1.5
1.9
0.087
0.001
0.003
0.398
0.000
0.000
0.024
0.010
0.139
0.056
0.95
1.42
1.33
0.76
3.31
2.01
1.13
1.11
0.88
0.99
2.20
3.96
4.22
1.96
5.62
3.72
5.57
2.14
2.54
2.21
NS
**
**
NS
**
**
*
*
NS
NS
Qualifications Degree or equivalent (Ref)

Higher Education below
degree level
A level or equivalent
GCSE grades A-C or equivalent
GCSE grades D-E or equivalent
Foreign and other qualifications
No qualifications
Respondent aged 70+
1.51
1.58
1.97
2.16
1.02
1.71
1.40
0.158
0.158
0.186
0.300
0.211
0.148
0.234
4.0
4.5
7.2
5.6
0.1
6.2
2.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.922
0.000
0.046
1.23
1.29
1.64
1.64
0.68
1.44
1.01
1.86
1.92
2.37
2.84
1.53
2.03
1.94
**
**
**
**
NS
**
*
Worried about crime

Very worried (Ref)
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
0.89
0.74
0.63
0.091
0.078
0.076
-1.1
-2.9
-3.8
0.266
0.004
0.000
0.73
0.60
0.50
1.09
0.91
0.80
NS
**
**
0.82
0.062
-2.6
0.009
0.71
0.95
**
1.23
1.36
2.06
0.89
1.16
0.096
0.142
0.307
0.155
0.335
2.6
2.9
4.9
-0.7
0.5
0.009
0.003
0.000
0.511
0.606
1.05
1.11
1.54
0.63
0.66
1.43
1.67
2.76
1.25
2.04
**
**
**
NS
NS
Ethnicity
Uses internet
Yes (Ref)
No
Attitude to local area

Very proud of the local area (Ref)
Fairly proud of the local area
Not very proud of the local area
Not at all proud of the local area
Neutral
Don't know
than people of other races (continued)
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
0.88
0.051
-2.2
1.16
1.10
0.94
0.84
0.51
0.122
0.109
0.099
0.118
0.107
Economic status
Employed
Unemployed
Economically inactive
0.92
0.81
Ethnicity of friends
All the same (Ref)
More than a half the same
About a half the same
Less than a half the same
Missing
Religious affiliation and practise
Practising Christian (Ref)
Non-practising Christian
Practising Buddhist
Non-practising Buddhist
Practising Hindu
Non-practising Hindu
Practising Muslim
Non-practising Muslim
Practising Sikh
Non-practising Sikh
Practising Other incl Jewish
Non-practising Other incl Jewish
No religion
Regularly reads national newspaper

Yes (Ref)
No
Age
16-24 years (Ref)

25-34 years
35-49 years
50-64 years
65-74 years
75+ years
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.027
0.79
0.99
1.4
0.9
-0.6
-1.3
-3.2
0.166
0.352
0.540
0.213
0.001
0.94
0.90
0.76
0.64
0.34
1.42
1.33
1.15
1.11
0.77
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
0.148
0.062
-0.5
-2.7
0.605
0.007
0.67
0.70
1.26
0.95
NS
**
0.60
0.93
0.98
1.26
0.126
0.062
0.104
0.149
-2.4
-1.0
-0.2
1.9
0.016
0.310
0.881
0.053
0.40
0.82
0.80
1.00
0.91
1.07
1.21
1.59
*
NS
NS
NS
1.15
0.21
0.40
0.84
0.84
0.88
0.77
0.91
0.76
0.69
1.46
0.87
0.079
0.104
0.184
0.180
0.293
0.209
0.173
0.262
0.276
0.150
0.350
0.081
2.1
-3.2
-2.0
-0.8
-0.5
-0.6
-1.2
-0.3
-0.8
-1.7
1.6
-1.5
0.039
0.002
0.047
0.412
0.627
0.582
0.249
0.750
0.452
0.086
0.118
0.135
1.01
0.08
0.16
0.55
0.43
0.55
0.50
0.52
0.37
0.45
0.91
0.72
1.32
0.55
0.99
1.28
1.67
1.40
1.20
1.60
1.55
1.05
2.34
1.04
*
**
*
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.68
0.158
-1.7
0.099
0.43
1.07
NS
0.81
0.73
0.77
0.94
0.95
0.86
0.87
0.80
0.59
0.095
0.089
0.091
0.111
0.131
0.107
0.123
0.109
0.092
-1.8
-2.6
-2.2
-0.5
-0.4
-1.2
-1.0
-1.6
-3.4
0.079
0.010
0.028
0.630
0.704
0.220
0.308
0.101
0.001
0.65
0.57
0.61
0.75
0.72
0.67
0.66
0.61
0.43
1.02
0.93
0.97
1.19
1.24
1.10
1.14
1.04
0.80
NS
*
*
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
Sexual identity
Heterosexual
Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual
Ethnic density of ward (deciles)
1 [Lowest density] (Ref)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 [Highest density]
than people of other races (continued)
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
Government Office Region

North East (Ref)
North West
Yorkshire and the Humber
East Midlands
West Midlands
East of England
London
South East
South West
1.07
1.08
1.25
1.32
1.53
1.28
1.27
1.24
0.155
0.165
0.206
0.195
0.236
0.225
0.187
0.198
0.4
0.5
1.4
1.9
2.8
1.4
1.6
1.3
Indices of deprivation (deciles)

1 [least deprived] (Ref)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 [most deprived]
Wales
0.92
0.87
1.02
0.71
0.98
0.77
0.85
0.86
0.76
0.74
0.107
0.106
0.120
0.091
0.121
0.102
0.112
0.115
0.108
0.142
-0.7
-1.1
0.2
-2.6
-0.2
-2.0
-1.2
-1.1
-2.0
-1.6
Respondents (14,905)
* = significant at 95% (p = <0.05)
** = significant at 99% (p = <0.01)
NS = Not significant
Ref = Reference category
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.657
0.630
0.177
0.058
0.006
0.166
0.109
0.182
0.80
0.80
0.90
0.99
1.13
0.90
0.95
0.90
1.42
1.45
1.73
1.77
2.07
1.80
1.69
1.70
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
NS
0.459
0.266
0.883
0.008
0.881
0.050
0.229
0.269
0.050
0.118
0.73
0.69
0.81
0.56
0.77
0.60
0.66
0.66
0.57
0.51
1.15
1.11
1.28
0.92
1.25
1.00
1.11
1.12
1.00
1.08
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
B2
Characteristics of people who feel there is more racial prejudice

than there was five years ago
Summary
was used to identify the covariates that predicted whether or not an individual felt there
was more racial prejudice than there was five years ago (compared to those who thought
there was the same or less). The stepwise model identified the variables that were most

Employment status
Rural/Urban area
Percentage of ethnic minority households in the ward
Education level
Whether respondent has a disability/limiting long-term illness
Perceived level of anti-social behaviour (high/low)
Length of residence
Uses the internet.
where it was added to the final model. If IMD was significantly related to the outcome (if
it had a p-value less than 0.1) it would be retained in the final model, otherwise it would
be discarded.
Variables removed from Stage 2 (logistic regression)

Sexual identity.
Summary of results from Stage 3 (logistic regression)

At Stage 3 IMD was added to the Stage 2 model. This variable was significant but it
caused another variable (whether the respondent lived in an urban/rural area) to become
non-significant. This indicates IMD was a stronger predictor of whether or not an
individual felt they had been treated worse by one of eight key public service
organisations than urban/rural indicator. Hence the urban/rural indicator was dropped
and IMD included in the final model.
Regression output: More racial prejudice in Britain than five years ago
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error

Agree (Ref)
Don't Know
Disagree
1.40
1.53
0.111
0.120
4.2
5.4
Country of birth
Born in UK (Ref)
Not born in UK
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.000
0.000
1.20
1.31
1.63
1.79
**
**
0.66
0.067
-4.1
0.000
0.55
0.81
**
1.57
1.69
1.85
2.26
1.79
0.165
0.162
0.192
0.254
0.211
4.3
5.5
5.9
7.3
5.0
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1.27
1.40
1.51
1.81
1.42
1.93
2.04
2.27
2.82
2.26
**
**
**
**
**
Regularly listens to local radio

Yes (Ref)
No
0.85
0.044
-3.1
0.002
0.77
0.94
**
Regularly reads national newspaper

Yes (Ref)
No
0.86
0.049
-2.7
0.008
0.77
0.96
**
0.54
0.83
0.43
0.65
0.45
0.44
0.75
0.68
0.26
0.64
0.106
0.188
0.112
0.151
0.054
0.078
0.330
0.104
0.081
0.114
-3.1
-0.8
-3.2
-1.8
-6.6
-4.6
-0.6
-2.5
-4.4
-2.5
0.002
0.409
0.001
0.066
0.000
0.000
0.520
0.011
0.000
0.013
0.37
0.53
0.26
0.42
0.36
0.31
0.32
0.50
0.15
0.45
0.79
1.29
0.72
1.03
0.57
0.62
1.78
0.91
0.48
0.91
**
NS
**
NS
**
**
NS
*
**
*
0.96
0.85
0.59
0.85
0.163
0.053
0.061
0.098
-0.2
-2.6
-5.1
-1.4
0.831
0.009
0.000
0.150
0.69
0.75
0.49
0.68
1.34
0.96
0.73
1.06
NS
**
**
NS
1.14
0.064
2.4
0.019
1.02
1.27
Worried about crime

Very worried (Ref)
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
0.83
0.70
0.71
0.085
0.071
0.078
-1.8
-3.5
-3.1
0.071
0.001
0.002
0.68
0.58
0.57
1.02
0.86
0.88
NS
**
**

Neutral
Don't know
1.20
1.40
1.81
1.25
1.13
0.080
0.137
0.283
0.196
0.334
2.8
3.5
3.8
1.4
0.4
0.005
0.001
0.000
0.163
0.669
1.06
1.16
1.33
0.91
0.64
1.37
1.70
2.46
1.70
2.02
**
**
**
NS
NS
Age
Ethnicity
16-24 years (Ref)

25-34 years
35-49 years
50-64 years
65-74 years
75+ years
White (Ref)
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Mixed Race
Chinese
Other
Ethnicity of friends
All the same (Ref)
More than a half the same
About a half the same
Less than a half the same
Missing
Sex
Male (Ref)
Female
Regression output: More racial prejudice in Britain than five years ago (continued)
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 [most deprived]
0.95
0.93
0.76
0.85
0.92
0.76
0.78
0.75
0.55
0.107
0.102
0.084
0.097
0.113
0.091
0.092
0.087
0.068
-0.5
-0.6
-2.5
-1.4
-0.7
-2.3
-2.1
-2.5
-4.8
Respondent's income
Under 5,000 (Ref)
5,000-9,999
10,000-14,999
15,000-19,999
20,000-29,999
30,000-49,999
50,000-74,999
75,000 or more
Missing
1.19
1.12
1.33
1.23
1.10
1.01
0.97
1.39
0.101
0.104
0.135
0.121
0.117
0.165
0.175
0.137

Practising Buddhist
Practising Hindu
Practising Muslim
Practising Sikh
Non-practising Sikh
No religion
1.02
0.66
1.34
0.86
1.32
1.82
1.14
0.99
1.61
0.98
1.02
0.90

North East (Ref)
North West
East Midlands
West Midlands
East of England
London
South East
South West
Wales
0.86
0.82
0.75
0.73
0.98
0.62
0.75
0.76
0.86
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.650
0.532
0.015
0.160
0.482
0.022
0.036
0.014
0.000
0.76
0.75
0.62
0.68
0.72
0.60
0.62
0.60
0.43
1.19
1.16
0.95
1.07
1.17
0.96
0.98
0.94
0.71
NS
NS
*
NS
NS
*
*
*
**
2.0
1.3
2.8
2.1
0.9
0.0
-0.2
3.4
0.041
0.210
0.005
0.038
0.387
0.975
0.858
0.001
1.01
0.94
1.09
1.01
0.89
0.73
0.68
1.15
1.40
1.35
1.62
1.49
1.35
1.39
1.38
1.69
*
NS
**
*
NS
NS
NS
**
0.067
0.305
0.603
0.182
0.411
0.370
0.328
0.245
0.490
0.213
0.232
0.079
0.3
-0.9
0.7
-0.7
0.9
2.9
0.5
-0.1
1.6
-0.1
0.1
-1.2
0.756
0.370
0.510
0.487
0.375
0.003
0.650
0.960
0.119
0.920
0.930
0.220
0.90
0.27
0.56
0.57
0.71
1.22
0.65
0.61
0.88
0.64
0.65
0.75
1.16
1.64
3.24
1.31
2.43
2.71
2.00
1.61
2.93
1.50
1.59
1.07
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
0.116
0.119
0.114
0.111
0.145
0.097
0.110
0.118
0.157
-1.1
-1.3
-1.9
-2.1
-0.1
-3.0
-2.0
-1.7
-0.8
0.257
0.180
0.058
0.038
0.887
0.002
0.051
0.082
0.406
0.66
0.62
0.56
0.54
0.73
0.46
0.56
0.56
0.60
1.12
1.09
1.01
0.98
1.31
0.85
1.00
1.03
1.23
NS
NS
NS
*
NS
**
NS
NS
NS
B3
Characteristics of people who feel that there is a lot of religious

prejudice in Britain today
Summary
was used to identify the covariates that predicted whether or not an individual felt there
was more racial prejudice than there was five years ago (compared to those who thought
there was the same or less). The stepwise model identified the variables that were most

Sex
Employment status
Rural/Urban area
Education level
Income
Whether respondent has a disability/limiting long-term illness
Length of residence
Friends from different ethnic/religious backgrounds
Feel safe in local area
Sexual identity
Regularly reads a national newspaper
Uses the internet.
would be discarded.
Variables removed from Stage 2

(logistic regression)
Government Office Region.
Summary of results from Stage 3

At Stage 3 IMD was added to the Stage 2 model. This variable was significant and was
included in the final model.
Regression output: A lot of religious prejudice in Britain today

Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error

Agree (Ref)
Don't Know
Disagree
1.34
1.51
0.103
0.114
3.9
5.4
Worried about crime

Very worried (Ref)
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
0.80
0.59
0.77
0.070
0.054
0.084
Country of birth
Born in UK (Ref)
Not born in UK
0.72
Perceived anti-social behaviour in local area

High (Ref)
Low/none
Missing
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.000
0.000
1.16
1.30
1.56
1.75
**
**
-2.6
-5.8
-2.4
0.009
0.000
0.017
0.67
0.50
0.63
0.94
0.71
0.96
**
**
*
0.074
-3.2
0.001
0.58
0.88
**
0.76
0.85
0.057
0.075
-3.6
-1.9
0.000
0.065
0.66
0.72
0.89
1.01
**
NS
0.70
0.88
0.94
0.71
1.76
1.49
1.57
1.49
0.58
0.80
0.129
0.205
0.245
0.168
0.211
0.212
0.680
0.216
0.182
0.156
-1.9
-0.6
-0.2
-1.5
4.7
2.8
1.0
2.8
-1.8
-1.1
0.053
0.582
0.821
0.148
0.000
0.005
0.301
0.006
0.081
0.254
0.49
0.56
0.57
0.44
1.39
1.13
0.67
1.12
0.31
0.55
1.00
1.39
1.57
1.13
2.23
1.97
3.67
1.99
1.07
1.17
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
**
NS
**
NS
NS
Friends with similar income

All similar (Ref)
More than a half
About a half
Less than a half
Don't have any friends
Don't Know
0.68
0.84
0.87
1.11
0.97
0.091
0.063
0.062
0.083
0.173
-2.9
-2.3
-1.9
1.4
-0.2
0.004
0.020
0.057
0.153
0.883
0.52
0.73
0.76
0.96
0.69
0.89
0.97
1.00
1.29
1.38
**
*
NS
NS
NS

Neutral
Don't know
0.92
1.06
1.48
0.94
0.71
0.060
0.109
0.207
0.157
0.209
-1.2
0.6
2.8
-0.4
-1.2
0.232
0.568
0.005
0.706
0.241
0.81
0.87
1.13
0.68
0.40
1.05
1.30
1.95
1.30
1.26
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
Ethnicity
White (Ref)
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Mixed Race
Chinese
Other
Regression output: A lot of religious prejudice in Britain today (continued)

Variable
Practising Buddhist
Practising Hindu
Practising Muslim
Practising Sikh
Non-practising Sikh
No religion
Age
16-24 years (Ref)

25-34 years
35-49 years
50-64 years
65-74 years
75+ years

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 [most deprived]
Wales
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
0.98
1.48
1.31
0.90
0.86
1.75
1.85
1.27
1.44
1.53
1.69
1.04
0.064
0.604
0.727
0.186
0.253
0.358
0.548
0.347
0.462
0.274
0.372
0.098
-0.3
1.0
0.5
-0.5
-0.5
2.7
2.1
0.9
1.1
2.4
2.4
0.5
1.25
1.25
1.23
1.22
0.99
0.134
0.119
0.128
0.146
0.122
1.22
1.31
1.05
1.07
1.22
1.03
1.21
1.13
0.96
1.43
0.150
0.161
0.132
0.127
0.157
0.128
0.152
0.154
0.126
0.196
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.777
0.334
0.632
0.618
0.612
0.006
0.038
0.388
0.255
0.018
0.018
0.653
0.86
0.67
0.44
0.60
0.48
1.17
1.03
0.74
0.77
1.08
1.09
0.87
1.12
3.30
3.90
1.35
1.53
2.62
3.31
2.17
2.70
2.18
2.60
1.25
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
*
NS
NS
*
*
NS
2.1
2.3
2.0
1.7
-0.1
0.038
0.021
0.045
0.090
0.936
1.01
1.03
1.00
0.97
0.78
1.54
1.50
1.51
1.55
1.26
*
*
*
NS
NS
1.7
2.2
0.4
0.6
1.5
0.2
1.5
0.9
-0.3
2.6
0.099
0.026
0.679
0.547
0.124
0.838
0.134
0.389
0.743
0.010
0.96
1.03
0.82
0.85
0.95
0.80
0.94
0.86
0.74
1.09
1.56
1.67
1.35
1.35
1.57
1.31
1.54
1.47
1.24
1.87
NS
*
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
*
B4
Characteristics of people who feel that the Government is

doing too little to protect peoples religious rights
Summary
was used to identify the covariates that predicted whether or not an individual felt the
Government was doing too little to protect peoples religious rights (compared to those
that the Government was doing enough or too much). The stepwise model identified the
variables that were most significantly related to the outcome variable. This step was used
to narrow down the range of variables that were entered in the model at the second
stage. At the second stage, a logistic regression model was run using the svy commands
in Stata. This approach allows elements of the sample design (such as the clustering and
stratification) to be taken into consideration when generating standard errors. Those
variables that had been retained in the stepwise model were entered at the second stage.
The covariates in the second stage models were checked and the models further refined
by dropping any variables that were not significant (had a p-value more than 0.1).

Index of multiple deprivation
Rural/Urban area
Education level
Income
Length of residence
Proud of local neighbourhood
Sexual identity

Uses the internet.
would be discarded.

Employment status.

At Stage 3 IMD was added to the Stage 2 model. This variable was not significant and
was not added to the final model.
Regression output: The government is doing too little to protect peoples

religious rights
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
1.25
0.070
4.0
0.000
1.12
1.39
**
Country of birth
Born in UK (Ref)
Not born in UK
0.70
0.072
Worried about crime

Very worried (Ref)
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
-3.5
0.001
0.57
0.86
**
0.72
0.60
0.65
0.070
0.059
0.080
-3.4
-5.1
-3.5
0.001
0.000
0.000
0.60
0.50
0.51
0.87
0.73
0.83
**
**
**
16-24 years (Ref)

25-34 years
35-49 years
50-64 years
65-74 years
75+ years
0.67
0.60
0.61
0.58
0.51
0.073
0.059
0.063
0.064
0.065
-3.7
-5.2
-4.8
-4.9
-5.3
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.54
0.50
0.50
0.46
0.40
0.83
0.73
0.75
0.72
0.65
**
**
**
**
**
White (Ref)
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Mixed Race
Chinese
Other
0.92
1.23
0.92
0.96
2.10
1.29
2.11
1.72
1.13
0.75
0.172
0.251
0.224
0.209
0.273
0.198
0.803
0.240
0.295
0.148
-0.4
1.0
-0.3
-0.2
5.7
1.7
2.0
3.9
0.5
-1.5
0.667
0.307
0.742
0.837
0.000
0.098
0.050
0.000
0.626
0.142
0.64
0.83
0.57
0.62
1.63
0.95
1.00
1.30
0.68
0.51
1.33
1.84
1.49
1.47
2.71
1.74
4.46
2.26
1.89
1.10
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
**
NS
NS

No (Ref)
Yes
1.15
0.072
2.3
0.023
1.02
1.30

Practising Buddhist
Practising Hindu
Practising Muslim
Practising Sikh
Non-practising Sikh
No religion
0.81
0.59
0.98
0.83
0.74
1.88
1.76
0.95
1.03
1.39
1.02
0.87
0.055
0.303
0.408
0.172
0.227
0.329
0.455
0.243
0.288
0.273
0.220
0.085
-3.1
-1.0
0.0
-0.9
-1.0
3.6
2.2
-0.2
0.1
1.7
0.1
-1.5
0.002
0.308
0.971
0.369
0.323
0.000
0.029
0.826
0.905
0.098
0.928
0.146
0.71
0.22
0.44
0.55
0.40
1.33
1.06
0.57
0.60
0.94
0.67
0.72
0.93
1.62
2.22
1.25
1.35
2.65
2.92
1.57
1.79
2.04
1.56
1.05
**
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
*
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS

Agree (Ref)
Don't Know
Disagree
1.14
1.18
0.083
0.088
1.8
2.2
0.072
0.030
0.99
1.02
1.32
1.36
NS
*
Sex
Age
Ethnicity
Male (Ref)
Female
Regression output: The government is doing too little to protect peoples

religious rights (continued)
Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
How safe respondent feels after dark

Very safe (Ref)
Fairly safe
A bit unsafe
Very unsafe
Never walks alone after dark
1.13
1.13
1.31
0.81
0.077
0.103
0.150
0.128
1.9
1.3
2.4
-1.3

North East (Ref)
North West
East Midlands
West Midlands
East of England
London
South East
South West
Wales
1.14
1.10
1.17
1.52
1.06
1.17
1.40
1.12
1.41
0.134
0.130
0.151
0.194
0.142
0.154
0.166
0.152
0.190
1.1
0.8
1.2
3.3
0.4
1.2
2.9
0.9
2.6
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.064
0.196
0.018
0.193
0.99
0.94
1.05
0.60
1.30
1.35
1.64
1.11
NS
NS
*
NS
0.273
0.403
0.231
0.001
0.668
0.238
0.004
0.395
0.010
0.90
0.88
0.91
1.18
0.81
0.90
1.11
0.86
1.09
1.44
1.39
1.50
1.95
1.38
1.51
1.77
1.46
1.84
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
**
NS
*
B5
Characteristics of people who feel that they have been

discriminated against because of their religion, by one or more
of the public service organisations
Summary
was used to identify the covariates that predicted whether or not an individual felt they
had been discriminated against because of their religion (compared to those who
thought they had not). The stepwise model identified the variables that were most

Age
Employment status
Index of multiple deprivation
Rural/Urban area
Education level
Income
Length of residence
Sexual identity
Feel safe in local area

Uses the internet.
would be discarded.

Sex
Perceived level of anti-social behaviour (high/low).

At Stage 3 IMD was added to the Stage 2 model. This variable was not significant and
was not added to the final model.
Regression output: Discriminated against by organisations due to religion

Variable
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error

Yes (Ref)
No
0.67
0.085
-3.2
Country of birth
Born in UK (Ref)
Not born in UK
0.58
0.108
Worried about crime

Very worried (Ref)
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
1.08
0.70
0.43
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.001
0.52
0.85
**
-2.9
0.004
0.40
0.84
**
0.236
0.160
0.116
0.4
-1.6
-3.1
0.713
0.121
0.002
0.71
0.45
0.25
1.66
1.10
0.73
NS
NS
**
1.33
1.83
2.44
0.256
0.329
1.110
1.5
3.3
2.0
0.144
0.001
0.051
0.91
1.28
1.00
1.94
2.60
5.96
NS
**
NS

Practising Buddhist
Practising Hindu
Practising Muslim
Practising Sikh
Non-practising Sikh
No religion
1.00
0.08
5.85
2.27
1.39
4.64
2.29
1.97
2.27
3.97
2.08
1.37
0.189
0.082
3.126
0.867
0.644
2.168
0.829
0.967
1.264
1.368
0.946
0.307
0.0
-2.4
3.3
2.2
0.7
3.3
2.3
1.4
1.5
4.0
1.6
1.4
0.985
0.015
0.001
0.032
0.480
0.001
0.023
0.165
0.142
0.000
0.106
0.159
0.69
0.01
2.05
1.07
0.56
1.85
1.12
0.75
0.76
2.01
0.86
0.88
1.45
0.61
16.71
4.81
3.45
11.61
4.66
5.17
6.78
7.81
5.08
2.13
NS
*
**
*
NS
**
*
NS
NS
**
NS
NS

Agree (Ref)
Don't Know
Disagree
1.24
1.58
0.268
0.253
1.0
2.9
0.326
0.004
0.81
1.16
1.89
2.16
NS
**

Neutral
Don't know
1.24
1.68
1.96
1.77
0.13
0.237
0.408
0.618
0.646
0.091
1.1
2.1
2.1
1.6
-2.9
0.266
0.033
0.033
0.120
0.004
0.85
1.04
1.06
0.86
0.03
1.80
2.71
3.64
3.62
0.51
NS
*
*
NS
**

No (Ref)
Yes
1.33
0.210
1.8
0.069
0.98
1.82
NS
Tenure
Owned outright (Ref)

Mortgage
Rent
Missing
Regression output: Discriminated against by organisations due to religion (continued)

Variable
Ethnic density of ward (deciles)
1 [Lowest density] (Ref)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 [Highest density]
Ethnicity
White (Ref)
Indian
Pakistani
Bangladeshi
Other Asian
Black Caribbean
Black African
Other Black
Mixed Race
Chinese
Other
Odds
Ratio
Linearized
Std Error
0.79
1.26
1.36
1.15
1.85
1.25
1.55
2.36
2.65
0.346
0.498
0.503
0.484
0.689
0.491
0.579
0.911
0.965
-0.5
0.6
0.8
0.3
1.7
0.6
1.2
2.2
2.7
1.22
1.80
2.25
1.76
2.37
1.96
1.36
1.70
2.32
1.83
0.553
0.944
1.325
0.807
0.647
0.780
0.963
0.548
0.957
0.760
0.4
1.1
1.4
1.2
3.2
1.7
0.4
1.7
2.1
1.5
Confidence
Interval (95%)
Sig
0.597
0.554
0.411
0.747
0.100
0.574
0.237
0.026
0.008
0.34
0.58
0.65
0.50
0.89
0.58
0.75
1.11
1.30
1.87
2.74
2.81
2.63
3.84
2.70
3.23
5.04
5.42
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
NS
*
**
0.661
0.261
0.167
0.216
0.002
0.090
0.661
0.098
0.041
0.148
0.50
0.64
0.71
0.72
1.39
0.90
0.34
0.91
1.04
0.81
2.97
5.04
7.15
4.33
4.05
4.29
5.46
3.21
5.22
4.13
NS
NS
NS
NS
**
NS
NS
NS
*
NS
Annex C
Definitions and terms
All ethnic minority groups Results from this survey combine the 16-point census
classification into either 11, five or two summary groups.
All non-White ethnic groups are included in the 2-group
classification as all ethnic minority groups.
Anti-social behaviour
People were asked a series of seven questions (in a random

order) which asked whether the following things are a
problem in their local area:
noisy neighbours or loud parties
teenagers hanging around on the streets
rubbish or litter lying around
vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to
property
people using or dealing drugs
people being drunk or rowdy in public places
abandoned or burnt-out cars.
A score was calculated to measure the level of perceived
anti-social behaviour from these answers, with each question
response being given a score between three and zero. People
who said something was a very big problem were given a
maximum score of three, a fairly big problem scored two,
while not a very big problem scored one and those saying
not a problem at all were given no points. Respondents
who said dont know to any of these questions were
excluded from this analysis. This provided a score out of
twenty-one, from which people scoring eleven or more were
categorised as having a high level of perceived anti-social
behaviour.
At risk of social exclusion
Defined as those belonging to ethnic minority groups, people

with no qualifications or people with a limiting long-term
illness or disability.
Annex C Definitions and terms | 115
Charitable giving
Giving money to charity.
Civic activism
Involvement in either direct decision-making about local

services or issues, or in the actual provision of these services
by taking on a role such as a local councillor, school governor
or magistrate.
Civic consultation
Active engagement in consultation about local services or

issues through activities such as attending a consultation
group or completing a questionnaire about these services.
Civic participation
Engaging in one of the following activities:

contacting a local councillor, Member of Parliament,
Member of the Greater London Assembly or National
Assembly for Wales
contacting a public official working for a local council,
central Government, Greater London Assembly or
National Assembly for Wales
attending a public meeting or rally
taking part in a public demonstration or protest; or
signing a petition.
Civil renewal
Any civic participation, civic activism or civic consultation

activities.
Community cohesion
The Citizenship Survey measures cohesion by whether people

feel that people from different backgrounds get on well
together in their local area.
Computer assisted
personal interview (CAPI)
The mode of interview used. The questionnaire is a computer

program that specifies the questions, range and structure of
permissible answers and instructions for navigating through
the questionnaire.
Criminal Justice Service

(CJS) organisations
These are: the police, prisons, the courts, Crown Prosecution

Service, probation service.
Formal Volunteering
Giving unpaid help through groups, clubs or organisations to

benefit other people or the environment.
Government Office
Region (GOR)
An administrative division of England and Wales, comprising

nine regions in England (North East, North West, Yorkshire
and the Humber, East Midlands, West Midlands, East of
England, London, South West and South East) and Wales.
Index of Multiple
Deprivation
The index was developed by Communities and Local

Government and combines a number of indicators which
cover income, employment, health and disability, education,
skills and training, housing and access to services into a
single deprivation score for each area.
Informal volunteering
Giving unpaid help as an individual to people who are not

relatives.
Local area
Within 15-20 minutes walking distance of respondents

home.
Long-term limiting illness

(LTLI) or disability
Respondents who report a long-standing illness, disability or

infirmity.
Meaningful interaction
Defined as mixing with people on a personal level by having

informal conversations with them at, for example, the shops,
your work or a childs school, as well as meeting up with
people to socialise. However, it excludes situations where
youve interacted with people for work or business, for
example just to buy something.
Regular volunteering
Defined as involvement at least once a month over the year

before interview.
Sample size
The number of people interviewed for the survey. In 2007-08

this was 9,336 core interviews and an additional 4,759
interviews from an ethnic minority boost sample.
Sexual identity
People were asked which of the following best describes

their sexual identity: heterosexual/straight, gay or lesbian,
bisexual, other or if they would prefer not to say. People who
said other, that they preferred not to say or dont know
were excluded from analysis by sexual identity.
Annex C Definitions and terms | 117
Statistical significance
Because the survey uses responses from a random sample to

estimate responses from the population, differences between
estimates from successive years and between sub-groups
may occur by chance. Tests of statistical significance are used
to identify which differences are unlikely to have occurred by
chance. In these reports, tests at the five per cent significance
levels have been applied (the level at which there is a one
in 20 chance of an observed difference being solely due to
chance). All reported differences are statistically significant
to the 95 per cent level, unless otherwise stated.
Urban/rural
Areas are classified as urban if the settlement is above

20 hectares, the land use is urban in character and the
population count is 10,000 or over.
Weighting
The data are weighted to ensure that the sample is

representative of the population of England and Wales.
Annex D
Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and
Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs)
The Citizenship Survey is used to measure components of several Public Service
Agreement (PSA) targets. PSAs are government targets which form an integral part of
the Governments spending plans and articulate and drive forward the Governments
priorities for improvements in public services.
Several PSA Indicators from the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review are measured by
the Citizenship Survey:
PSA 21 Build more cohesive, empowered and active communities
Percentage of people who believe that people from different backgrounds get on well
together in their local area (Indicator 1)
Percentage of people who have meaningful interactions on a regular basis with people
from different ethnic or religious backgrounds (Indicator 2)
Percentage of people who feel that they belong to their neighbourhood (Indicator 3).
Percentage of people who feel they can influence decisions affecting their local area
(Indicator 4)
Percentage of people who engage in formal volunteering on a regular basis (at least
once a month) (Indicator 5i).
PSA 15 Address the disadvantage that individuals experience because of their
gender, race, disability, age, sexual orientation, religion or belief
Differential gaps in participation in civic society (Indicator 3)
Differential gaps in perception of employment-based discrimination (Indicator 4)
Differential gaps in perceptions of dignity and respect when accessing services
(Indicator 5).
Annex D Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs) | 119
The Citizenship Survey is also used to measure the following Departmental Strategic
Objective (DSO)23 indicators:
Communities and Local Government DSO 1 To support local government that
empowers individuals and communities and delivers high-quality services
efficiently
Overall satisfaction with local area (Indicator 1.1)
Percentage of people who feel they can influence decisions in their locality
(Indicator 1.2)
Differential gaps in participation in civic society the composite change in the gap
between involvement rates of disadvantaged groups by comparison with nondisadvantaged groups (Indicator 1.3).
Communities and Local Government DSO 4 To develop communities that are
cohesive, active and resilient to extremism
Percentage of people who believe that people from different backgrounds get on well
together in their local area (Indicator 4.1)
Percentage of people who have meaningful interactions on a regular basis with people
from different backgrounds (Indicator 4.2)
Percentage of people who feel that they belong to their neighbourhood (Indicator 4.3)
The percentage of people who feel that racial or religious harassment is a problem in
their local area (Indicator 4.5).
Cabinet Office DSO 3b To enable a thriving third sector
Increase the participation of people who engage in formal volunteering on a regular
basis (at least once a month) (Indicator 3b.1).
23
Every government department has a set of Departmental Strategic Objectives (DSOs). These are targets which represent the whole
range of core business for that department.
Annex E
Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Expectations of treatment by public service organisations compared

to people of other races, by ethnic group
126
Proportion of people expecting to be treated worse than other races,

by organisation and ethnicity
130
Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least

one public service organisation, by ethnic group
139

one public service organisation, by age within ethnic group
140

one public service organisation, by sex within ethnic group
143
Table 6
Proportion of respondents saying that there is now more racial prejudice

than five years ago; 2001, 2003, 2005 and 2007-08, by ethnic group
145
Table 7
Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago,

by age within ethnicity
146

by sex within ethnicity
148

by country of birth within ethnic group
149
Table 10
Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by age
149
Table 11

by highest qualification level
150

by socio-economic group
150
Table 13
Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by religion
151
Table 14
Groups who experience more racial prejudice now than five years ago,
by ethnic group
153
Proportions of people who have different religions
154
Table 15b Proportions of people practising different religions, by religion
154
Table 8
Table 9
Table 12
Table 15
Table 16
Proportions of people practising different religions, by religion

within ethnicity
155
Table 17
Proportions of people practising different religions, by sex within religion 156
Table 18
Proportions of people practising different religions, by age within religion 157
Table 19
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by ethno-religious group 158
Table 20
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by sex within religion
159
Annex E Tables | 121
Table 21
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by ethnicity
161
Table 22
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by country of birth

within ethnicity
161
Table 23
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by age
162
Table 24
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by age within religion
163
Table 25
Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by socio-economic group 164
Table 26
Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago,

by sex within religion
165

by age
167

by age within religion
168

by ethnicity
169

by ethno-religious group
169

by country of birth within ethnicity
170

170
Groups who would experience more religious prejudice today

compared to five years ago, by religion
171
Groups who would experience more religious prejudice today

compared to than five years ago, by ethnicity
173
Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the

rights of people belonging to different religions, by sex
174

rights of people belonging to different religions, by age
174
Table 27
Table 28
Table 29
Table 30
Table 31
Table 32
Table 33
Table 34
Table 35
Table 36
Table 37

rights of people belonging to different religions, by socio-economic group 175
Table 38

rights of people belonging to different religions, by religion
176

rights of people belonging to different religions, by ethnicity
177
Table 39
Table 40

rights of people belonging to different religions, by ethno-religious group 178
Table 41

rights of people belonging to different religions, by country of birth
within ethnicity
178
Table 42
Table 43
Table 44
Table 45
Table 46
Table 47
Table 48
Table 49
Table 50
Table 51
Table 52
Table 53
Table 54
Table 55
Table 56
Table 57
Table 58
Table 59
Table 60
Table 61
Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too

much and too little by the Government, by religion
179

much and too little by the Government, by ethnicity
181

much and too little by the Government, by age
182
Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion

by at least one public service organisation, by religion
183

by at least one public service organisation, by ethnicity
184

by at least one public service organisation, by ethno-religious group
184

by at least one public service organisation, by sex within religion
185

by at least one public service organisation, by age within religion
187

by at least one public service organisation, by country of birth
188
Organisations from which respondents experienced discrimination

because of their religion, by religion
189
Organisations from which respondents experienced discrimination

because of their religion, by ethno-religious group
191
Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are
able to practise their religion freely, by religion
192
able to practise their religion freely, by ethno-religious group
192
able to practise their religion freely, by age within religion
193
able to practise their religion freely, by country of birth within ethnicity
194
Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they

are able to practise their religion freely, by sex within religion
195
The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life,

by religion and whether respondents actively practise a religion
196

198

199

by sex
200
Table 62
Table 63
Table 64
Table 65

201

by age within religion
202
Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment

is in the respondents area, by age within ethnicity, England and Wales
206

is in the respondents area, by age within ethnicity, England
208
Table 66
Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the

respondents area, by country of birth within ethnicity, England and Wales 210
Table 67

is in the respondents area, by country of birth within ethnicity, England
211
Table 68

is in the respondents area, by ethno-religious group, England and Wales 212
Table 69

is in the respondents area, by ethno-religious group, England
213

is in the respondents area, by sex within ethnicity, England and Wales
214

is in the respondents area, by sex within ethnicity, England
215
Table 70
Table 71
Table 72

is in the respondents area, by socio-economic group, England and Wales 216
Table 73

is in the respondents area, by socio-economic group, England
217
Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in

the respondents area, by the Index of Multiple Deprivation, England
218

is in the respondents area, by type of area, England and Wales
218

is in the respondents area, by type of area, England
219
Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the

respondents area, by Government Office Region, England and Wales
220
Percentages of people who are worried about being physically

attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion,
by age within ethnicity, England and Wales
221

by age within ethnicity, England
222

by ethno-religious group, England and Wales
223
Table 74
Table 75
Table 76
Table 77
Table 78
Table 79
Table 80
Table 81

by ethno-religious group, England
223

by sex within ethnicity, England and Wales
224

by sex within ethnicity, England
225

by country of birth within ethnicity, England and Wales
226

by country of birth within ethnicity, England
227

by socio-economic group, England and Wales
228

by socio-economic group, England
228
Reasons for being refused a job or discriminated against regarding

promotion, 2003, 2005 and 2007-08
229
Table 89
Reasons for being refused a job, by age
230
Table 90
Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion,

by age
231
Table 91
Reasons for being refused a job, by sex
232
Table 92

by sex
233
Table 93
Reasons for being refused a job, by ethnicity
234
Table 94

by ethnicity
235
Table 95
Reasons for being refused a job, by religion
236
Table 96

by religion
237
Reasons for being refused a job, by whether the respondent

has a long-term limiting illness or disability
238

by whether the respondent has a long-term limiting illness or disability
239
Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering,

by age
240
Table 82
Table 83
Table 84
Table 85
Table 86
Table 87
Table 88
Table 97
Table 98
Table 99
Table 100 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering,

by sex
240

by ethnicity
241

by religion
242

by whether the respondent has a long-term limiting illness or disability
244

by sexual identity
244
Table 105 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with,
by age
245
by sex
246
by ethnicity
247
by religion
248
250
by sexual identity
251
4
2
2
94
2
6
3
3
92
2
8
3
5
75
17
A local hospital
Treated different to other races
(better or worse)
Worse than other races
Better than other races
The same as other races
Dont know/No opinion
The Health Service

(better or worse)
A local school
(better or worse)
6
5
1
76
18
6
4
2
92
2
6
5
1
92
2
4
2
2
94
1
6
5
1
80
14
6
5
2
92
2
7
6
1
91
2
6
4
2
93
1
8
3
5
79
12
10
6
4
86
4
11
7
4
85
4
13
8
6
83
4
Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi
Asian
All column based on core sample. Other columns based on combined sample.
Excludes respondents with missing answers.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
4
2
2
95
2
White

(better or worse)
Organisation
Percentage2
5
3
2
73
21
5
2
2
90
6
6
3
3
88
6
7
2
4
90
4
Other
6
5
2
77
16
6
4
2
91
3
7
5
2
91
3
6
4
2
92
2
All
12
11
1
70
19
6
6
1
91
3
6
5
1
92
3
5
3
2
93
3
8
6
1
73
19
8
6
2
88
4
7
5
2
89
4
8
4
3
90
3
Caribbean African
Black
16
15
1
65
19
12
11
1
84
4
10
9
1
86
4
2
94
4
Other
10
8
1
72
19
7
6
1
89
4
6
5
2
90
4
6
4
2
91
3
All
7
5
2
79
14
4
3
1
94
2
4
3
1
95
2
5
3
2
94
1
10
8
1
63
27
5
5
1
91
4
4
2
2
92
4
7
5
1
90
3
Mixed Chinese
Race
6
4
2
69
25
6
4
1
91
3
7
5
2
91
2
6
5
1
92
2
Other
7
6
2
75
18
6
5
2
91
3
6
5
2
91
3
6
4
2
92
2
All minority
ethnic groups
8
4
4
75
17
6
3
3
92
2
4
3
2
94
2
4
2
2
95
2
All1
England and Wales, 2007-08
Table 1 Expectations of treatment by public service organisations compared to people of other races, by ethnic group
31
25
6
48
21
15
11
4
73
11
29
4
25
48
23
A housing dept. or housing association

(better or worse)
A local council
(better or worse)
A private landlord
(better or worse)
11
8
2
56
34
8
6
2
75
18
9
7
2
57
34
7
5
2
79
14
11
8
3
58
31
7
6
1
75
17
10
8
2
64
26
7
6
1
82
11
15
10
5
57
29
11
7
4
73
16
18
14
4
62
20
9
5
4
82
9
Asian
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
12
5
7
73
15
White

(better or worse)
Organisation
Percentage2
11
7
4
59
30
5
2
3
75
20
7
5
2
62
31
8
3
4
78
14
Other
11
8
3
57
32
8
6
2
75
18
10
8
2
60
30
7
5
2
80
13
All
18
16
2
49
33
13
12
1
73
14
18
18
1
58
24
23
21
1
62
15
16
15
1
56
28
11
9
2
73
16
18
15
2
60
22
15
13
2
73
12
Caribbean African
Black
17
15
1
52
31
15
14
1
68
17
20
19
1
71
9
28
26
2
58
14
Other
17
15
2
53
30
12
11
1
73
15
18
16
2
60
22
19
17
2
68
14
All
20
15
5
57
23
8
7
1
81
11
17
14
3
68
15
10
10
1
80
9
15
8
7
59
26
8
6
2
73
18
11
9
3
54
35
11
8
3
76
13
Mixed Chinese
Race
13
7
6
59
28
12
8
4
72
17
15
13
2
57
28
8
5
3
71
21
Other
14
10
3
56
30
9
7
2
74
16
13
11
2
60
27
11
9
2
76
13
All minority
ethnic groups
27
4
23
49
24
15
11
4
74
12
29
23
6
49
22
12
6
7
73
15
All1
Table 1 Expectations of treatment by public service organisations compared to people of other races, by ethnic group (continued)
12
5
7
71
17
25
6
19
68
7
17
4
13
74
9

(better or worse)
The Police
(better or worse)
Your local Police

(better or worse)
12
10
2
76
12
16
14
2
72
12
7
6
1
58
34
7
6
1
61
32
22
21
1
65
13
26
25
1
61
12
12
11
1
54
34
12
11
1
59
28
23
19
4
58
19
28
24
4
53
20
10
8
3
52
38
8
6
3
58
33
Asian
1 All column based on core sample. Other columns based on combined sample.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
13
6
8
73
14
White
The courts
(better or worse)
Don't know/No opinion
Organisation
Percentage2
9
7
2
70
20
12
10
2
70
18
3
2
1
61
36
3
2
1
65
33
Other
16
14
2
70
14
20
18
2
66
14
8
7
1
57
35
8
7
1
61
31
All
34
33
1
54
12
41
41
1
46
12
25
25
*
49
25
27
27
*
51
22
22
21
1
64
14
30
29
1
56
14
14
14
*
54
32
14
13
1
59
27
Caribbean African
Black
21
20
1
67
11
25
22
2
67
9
13
12
1
50
37
14
13
1
62
24
Other
27
26
1
60
13
35
34
1
52
13
19
19
*
52
29
19
19
1
56
25
All
22
19
3
67
11
29
26
3
62
9
16
14
2
60
24
16
15
1
64
20
7
5
1
78
15
12
10
2
77
12
8
8
*
62
30
8
8
1
66
26
Mixed Chinese
Race
10
7
3
74
16
14
10
4
73
13
9
7
2
53
38
10
9
2
58
32
Other
18
17
2
68
14
24
22
2
63
13
12
11
1
56
33
12
11
1
60
28
All minority
ethnic groups
17
6
11
74
9
25
8
17
68
7
12
6
6
69
18
13
6
7
72
15
All1
31
25
6
1,369
11
2
9
62
28
60
29
30
8,553

(better or worse)
Don't know/No opinion
At least one of eight key

public service organisations3
(better or worse)
816
41
36
5
10
9
1
50
41
15
15
*
43
41
18
16
2
60
22
294
44
35
9
12
9
2
42
46
18
16
2
39
44
18
13
5
55
27
35
29
6
8
8
1
46
45
13
12
1
43
44
16
14
2
61
22
All
283 2,762
27
22
6
5
5
1
47
47
10
10
1
46
44
13
8
5
68
19
Other
809
58
55
4
21
21
*
43
36
27
26
*
38
35
28
27
1
43
28
819
45
39
6
14
13
1
46
40
18
18
1
43
39
25
22
3
57
18
Caribbean African
Black
51
46
5
17
16
1
45
39
22
21
*
41
38
26
24
2
51
23
All
464 1,674
48
42
6
12
10
2
37
51
15
12
2
38
47
16
11
6
46
38
Other
485
48
38
10
11
9
2
60
29
19
16
3
51
30
21
13
7
55
24
166
34
26
8
6
4
3
52
42
6
6
53
41
17
14
2
63
20
Mixed Chinese
Race
441
33
26
8
7
6
1
43
50
9
7
2
41
51
15
12
4
57
28
Other
58
30
28
11
3
8
60
29
17
4
14
55
28
28
9
19
46
26
All1
5,528 9,336
40
34
6
11
10
1
47
43
15
14
1
43
42
19
16
3
58
23
All minority
ethnic groups
Excludes respondents with missing answers, except for at least one of eight key public service organisations which includes those with missing answers.
These are: local schools, local doctors surgery, council housing department or housing association, the Police, the Prison Service, the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Probation Service. Figures are not shown for treated
the same as other races by at least one of eight key public service organisations as this figure was not deemed to be useful; figures are likely to be close to 100%.
4 Please note this is a very small base size so these findings should be treated as indicative rather than significant.
5 These bases are for A local doctors surgery. Bases for other categories are very similar.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
8
7
1
45
48
11
10
1
43
46
18
2
15
56
26
16
14
2
62
22
The Prison Service

(better or worse)
Respondents5
Asian
30
8
22
45
26
White

(better or worse)
Organisation
Percentage2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
5
4
2
6
4
3
6
3
2
2
3
3
1
3
4
7
5
6
6
5
6
4
4
4
5
3
4
5
5
8
5
10
2
6
8
10
7
8
8
6
9
6
**
3
4
4
4
3
**
3
1
3
2
3
2
Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi1 Other
Asian
5
5
4
6
4
4
6
4
3
4
4
3
3
4
All
5
4
7
5
2
4
5
3
3
3
4
2
4
2
6
4
4
5
6
5
4
9
4
4
4
8
5
4
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
13
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other2
6
4
5
5
4
5
5
5
4
3
4
4
4
3
All
3
2
3
4
2
4
3
4
2
3
5
4
3
**
3
1
4
2
1
3
**
7
3
12
3
8
6
5
5
5
5
5
6
1
6
2
8
2
4
6
Other
5
5
4
6
4
4
5
4
4
3
5
3
4
4
All minority
ethnic groups
2
3
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
Figures for Aged 50+ are based on a very small base size and so should be treated as indicative rather than significant.
Figures for All and Females are based on a very small base size and so should be treated as indicative rather than significant.
3 Figures for Aged 50+ are based on a very small base size and so should be treated as indicative rather than significant.
4 All column based on core sample with the exception of figures based on Born in the UK/Not born in the UK. Other columns based on combined sample.
5 Excludes respondents with missing answers.
** = Percentages are not shown for groups of less than 30 people.
= 0.
All
A local hospital
White
All
Organisation
Percentage5
Table 2 Proportion of people expecting to be treated worse than other races, by organisation and ethnicity
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
3
3
5
4
2
3
1
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
5
5
5
5
3
5
4
5
4
3
5
4
3
6
7
5
6
6
3
6
4
3
5
4
6
3
5
5
4
3
6
2
1
6
6
7
6
7
3
5
8
**
2
4
3
4
2
**
2
2
3
3
2
Asian
6
4
6
5
2
5
4
4
4
4
5
4
4
5
All
14
7
15
11
7
12
10
11
8
3
12
5
2
7
4
13
5
5
7
7
7
6
7
5
8
4
6
4
7
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
11
15
**
**
**
**
**
**
16
11
Other2
14
6
9
9
7
9
8
8
5
9
4
4
5
6
All
7
1
5
5
2
1
7
3
3
2
6
4
3
**
6
14
4
12
5
**
6
4
7
2
3
6
5
4
3
5
2
2
6
2
5
5
4
3
4
5
Other
8
4
7
6
4
6
6
5
5
5
5
3
4
5
All minority
ethnic groups
4
3
6
4
2
4
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
3
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
All
A local school
White
All
The Health Service
Organisation
Percentage5
Table 2 Proportion of people expecting to be treated worse than other races, by organisation and ethnicity (continued)
6
5
5
5
5
5
3
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
26
24
27
29
20
25
15
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
12
5
9
7
5
7
8
7
4
4
7
2
5
5
10
7
7
8
11
8
8
8
4
6
8
1
5
8
16
13
18
13
2
10
18
14
3
5
6
5
5
5
**
5
7
5
2
7
3
**
7
5
1
6
4
3
Asian
11
7
9
8
6
8
8
7
4
5
6
2
5
5
All
21
14
25
18
12
18
17
18
30
13
31
23
12
23
20
21
16
15
20
13
14
14
16
15
27
11
17
12
11
16
11
13
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
24
19
**
**
**
**
**
**
23
Other2
20
15
22
15
13
16
17
16
29
12
22
16
12
19
15
17
All
18
8
18
12
10
11
17
14
13
4
13
7
6
11
8
10
**
7
15
1
6
11
7
**
10
14
2
11
4
29
10
8
12
21
14
12
13
4
5
6
5
4
4
6
Other
15
9
13
10
10
10
12
11
13
6
10
9
5
9
8
All minority
ethnic groups
25
12
25
26
20
24
22
23
6
4
6
6
5
6
5
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
25
All
A housing dept. or HA
White
All
Organisation
Percentage5
12
10
11
13
9
11
6
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
9
8
7
10
5
9
7
10
4
6
7
4
5
7
9
7
9
9
3
8
9
8
5
5
7
8
7
6
19
7
14
7
7
9
11
10
15
4
10
5
1
6
7
**
7
7
7
5
6
7
**
3
2
3
2
Asian
10
7
9
9
5
8
8
9
4
6
6
5
6
6
All
22
11
20
19
10
17
16
16
15
9
19
11
10
13
12
12
20
13
18
10
23
13
15
15
10
9
11
8
12
10
9
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
19
15
**
**
**
**
**
**
9
14
Other2
21
13
18
14
15
15
16
15
14
9
14
9
10
11
10
11
All
21
6
17
15
10
18
13
15
8
4
7
8
4
5
8
**
8
13
2
5
9
7
**
4
9
2
6
7
5
7
7
4
8
7
6
8
18
6
6
6
15
9
7
Other
14
9
12
11
8
10
11
10
11
6
8
7
7
7
7
All minority
ethnic groups
4
5
5
5
4
5
4
11
6
11
12
9
11
10
11
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
All
A private landlord
11
White
All
A local council
Organisation
Percentage5
7
5
4
6
6
6
4
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
6
4
3
6
5
5
3
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
10
4
6
6
6
6
6
9
4
5
6
6
6
6
20
5
12
12
5
13
8
11
20
5
12
13
4
14
8
11
16
5
15
2
2
4
11
14
3
11
3
2
5
7
**
2
2
2
1
**
2
3
1
Asian
14
4
9
7
5
8
6
13
4
8
7
5
8
6
All
37
14
28
32
14
28
23
25
40
14
34
31
15
29
25
27
35
11
23
9
10
16
12
14
37
9
22
9
9
14
12
13
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
7
12
**
**
**
**
**
**
15
13
Other2
35
12
24
18
12
21
17
19
38
11
26
18
13
20
18
19
All
18
7
18
11
9
17
11
14
20
7
18
14
10
16
14
15
**
6
13
2
6
12
4
**
8
10
5
5
9
6
16
5
7
5
12
6
8
20
6
9
7
12
9
9
Other
20
6
13
10
8
12
10
11
21
6
13
10
8
11
10
11
All minority
ethnic groups
5
5
6
6
6
7
4
6
5
6
7
6
8
5
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
All
White
All
The courts
Organisation
Percentage5
7
5
6
7
5
6
4
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
5
3
6
5
3
4
4
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
17
7
13
9
8
10
10
10
25
10
18
14
11
14
14
14
29
15
22
19
23
25
15
21
35
19
27
23
28
29
20
25
34
14
24
16
12
21
16
19
43
18
31
19
18
28
20
24
**
7
8
7
6
11
4
**
9
13
10
4
14
6
10
Asian
23
10
17
13
11
16
11
14
30
13
22
16
14
20
15
18
All
46
20
58
32
16
41
26
33
59
24
65
44
19
48
35
41
40
18
28
16
23
24
18
21
52
25
43
20
28
32
26
29
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
15
20
**
**
**
**
**
**
11
22
Other2
43
19
38
22
18
31
21
26
55
25
50
30
22
39
30
34
All
25
8
27
14
9
18
20
19
35
12
34
20
20
32
21
26
**
5
10
1
1
8
3
**
11
13
7
7
14
7
10
7
7
4
9
6
5
9
14
9
9
10
10
8
12
10
Other
27
12
21
15
12
18
14
17
36
15
28
20
16
24
19
22
All minority
ethnic groups
5
7
10
6
4
7
4
7
9
11
8
6
9
6
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
All
Your local Police
White
All
The Police
Organisation
Percentage5
16
16
10
23
11
8
8
8
8
6
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK5

Not born in the UK
3
2
3
3
2
2
2
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
19
6
12
11
6
9
11
10
27
7
17
15
8
16
13
15
23
11
19
15
15
18
13
16
22
13
25
11
2
15
16
16
15
12
17
12
2
12
14
13
**
9
14
8
5
13
6
10
**
8
8
10
2
11
5
22
7
16
12
6
13
11
12
22
11
16
14
10
14
14
14
All
39
15
37
29
15
27
26
26
35
19
37
30
15
29
25
27
36
15
25
14
17
21
14
18
41
19
23
21
23
24
20
22
Caribbean African
Black
**
**
**
**
**
**
10
12
**
**
**
**
**
**
15
11
Other2
37
15
29
20
15
24
19
21
36
19
27
25
18
26
22
24
All
19
10
19
15
10
17
15
16
15
10
14
15
9
13
14
13
**
5
10
1
6
6
6
**
14
16
14
13
17
12
14
10
6
9
6
6
5
10
22
9
13
11
13
12
11
12
Other
24
9
18
13
9
14
13
14
24
13
18
17
12
17
16
16
All minority
ethnic groups
3
5
6
4
3
4
3
9
9
10
10
8
10
8
All4

Mixed Chinese3
Race
= 0.
All
12
17
9
7
14
Males
Females
The Prison Service
Asian
White
All
Organisation
Percentage5
3
2
2
3
2
2
1
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
15
4
10
7
5
7
7
32
27
32
34
25
30
21
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
38
20
29
26
18
24
26
25
47
28
39
32
35
40
30
36
15
5
10
8
7
9
9
51
31
47
29
19
35
35
35
20
6
15
6
2
8
11
37
20
27
21
13
30
13
22
**
3
5
6
*
6
3
43
23
35
28
21
31
26
29
15
4
10
7
5
8
8
All
73
37
77
59
32
60
50
55
28
13
29
22
13
19
22
21
62
36
53
31
40
42
37
39
25
11
17
11
12
15
12
13
Caribbean African
Black
42
42
50
28
55
46
40
42
**
**
**
**
**
**
10
10
Other2
69
36
61
42
35
50
43
46
27
12
21
15
12
16
16
16
All
45
26
50
29
28
43
33
38
9
9
10
8
9
11
8
28
25
32
25
8
27
24
26
**
2
6
2
5
2
Mixed Chinese3
Race
40
23
25
25
29
27
25
26
10
5
7
5
7
5
7
Other
49
27
41
32
26
36
31
34
17
6
12
9
7
10
10
10
All minority
ethnic groups
31
25
35
33
19
33
28
30
3
3
3
4
3
4
3
All4
5 Excludes respondents with missing answers, except for At least one of eight key public service organisations which includes those with missing answers.
6 These are: local schools, local doctors surgery, council housing department or housing association, the Police, the Prison Service, the courts, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Probation Service.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
29
All
Asian
At least one of eight key public service organisations6
White
All
Organisation
Percentage5
3,717
4,832
1,203
2,931
4,414
8,012
540
Males
Females
Aged 16-29
Aged 30-49
Aged 50+
Born in the UK
Not born in the UK
371
992
310
636
423
672
697
1,369
287
528
277
404
135
430
386
816
63
231
107
148
38
138
156
294
All
27
748
255 2,006
71
765
152 1,340
60
656
134 1,374
149 1,388
283 2,762
Asian
369
439
118
400
290
329
480
809
89
725
210
484
125
324
495
819
All
340
906
427
18
476
28 1,192
12
22
12
14
667
32 1,007
46 1,674
Caribbean African Other2
Black
280
202
172
216
96
177
308
485
27
137
62
72
32
60
106
166
66
372
102
223
116
215
226
441
Other
All4
1,597 9,610
3,909 4,450
1,441 1,398
2,757 3,327
1,327 4,602
2,493 4,060
3,035 5,268
5,528 9,332
All minority
ethnic groups

Mixed Chinese3
Race
6 These bases are for A local doctors surgery. Bases for other categories are very similar.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
8,553
White
All
Respondents6
Organisation
Percentage5
5
2
3
3
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
872
15
2,713
Other group named as being treated better than respondent
794
87
15
Black
185
78
15
Mixed
Race
184
15
64
10
14
2,035
82
10
Chinese All minority

or Other ethnic groups
3,019
14
24
23
16
15
13
26
42
All1
Includes only people who said that they would be treated worse than people of other races by at least one organisation.
3 Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of groups.
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents2
26
Eastern Europeans
26
New immigrants
18
84
Asian
Sikhs
17
White people
Muslims
29
Black people (Caribbean, African, Other)
Chinese people
46
White
Asian people (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Other)
Groups named as being treated

better than respondent
Percentage3
Table 3 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by ethnic group
5
2
3
3
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
7
299
22
13
461
Eastern Europeans
Other groups
Respondents2
201
88
15
Black
78
78
13
Mixed
Race
59
18
79
637
84

556
13
18
19
16
11
20
23
40
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
23
New immigrants
20
84
10
Asian
Sikhs
14
White people
Muslims
28
Chinese people
46
White
Age 16-29

Percentage3
Table 4 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by age within ethnic group
6
2
3
3
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
6
431
30
15
1,068
Eastern Europeans
Other groups
Respondents2
435
87
16
Black
76
78
12
Mixed
Race
82
13
10
56
15
23
1,024
82
11

1,213
13
27
25
17
15
13
27
42
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
28
New immigrants
19
84
Asian
Sikhs
18
White people
Muslims
30
Chinese people
47
White
Age 30-49

Percentage3
Table 4 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by age within ethnic group (continued)
5
3
3
3
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
5
142
25
16
1,183
Eastern Europeans
Other groups
Respondents2
158
83
12
Black
314
15
12
76
10
32
Mixed
Race
434
12
19
23
12
47
13
14
374
79
10

1,249
15
24
24
15
17
27
44
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
26
New immigrants
16
85
Asian
Sikhs
18
White people
Muslims
29
Chinese people
46
White
Aged 50+

Percentage3
Table 4 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by age within ethnic group (continued)
5
3
4
3
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
7
445
27
16
1,257
Eastern Europeans
Other groups
Respondents2
329
88
14
Black
76
82
14
Mixed
Race
87
15
63
937
82

1,405
15
25
21
14
15
14
26
42
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
24
New immigrants
16
82
Asian
Sikhs
18
White people
Muslims
29
Chinese people
47
White
Males

Percentage3
Table 5 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by sex within ethnic group
5
2
3
2
Mixed Race people
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
6
427
25
14
1,456
Eastern Europeans
Other groups
Respondents2
465
85
15
Black
109
18
73
16
Mixed
Race
97
15
66
13
22
1,098
83
11

1,614
13
23
25
19
14
12
25
42
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
28
New immigrants
21
87
Asian
Sikhs
16
White people
Muslims
28
Chinese people
45
White
Females

Percentage3
Table 5 Groups who would be treated better than respondent by at least one public service organisation, by sex within ethnic group (continued)
6,109
10,015
25
32
28
31
43
Black
Mixed Race
Chinese/Other
All minority ethnic groups
All respondents1
47
27
22
30
20
32
49
9,482
5,292
611
338
1,679
2,664
8,747
2003
Respondents
48
31
32
33
22
35
50
9,671
5,125
556
478
1,580
2,511
8,909
20052
Respondents
56
32
25
36
25
36
58
9,333
5,530
607
486
1,674
2,763
8,553
2007-082
Respondents
England and Wales, 2001 to 2007-08

Percentage saying there is more racial prejudice today than five years ago
All respondents row based on core sample. Other rows based on combined sample.
2005 and 2007-08 figures exclude respondents with missing data, 2001 and 2003 include respondents with missing data.
614
380
1,852
3,263
33
Asian
9,358
44
2001
Respondents
White
Ethnic group
Percentage3
Table 6 Proportion of respondents saying that there is now more racial prejudice than five years ago;
2001, 2003, 2005 and 2007-08, by ethnic group
26
About the same racial prejudice as

five years ago
2,931
636
16
30
35
19
310
21
28
28
24
404
10
25
54
12
277
11
24
41
24
148
17
30
24
29
107
17
24
36
23
Asian
Respondents
60
Dont know or cant say
10
More racial prejudice than five years ago
1,203
Less racial prejudice than five years ago
Aged 30-49
Respondents
30

five years ago
15
46
White
Aged 16-29
Perceived prejudice today

compared with five years ago
Percentage2
14
28
39
18
765
17
26
33
24
All
152 1,340
18
25
36
21
71
24
26
25
25
Other
399
10
38
29
23
118
28
25
40
485
20
27
23
30
210
22
33
20
25
Caribbean African
Black
22
**
**
**
**
12
**
**
**
**
Other
Table 7 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by age within ethnicity
906
16
31
25
27
340
17
31
23
29
All
217
14
31
39
16
172
10
32
32
25
72
22
38
14
26
62
26
38
14
21
Mixed Chinese
Race
223
28
27
26
19
102
38
30
19
13
Other
10
30
44
16
All1
27
56
11
2,758 3,328
16
29
33
21
1,441 1,398
19
29
29
24
All minority
ethnic groups
25

five years ago
8,553
1,369
16
31
32
21
423
13
36
30
22
817
10
25
48
17
136
29
48
14
294
17
29
29
26
383
13
35
29
22
Asian
15
28
36
20
657
13
34
33
20
All
283 2,763
21
26
30
23
60
22
30
24
24
Other
Black
808
11
35
28
27
290
14
35
29
22
820
22
29
22
28
125
26
25
21
27
Caribbean African
Respondents
58
10
4,414
All
Respondents
22

five years ago
63
White
Aged 50+

Percentage2
17
31
25
27
427
18
32
27
24
All
463 1,674
14
32
37
17
12
**
**
**
**
Other
Table 7 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by age within ethnicity (continued)
486
12
32
36
20
96
12
33
42
13
166
23
40
16
21
323
13
47
27
13
Mixed Chinese
Race
441
28
26
28
17
116
15
19
46
19
Other
22
61
All1
11
25
56
5,530 9,333
17
30
32
22
1,328 4,602
14
32
33
21
All minority
ethnic groups
4,832
697
16
33
33
18
672
16
30
30
24
386
11
27
48
14
431
10
24
48
19
156
13
29
32
26
138
20
28
27
25
Asian
15
27
36
23
All
16
31
36
18
149 1,388
26
30
27
17
134 1,375
16
22
33
28
Other
Black
480
13
38
32
18
328
32
23
37
496
25
26
24
26
324
19
32
20
29
Caribbean African
Respondents
24

five years ago
59
3,717
Females
Respondents
26

five years ago
12
57
White
Males

Percentage2
19
31
27
22
666
14
32
22
32
All
323 1,008
14
40
31
15
14
**
**
**
**
Other
Table 8 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by sex within ethnicity
309
14
31
35
20
177
10
33
38
19
106
32
32
15
21
60
13
48
18
22
Mixed Chinese
Race
226
29
28
32
12
215
27
25
26
22
Other
26
54
13
All1
25
57
10
3,037 5,269
18
31
32
19
2,493 4,060
15
29
31
25
All minority
ethnic groups
8,012
540
21
27
41
12
Non-UK
born
White
748
30
47
20
UK
born
2,007
20
28
31
21
Non-UK
born
Asian
475
36
33
25
UK
born
1,193
21
30
21
28
Non-UK
born
Black
31
10
About the same racial prejudice as five years ago

767
42
Respondents
17
Aged 16-24

Percentage1
1,388
27
52
13
Aged 25-34
2,571
27
56
11
Aged 35-49
Table 10 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by age
Respondents

All columns based on core sample.
25
About the same racial prejudice

as five years ago
60
More racial prejudice than

five years ago
10
UK
born
Less racial prejudice than

five years ago

Percentage2
203
25
27
30
18
Non-UK
born
2,214
24
60
10
Aged 50-64
280
35
40
21
UK
born
Mixed
1,230
19
66
9,609
25
59
10
UK
born
4,453
21
27
35
17
Non-UK
born
9,333
25
56
11
All1
1,158
12
22
58
Aged 75+
9,333
25
56
11
All
509
31
29
19
21
Non-UK
born
Aged 65-74
93
39
47
UK
born
All

Chinese/Other
Table 9 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by country of birth within ethnic group
30
1,772
752
28
53
11
1,044
28
53
13
A level
or
equivalent
1,526
25
59
11
GCSE grades
A-C or
equivalent
27
Respondents
3,239
55
12
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions

Percentage1
1,820
24
59
11
2,448
25
58
10
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
small and technical/
employers Semi-routine
1,092
11
21
58
10
Routine
occupations
456
17
27
44
12
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
360
21
63
GCSE grades
D-E or
equivalent
Table 12 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by socio-economic group

All column based on all age groups including those aged 70 years and over. Other columns based on those aged 16 to 69 years.
Respondents
49
14
Degree or
Higher
equivalent Education below
degree level

Percentage2
Table 11 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by highest qualification level
1,544
23
58
10
No
qualifications
9,333
25
56
11
All1
158
16
33
32
19
Full time
students
113
12
22
54
12
Not
stated or
classified
9,333
25
56
11
All
176
23
18
42
16
Foreign and
and other
qualifications
57
23
More racial prejudice than

five years ago

five years ago
Respondents
3,591
11
Christian
24
58
11
5,328 8,928
24
59
10
NonPractising practising All
Less racial prejudice than

five years ago

Percentage1
1,429
16
24
42
18
352
12
26
36
26
15
25
40
20
All
1,784
NonPractising practising
Muslim
Table 13 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by religion
551
23
31
25
22
204
14
22
37
28
Hindu
756
20
28
28
24
All
242
13
42
30
15
98
28
47
19
Sikh
341
11
38
35
16
All
Buddhist
35
33
14
67
About the same racial prejudice

as five years ago
Respondents
62
23
24
37
16
Judaism is included in other religions due to a small base.
18

Percentage2
129
17
30
35
17
All
249
28
56
11
187
24
55
12
Other Religions3
439
26
56
11
All
Table 13 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by religion (continued)
6,129
10
24
54
12
6,231
24
59
11
24
57
11
All
12,377
All Religions
1,682
31
52
11
No
Religion
9,333
25
56
11
All1
2
*
1
1
Mixed Race
Buddhists
Hindus
Jews
966
14
53
19
57
Asian
422
10
26
15
16
41
49
40
Black
173
11
28
21
14
42
32
49
Mixed
Race
150
17
27
13
11
49
20
42
Chinese
or Other
5,233
29
17
13
44
17
39
All1
Includes only people who said that there is more racial prejudice today than five years ago.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
4,979
Respondents2
30
Eastern Europeans
6
17
New immigrants
Other groups
14
Asylum seekers/Refugees
Sikhs
44
White
Muslims
17
Black (Caribbean, African, Other)
Chinese
38
White
Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Other)
Groups named as experiencing more

racial prejudice than five years ago
Percentage3
Table 14 Groups who experience more racial prejudice now than five years ago, by ethnic group
*
3
Buddhist
8,917
69
Non-practising
Respondents
31
Christian
Practising
Percentage1
1,781
24
76
Muslim
Table 15b Proportions of people practising different religions, by religion
Excludes those with no religion and those with missing religion data.
All columns based on combined sample.
Excludes respondents with missing religion data.

* = Less than 0.5%.
No religion
16
304
Sikh
Other religion
33
Hindu
Muslim
755
30
70
Hindu
1,386
32
99
245
7,225
74
Christian
7,938
Respondents
84
Weighted percentage
All religions
Percentage1
Table 15 Proportions of people who have different religions
340
30
70
Sikh
129
34
66
Buddhist
436
51
49
Other
religions2
12,362
66
34
All
Asian
1,369
17
24
14
33
47
14
16
814
21
75
96
293
15
82
96
12
19
26
40
50
All
283 2,759
12
24
31
17
24
17
22
Other
Black
803
38
47
85
817
17
20
12
64
76
Caribbean African
Excludes those with missing religion data.

Please note this is a very small base size so these findings should be treated as indicative rather than significant.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
8,546
Respondents
Non-practising
17
No religion
Practising
Non-practising
Other religion
Practising
Non-practising
Buddhist
Practising
Non-practising
Sikh
Practising
Non-practising
Hindu
Practising
55
Non-practising
Muslim
24
79
White
Practising
Christian
Religion
Percentage1
Table 16 Proportions of people practising different religions, by religion within ethnicity
10
12
23
57
80
All
462 1,666
20
58
78
Other
484
18
31
32
63
163
55
13
18
11
13
24
Mixed Chinese
Race
440
10
10
20
30
14
27
41
Other
17
52
24
75
All
5,512 14,061
11
15
26
33
11
23
34
All minority
ethnic groups
897
63
5,231
Non-practising
Respondents1
17
37
83
884
30
70
Muslim
Practising
Females
3,686
75
Non-practising
Respondents1
25
Christian
Practising
Males
Percentage
354
21
79
401
37
63
Hindu
Table 17 Proportions of people practising different religions, by sex within religion
190
22
78
150
39
61
Sikh
71
47
53
58
27
73
Buddhist
259
41
59
177
64
36
Other
religions2
7,002
60
40
5,356
72
28
All1
295
63
4,439
Non-practising
3 Judaism is included in other religions due to a small base.
Respondents1
20
37
80
911
25
75
574
25
75
Muslim
Practising
Age 50+
3,304
72
Non-practising
Respondents
28
Practising
Age 30-49
1,173
78
Non-practising
Respondents
22
Christian
Practising
Age 16-29
Percentage
241
20
80
351
34
66
163
35
65
Hindu
Table 18 Proportions of people practising different religions, by age within religion
114
18
82
143
41
59
83
25
75
Sikh
392
33
67
56
33
67
342
41
59
Buddhist
199
38
62
175
62
38
62
58
42
Other
religions3
5,327
61
39
4,940
69
31
2,089
72
28
All1
20
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
676
14
36
38
Black
Caribbean
Christian
20
40
30
All
603 8,926
13
12
35
33
Black
African
6,893
40
A fair amount
Respondents
30
White
A lot
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage2
790
16
39
35
Pakistani
284
11
14
37
35
236
10
13
40
30
Bangladeshi Indian
Muslim
179
16
31
36
Black
African
Table 19 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by ethno-religious group
1,783
10
15
36
35
All
629
12
22
38
19
Hindu
Indian
328
12
21
33
26
Sikh
Indian
1,753
19
32
36
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,682
18
41
31
No
religion
9,330
20
39
31
All1
Respondents
All
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Females
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Males
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage1
3,589
30
41
20
3
6
2,399
30
41
19
4
6
1,190
31
40
21
2
5
31
39
22
3
5
All
29
40
19
4
8
30
40
20
3
7
5,328 8,926
30
39
21
3
7
2,830 5,236
29
40
19
3
8
2,494 3,686
31
38
22
3
6
Christian
1,428
34
35
14
5
11
743
38
31
13
5
14
685
30
39
15
6
9
352
38
38
15
3
5
154
35
43
14
2
5
198
39
36
16
3
6
35
36
15
5
10
898
37
33
13
4
12
885
33
38
16
5
8
All
1,783
Muslim
Table 20 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by sex within religion
551
18
36
23
9
14
281
16
38
23
8
14
270
19
34
23
10
15
204
19
37
29
7
9
73
18
43
23
5
11
131
19
34
31
8
8
Hindu
756
18
36
25
8
13
354
17
39
23
8
14
402
19
34
26
9
12
All
242
24
33
23
12
8
146
28
34
22
10
6
96
19
31
25
15
10
98
30
35
15
11
9
44
43
39
13
2
2
54
21
32
17
18
13
Sikh
341
26
33
21
12
8
191
31
35
20
9
5
150
20
31
22
16
11
All
Buddhist
343
20
20
29
5
25
333
32
26
21
4
18
67
Respondents
Females
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
All
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
62
25
21
29
7
17
383
20
25
26
7
22
24
**
**
**
**
**
129
30
24
24
5
17
71
20
23
28
6
24
58
36
25
21
4
13
All
249
39
38
15
2
5
164
46
35
12
1
5
85
26
43
23
3
4
187
43
26
21
4
6
95
43
33
16
4
3
92
43
20
25
3
8
Other Religions4
38
28
17
3
14
Males
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage2
439
41
33
18
3
5
260
45
34
14
3
5
179
36
31
24
3
6
All
Table 20 Perceptions of racial prejudice compared to five years ago, by religion (continued)
6,126
31
40
19
4
7
3,766
31
40
18
4
7
2,360
30
40
21
3
6
6,231
30
39
21
4
7
3,234
30
40
19
4
8
2,993
31
38
22
4
6
All Religions
12,374
31
39
20
4
7
7,010
30
40
19
4
8
5,360
31
38
21
3
6
All
1,682
31
41
18
3
7
846
34
41
14
3
8
836
29
41
21
3
6
No
Religion
9,330
31
39
20
3
7
5,267
31
40
18
4
8
4,059
30
39
22
3
6
All1
20
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
1,368
11
21
37
22
816
16
39
35
293
11
14
38
35
Asian
10
19
37
27
All
283 2,760
14
26
31
21
Other
Black
819
14
11
34
33
20
A little
None
Dont know/cant say

539
10
23
35
26
Non-UK
born
White
747
15
42
38
UK
born
8,011
40
A fair amount
Respondents
31
UK
born
A lot
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage2
2,005
13
21
35
23
Non-UK
born
Asian
476
10
35
47
UK
born
1,190
15
14
33
31
Non-UK
born
Black
280
13
36
46
UK
born
201
14
15
36
28
Non-UK
born
Mixed
93
13
39
39
UK
born
441
17
18
32
23
20
39
31
All1
5,523 9,330
11
17
35
30
All minority
ethnic groups
509
18
10
25
30
17
Non-UK
born
9,608
19
40
31
UK
born
4,445
12
21
34
25
Non-UK
born
All
9,330
20
39
31
All1
166
14
32
31
17
Chinese/Other
484
462 1,672
14
36
39
12
34
36
All
Other

Mixed Chinese
Race
12
17
39
35
Other
Table 22 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by country of birth within ethnicity
807
10
14
34
39
Caribbean African
8,551
40
A fair amount
Respondents
31
White
A lot
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage3
Table 21 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by ethnicity
22
2
6
A little
None
Dont know/cant say

767
40
A fair amount
Respondents
29
Aged 16-24
A lot
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage1
1,387
17
42
32
Aged 25-34
Table 23 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by age
2,570
20
40
32
Aged 35-49
2,214
20
39
31
Aged 50-64
1,229
19
37
31
Aged 65-74
1,158
13
20
35
25
Aged 75+
9,330
20
39
31
All
4,442
30
38
20
4
8
3,305
32
41
20
3
5
1,174
28
41
22
3
6
Christian
295
35
31
15
7
11
911
33
37
16
5
10
576
37
37
13
4
10
Muslim
241
15
35
23
8
19
351
19
35
25
7
13
164
19
40
25
10
8
Hindu
114
18
32
22
19
9
144
30
30
19
13
7
83
28
39
21
4
8
Sikh
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents
Age 50+
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Age 30-49
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Age 16-29
A lot
A fair amount
A little
None
Dont know/cant say
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage3
392
41
19
30
4
6
56
25
32
19
4
20
342
19
19
21
9
33
Buddhist
Table 24 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by age within religion
30
38
20
4
8
5,331
200
4,943
32
40
20
3
5
2,094
29
41
21
3
6
All
religions
39
31
19
4
8
176
45
32
15
4
4
63
37
37
23
*
4
Other
religions4
400
28
41
18
3
10
733
32
42
17
3
7
547
32
41
18
3
6
No
religion
4,601
30
38
20
4
9
3,326
32
40
19
3
6
1,398
30
41
20
3
6
All1
20
3
4
A little
None
Dont know/cant say

3,239
44
A fair amount
Respondents
29
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
A lot
Perceived level of
religious prejudice
Percentage1
1,819
18
39
33
2,448
19
37
31
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
employers semi-routine
1,092
11
20
34
31
Routine
occupations
Table 25 Perceptions of level of religious prejudice today, by socio-economic group
456
11
18
36
29
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
158
25
42
24
Full time
students
111
10
25
31
31
Not
stated or
classified
9,330
20
39
31
All
19
Same amount
24
Same amount
22
Same amount
3,590
22
66
All
26
59
24
63
5,329 8,928
25
62
2,831 5,237
27
58
2,494 3,687
23
66
Nonpractising
Christian
1,429
15
21
57
743
15
20
58
686
15
22
56
352
16
68
154
13
70
10
198
17
67
13
20
59
898
14
19
60
886
13
20
59
All
1,784
Muslim

Respondents
64
More
Dont know/cant say
2,399
Less
All
Respondents
62
More
Dont know/cant say
1,191
Less
Females
Respondents
67
More
Dont know/cant say
Practising
Males
Less
Perceived prejudice
today compared with
five years ago
Percentage1
551
22
25
41
12
281
23
27
41
270
21
23
41
15
204
16
19
51
13
73
13
26
45
16
131
17
17
53
12
Hindu
Table 26 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by sex within religion
756
20
23
44
13
354
21
26
42
10
402
20
21
45
14
All
242
15
30
46
146
13
29
50
96
17
32
38
13
98
11
21
58
10
442
23
67
54
19
20
52
10
Sikh
341
14
28
49
191
10
28
54
150
18
27
43
12
All
21
48
20
11
343
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
40
23
33
333
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
45
21
19
67
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
62
25
20
49
383
26
24
44
24
**
**
**
**
129
21
20
47
12
71
30
24
42
58
15
18
50
17
All
249
21
65
164
22
62
85
19
71
187
31
55
95
28
65
92
34
48
27
58
All
439
26
61
260
24
63
179
Other Religions4
15
Less
All
Less
Females
Buddhist
Less
Males
Perceived prejudice
today compared with
five years ago
Percentage2
6,128
22
62
3,766
23
61
2,362
20
64
Practising
6,232
25
62
3,235
27
58
2,993
23
65
24
62
7,011
26
59
5,362
22
65
All
12,377
Nonpractising
All Religions
1,682
25
61
846
10
28
58
836
22
64
No
Religion
9,331
24
62
5,268
26
59
4,059
22
64
All1
Table 26 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by sex within religion (continued)
29
11
Same amount
Dont know/cant say

767
49
More
Respondents
11
Aged 16-24
Less
Perceived prejudice today compared

with five years ago
Percentage1
1,387
10
24
60
Aged 25-34
2,569
23
65
Aged 35-49
2,215
22
67
Aged 50-64
Table 27 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by age
1,230
22
66
Aged 65-74
1,158
14
26
53
Aged 75+
9,331
24
62
All
8,928
6
63
24
7
4,444
5
64
24
7
3,305
5
65
24
6
1,174
11
53
25
11
Christian
1,784
8
59
20
13
295
7
63
20
10
912
6
62
20
12
576
10
55
19
15
Muslim
756
13
44
23
20
241
14
44
26
16
351
13
41
23
23
164
11
48
20
20
Hindu
341
9
49
28
14
114
9
41
36
13
144
9
58
23
10
83
10
46
26
18
Sikh
Respondents
All
Less
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Age 50+
Less
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Age 30-49
Less
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
Age 16-29
Less
More
Same amount
Dont know/cant say

Percentage3
129
12
47
20
21
392
7
60
22
10
56
17
45
15
23
342
11
27
27
34
Buddhist
439
7
61
26
7
200
10
66
16
8
176
4
61
28
7
63
4
49
41
6
Other
religions4
Table 28 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by age within religion
12,377
6
62
24
8
5,333
5
64
23
7
4,944
5
64
24
7
2,094
11
53
25
11
All
religions
1,682
5
61
25
9
400
4
68
19
8
733
5
67
20
8
547
6
53
32
9
No
religion
9,331
6
62
24
8
4,603
5
64
23
8
3,325
5
64
23
7
1,398
9
53
27
11
All1
24
Same amount
8,552 1,369
17
24
47
12
816
10
21
61
293
13
22
54
11
Asian
15
23
52
11
All
283 2,761
20
26
41
12
Other
Black
819
22
19
49
10
24
Same amount
6,895
676
11
18
61
11
24
63
603 8,928
21
19
50
All
790
10
20
62
284
13
23
54
11
Pakistani Bangladeshi
Respondents
63
More
Dont know/cant say
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Less
Perceived prejudice
today compared with
five years ago
Percentage2
237
12
17
64
Indian
Muslim
179
21
21
46
12
Black
African
1,784
13
20
59
All
629
21
24
43
13
Hindu
Indian
328
14
27
50
10
Sikh
Indian
484
462 1,672
20
60
11
18
54
10
All
18
19
17
56
Other
441
32
22
38
24
62
All1
5,524 9,331
17
22
51
10
All minority
ethnic groups
1,753
12
23
57
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,682
25
61
No
religion
9,331
24
62
All1
166
26
27
36
11
Other

Mixed Chinese
Race
Table 30 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by ethno-religious group
807
12
18
61
10
Caribbean African
Respondents
63
More
Dont know/cant say
White
Less

Percentage3
Table 29 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by ethnicity
8,011
540
20
20
54
Non-UK
born
White
748
20
66
10
UK
born
2,005
20
24
45
11
Non-UK
born
Asian
476
13
71
UK
born
1,190
22
21
47
10
Non-UK
born
Black
280
20
69
UK
born
201
22
21
46
11
Non-UK
born
Mixed
93
27
59
UK
born
21
Same amount
Respondents
3,239
69
More
Dont know/cant say
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Less

Percentage1
1,820
21
66
2,449
26
58
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
1,092
13
28
52
Routine
occupations
455
14
29
47
10
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
9,609
25
64
UK
born
4,446
21
21
50
Non-UK
born
9,331
24
62
All1
158
15
29
47
Full time
students
111
13
27
55
Not
stated or
classified
9,331
24
62
All
509
36
23
32
Non-UK
born
All

Chinese/Other
Table 32 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by socio-economic group
Respondents

25
Same amount
63
More
Dont know/cant say
UK
born
Less

Percentage2
Table 31 Perceptions of religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by country of birth within ethnicity
Buddhists
Sikhs
Anglicans/Church of England
Religions generally
Any other
11
89
3,202 5,275
90
All
762
96
219
98
Muslim
982
97
All
211
15
92
89
97
Hindu
301
12
94
All
107
20
10
97
59
12
96
Sikh
166
17
96
All
Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of groups.
Includes only people who said that there is more religious prejudice today than five years ago.
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
2,070
Protestants
Respondents2
Roman Catholics/Catholics
18
Hindus
86
Christian
Jews
Muslims
Groups named as
experiencing more religious
prejudice than five years ago
Percentage1
Table 33 Groups who would experience more religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by religion
**
17
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
22
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Roman Catholics
Protestants
Religions generally
Any other
Respondents3
392
10
88
All
135
17
13
19
79
111
11
89
Other Religions4
248
12
15
84
All
3,307
16
87
3,697
90
All Religions
7,011
11
89
All
994
12
91
No
Religion
5,636
11
89
All1
3 Includes only people who said that there is more religious prejudice today than five years ago.
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Jews
**
**
Buddhist
Muslims
Groups named as
experiencing more religious
prejudice than five years ago
Percentage5
Table 33 Groups who would experience more religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by religion (continued)
Buddhists
Sikhs
2
634
5,234
Religions generally
Any other
474
96
153
95
96
All
108 1,369
97
Other
475
14
91
398
15
89
Caribbean African
Black
25
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
898
14
90
All
289
12
92
54
12
10
94
Mixed Chinese
Race
165
91
Other
11
89
All1
2,775 5,636
93
All minority
ethnic groups
Includes only people who said that there is more religious prejudice today than five years ago.
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
Protestants
95
Respondents2
Asian
11
Hindus
89
White
Jews
Muslims
Groups named as experiencing more

religious prejudice than five years ago
Percentage3
Table 34 Groups who would experience more religious prejudice today compared to five years ago, by ethnicity
28
Too much
17
Too much
Respondents
766
34
Right amount
Dont know/cant say
42
Aged 16-24
Too little
How much the Government is doing

to protect the rights of people
belonging to different religions
Percentage1

4,055
5,264
10
24
33
32
Females
9,323
1,388
23
38
31
Aged 25-34
2,566
28
36
28
Aged 35-49
2,214
30
34
29
Aged 50-64
1,227
32
31
28
Aged 65-74
26
35
30
All
1,157
13
23
40
25
Aged 75+
9,323
26
35
30
All
Table 36 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people belonging to different religions, by age
1 Excludes respondents with missing religion data.

Respondents
38
Right amount
Dont know/cant say
29
Males
Too little
How much the Government is doing to protect the rights of people

Percentage1
Table 35 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people belonging to different religions, by sex
28
Too much

Respondents
3,235
36
Right amount
Dont know/cant say
28
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Too little
How much the Government is

doing to protect the rights of
people belonging to different
religions
Percentage1
1,819
31
32
28
2,448
24
35
34
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
1,091
10
24
37
29
Routine
occupations
454
10
15
40
35
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
158
14
42
38
Full time
students
111
12
32
27
29
Not
stated or
classified
9,323
26
35
30
All
Table 37 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people belonging to different religions,
35
25
Right amount
Too much
Respondents
3,583
32
Dont know/cant say
Christian
28
35
29
All
5,327 8,919
29
35
28
Too little

Percentage1
1,427
44
46
352
49
45
45
46
All
1,782
Muslim
551
12
57
25
204
13
58
23
Hindu
756
12
57
24
All
242
56
29
98
20
43
35
Sikh
341
12
52
31
All
Table 38 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people belonging to different religions, by religion
13
61
128
19
52
22
All
249
16
38
41
187
22
36
33
Other Religions3
439
20
37
36
All
6,119
22
37
33
6,229
28
36
29
26
36
30
All
12,365
All Religions
1,681
27
33
31
No
Religion
9,323
28
Too much
8,546
1,369
11
55
29
815
42
50
292
50
42
Asian
51
37
All
282 2,758
57
30
Other
Black
804
11
37
45
817
48
36
Caribbean African
Respondents
34
Dont know/cant say
30
Right amount
White
Too little

Percentage3
484
462 1,667
16
32
46
10
43
40
All
164
14
13
44
29
441
14
14
49
24
Other
26
35
30
All1
5,514 9,323
47
37
All minority
ethnic groups

Mixed Chinese
Race
12
21
20
47
Other
26
35
30
All1
Table 39 Perceptions of the level of protection the Government gives to the rights of people belonging to different religions, by ethnicity
67
Respondents
21
3
18
Dont know/cant say
Too much
41
58
Right amount
25
20
Buddhist
Too little

Percentage2
by religion (continued)
674
45
36
11
7
Black
Caribbean
Christian
29
35
28
8
All
602 8,919
35
49
10
7
Black
African
789
51
42
3
4
Pakistani
283
43
49
2
5
237
46
46
1
6
Bangladeshi Indian
Muslim
179
42
46
6
6
Black
African
1,782
46
45
3
6
All
629
23
58
13
6
Hindu
Indian
328
31
51
13
5
Sikh
Indian
1,751
34
41
16
8
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,681
8,006
30
34
28
8
UK
born
539
25
42
20
13
Non-UK
born
White
747
51
40
6
3
UK
born
Respondents
Too little
Right amount
Too much
Dont know/cant say

Percentage2
2,003
31
56
8
6
Non-UK
born
Asian
473
51
31
12
6
UK
born
1,188
36
47
9
8
Non-UK
born
Black
280
55
24
16
5
UK
born
201
32
45
15
8
Non-UK
born
Mixed
93
35
29
25
11
9,323
30
35
26
8
All1
507
24
52
10
14
Non-UK
born
9,600
31
34
28
8
UK
born
4,439
28
46
15
11
Non-UK
born
All
9,323
30
35
26
8
All1

Chinese/Other
UK
born
31
33
27
9
No
religion
6,890
29
35
28
8
Too little
Right amount
Too much
Dont know/cant say
Respondents
White
How much the Government

is doing to protect the
rights of people belonging
to different religions
Percentage2
720
87
4
8
4
7
4
1
1
12
1,128
50
4
4
1
4
34
8
3
7
18
55
4
4
1
4
25
7
3
5
20
86
3
8
3
7
2
1
*
*
14
1,434 2,154
86
2
8
2
7
2
1
*
*
15
1,470 2,602
58
4
4
2
4
21
6
3
4
21
Christian
492
64
7
6
4
5
8
4
4
4
36
591
92
3
5
1
4
1
1
*
*
9
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
146
92
6
6
1
4
*
*
10
Muslim
57
67
6
5
4
4
7
4
4
4
32
738
92
4
5
1
4
1
*
*
*
9
All
60
74
3
1
2
*
2
*
*
*
23
122
63
2
24
4
6
6
*
*
*
23
29
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
502
81
2
19
8
2
13
Hindu
89
76
3
1
1
2
4
23
173
68
2
23
3
6
5
*
*
*
20
All
18
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
63
66
4
12
4
33
6
2
14
15
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
322
68
14
3
24
2
31
Sikh
332
88
3
2
11
95
67
2
12
4
30
5
2
20
All
3 Includes only people who said that religious rights are protected too little by the Government.
4 Includes only people who said that religious rights are protected too much by the Government.
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents4
Too much
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Respondents3
Too little
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Religious groups whose rights

are perceived to be protected
too much and too little
Percentage1
Table 42 Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much and too little by the Government, by religion
12
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Respondents5
Too much
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
8
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
14
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
13
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**1
26
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
All
332
57
3
*
*
17
8
5
*
2
40
83
53
24
3
1
1
17
2
1
2
47
382
91
*
5
8
*
1
63
61
11
17
3
9
15
7
3
22
Other Religions
72
78
1
3
*
11
3
2
*
1
21
146
57
18
9
2
5
16
4
1
3
35
All
885
85
4
7
3
7
4
1
*
1
13
1,999
55
5
5
1
4
28
7
3
5
19
1,532
86
2
8
2
7
2
1
*
*
15
1,775
59
5
5
2
5
20
6
3
4
21
All Religions
2,418
86
3
8
3
7
3
1
*
*
14
3,780
58
5
5
2
4
23
6
3
5
20
All
396
75
5
10
4
10
9
4
2
2
25
502
65
5
6
4
6
15
3
2
2
24
No
Religion
2,399
84
3
8
3
7
4
2
1
1
16
2,632
60
5
5
2
5
21
6
3
4
21
All1
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Respondents6
Buddhist
Too little
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Religious groups whose rights are

perceived to be protected too
much and too little
Percentage3
Table 42 Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much and too little by the Government, by religion (continued)
2,306
84
3
8
3
7
4
2
1
1
16
2,367
57
5
5
2
5
23
6
3
4
22
White
188
80
3
4
2
3
4
1
1
1
18
926
82
3
9
2
7
3
1
*
*
14
Asian
169
87
8
6
4
6
7
5
3
3
9
644
75
6
4
1
3
19
4
1
1
14
Black
68
79
3
13
2
4
6
4
2
2
25
199
72
5
9
6
7
18
4
3
2
19
Mixed
Race
85
80
1
5
3
7
2
2
2
20
148
69
12
6
8
2
8
4
2
2
15
Chinese
or Other
2,399
84
3
8
3
7
4
2
1
1
16
2,632
60
5
5
2
5
21
6
3
4
21
All1
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
Respondents4
Too much
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Respondents3
Too little
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Religious groups whose rights are perceived

to be protected too much and too little
Percentage2
Table 43 Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much and too little by the Government, by ethnicity
83
4
8
3
8
4
2
1
1
18
1,660
117
1,739
60
4
5
1
4
22
6
3
4
20
Aged 25-64
79
5
12
6
12
6
2
17
292
67
8
9
3
10
15
6
1
1
22
Aged 16-24
619
90
1
6
1
4
2
1
*
10
600
50
4
2
1
2
26
6
3
6
20
Aged 65+
2,399
84
3
8
3
7
4
2
1
1
16
2,632
60
5
5
2
5
21
6
3
4
21
All
Includes only people who said that religious rights are protected too little by the Government.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
Respondents3
Too much
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Respondents2
Too little
Muslims/Islam
Jews
Hindus
Buddhists
Sikhs
Protestants
Any other religion
Religious groups whose rights are perceived

to be protected too much and too little
Percentage1
Table 44 Religious groups whose rights are perceived to be protected too much and too little by the Government, by age
3,590
98
2
98
5,330 8,929
98
Christian
1,423
82
18
351
91
9
84
16
All
1,777
Muslim
547
93
203
96
Hindu
751
94
All
241
94
98
91
Sikh
340
93
All
67
100
62
86
14
Buddhist
Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers.
Respondents
Have not been discriminated against
Have been discriminated against
Percentage who have/have not

been discriminated against
because of their religion
Percentage2
129
95
All
248
91
185
94
Other Religions3
436
93
All
6,116
96
6,229
97
97
All
12,362
All Religions
1,676
97
No
Religion
9,323
97
All1
Table 45 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by religion (continued)
Respondents

Percentage1
Table 45 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by religion
97
90
92
440
93
163
92
483
92
93
463 1,671
92
817
91
808
89
91
282 2,747
80
292
84
814
93
1,359
97
8,549
6,895
98
677
91
Black
White Caribbean
98
All
603 8,929
94
Black
African
Christian
788
84
16
283
79
21
Respondents
Have not been

discriminated against
Have been discriminated

against
Percentage who have/

have not been discriminated
against because of
their religion
Percentage2
234
89
11
Indian
Muslim
178
88
12
Black
African
1,777
84
16
All
625
94
Hindu
Indian
327
94
Sikh
Indian
1,749
92
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,676
97
No
religion
9,323
97
All1
Table 47 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation,
5,504 9,323
3
10
11
All1
20
All minority
ethnic groups
Other
16
Mixed Chinese
Race
All
Other
All Caribbean African
Other
Black
Asian
White
Respondents

Percentage2
Table 46 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by ethnicity
2,399
98
1,191
97
3
97
98
2,831 5,237
98
2,495 3,688
97
Christian
Respondents
Females
Respondents
Males
Percentage1
739
84
16
684
80
20
154
87
13
197
92
Muslim
894
85
15
883
84
16
All
277
95
270
91
73
96
130
96
Hindu
350
95
401
93
All
145
95
96
91
44
94
54
89
11
Sikh
190
95
150
90
10
All
Table 48 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by sex within religion
334
Respondents
95
71
384
58
95
90
10
24
**
**
All
164
87
13
84
97
93
89
11
92
98
Other Religions3
= 0.
* = Less than 0.5%.
100
344
Respondents
*
100
Females
Buddhist
Males
Percentage2
258
88
12
178
98
All
3,757
96
2,359
95
3,233
98
2,992
97
All Religions
7,000
97
5,358
97
All
844
95
832
98
No
Religion
5,262
97
4,057
97
All1
Table 48 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation,
by sex within religion (continued)
8,929
98
4,444
99
3,305
97
1,175
96
Christian
1,777
84
16
294
88
12
907
85
15
575
82
18
Muslim
751
94
240
97
347
94
164
90
10
Hindu
340
93
113
91
144
93
83
95
Sikh
Respondents
All
Respondents
Age 50+
Respondents
Age 30-49
Respondents
Age 16-29

Percentage2
129
95
393
96
56
99
343
86
14
Buddhist
436
93
198
95
175
90
10
63
95
Other
religions4
12,362
97
5,328
98
4,934
96
2,094
95
All
religions
1,676
97
399
99
731
95
544
97
No
religion
9,323
97
4,597
98
3,323
96
1,398
95
All1
Table 49 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by age within religion
Respondents
Percentage who have/have not been discriminated

against because of their religion
Percentage2
9,602
97
Born in the UK
4,430
95
Not born in the UK
9,323
97
All1
Table 50 Perceptions of being discriminated against because of their religion by at least one public service organisation, by country of birth
A local school
A council housing department

or Housing Association
A local council
A private landlord or letting agent
The courts
The Police
The Prison Service
5,330 8,929
1,423
Practising
351 1,777
Nonpractising All
Muslim
547
Practising
203
751
Nonpractising All
Hindu
241
Practising
98
340
Nonpractising All
Sikh
1 Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of organisations.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
3,590
A local hospital
Respondents
Nonpractising All
Christian
Practising
Organisation
Percentage1
Table 51 Organisations from which respondents experienced discrimination because of their religion, by religion
A local hospital
A local school
A council housing department

or Housing Association
A local council
A private landlord or letting agent
The courts
The Police
The Prison Service

62
129
All
248
185
Other Religions3
436
All
6,116
6,229
All
12,362
All Religions
1,676
No
Religion
9,323
All1
Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of organisations.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
67
Respondents
Buddhist
Organisation
Percentage2
Table 51 Organisations from which respondents experienced discrimination because of their religion, by religion (continued)
A local school
A council housing
department or Housing
Association
A local council
A private landlord or
letting agent
The courts
The Crown Prosecution

Service
The Police
The Prison Service
677
Black
Caribbean
All
603 8,929
Black
African
Christian
788
Pakistani
283
12
234
Bangladeshi Indian
Muslim
178
Black
African
1,777
All
625
Hindu
Indian
327
Sikh
Indian
1,749
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,676
No
religion
9,323
All1
Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of organisations.
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
6,895
A local hospital
Respondents
White
Organisation
Percentage2
Table 52 Organisations from which respondents experienced discrimination because of their religion, by ethno-religious group
1,426
3,589
551
96
Hindu
242
98
Sikh
67
95
Buddhist
247
90
Other
religions3
2,869
400
2,200
Respondents3
Do not feel free to practise religion
93
94
Black
White Caribbean
519
94
Black
African
Christian
Feel partly free to practise religion
Feel free to practise religion
Percentage2
3,589
94
All
635
87
239
10
85
211
88
Indian
Muslim
154
88
Black
African
1,426
88
All
455
95
Hindu
Indian
94
All1
231
98
Sikh
Indian
1,077
92
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
2,869
94
All1
Table 54 Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are able to practise their religion freely, by ethno-religious group
3 Includes only people who actively practise a religion.
= 0.
= 0.
Respondents4
88
Muslim
94
Christian
Percentage2
Table 53 Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are able to practise their religion freely, by religion
255
1,884
5 Includes only people who actively practice a religion.
= 0.
Respondents5
94
96
720
89
450
12
83
Muslim
Age 50+
1,292
Respondents5
92
Age 30-49
411
Respondents5
91
Christian
Age 16-29
Percentage2
189
98
249
94
113
96
Hindu
92
95
88
99
62
99
Sikh
20
**
**
**
313
100
16
**
**
**
Buddhist
124
97
91
14
80
323
15
85
Other
religions4
1,718
96
859
92
290
91
All1
Table 55 Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are able to practise their religion freely, by age within religion
201
2,159
494
10
86
UK
born
1,605
93
Non-UK
born
Asian
Respondents3
91
Non-UK
born
94
UK
born
White
Percentage2
224
89
UK
born
921
93
Non-UK
born
Black
97
95
UK
born
118
92
Non-UK
born
Mixed
**
**
**
UK
born
26
**
**
**
Non-UK
born
Chinese/Other
2,996
94
UK
born
3,109
92
Non-UK
born
All
2,869
94
All1
Table 56 Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are able to practise their religion freely,
741
2,398
= 0.
Respondents5
88
95
685
87
Muslim
Females
1,191
Respondents5
93
Christian
Males
Percentage2
281
96
270
95
Hindu
146
97
96
98
Sikh
333
91
343
96
Buddhist
162
11
86
85
96
Other
religions4
1,899
94
970
93
All1
Table 57 Percentage of people that actively practise a religion that feel they are able to practise their religion freely,
by sex within religion
3,936
6
94
2,396
16
84
5,032
10
90
3,414
25
75
Christian
275
10
90
944
31
69
330
27
73
1,367
44
56
Muslim
172
9
91
440
16
84
194
19
81
533
35
65
Hindu
85
11
89
180
15
85
94
19
81
235
33
67
Sikh
Excludes respondents with no religion, those with missing answers or religion data, and those that answered dont know and not applicable.
4 Strongly agree or tend to agree.
5 Strongly disagree or tend to disagree.
Respondents
Non-practising
Agree
Disagree
Respondents
Where you work

Practising
Agree
Disagree
Respondents
Non-practising
Agree
Disagree
Respondents
Where you live

Practising
Agree4
Disagree5
Aspect of day-to-day life
Percentage1
492
10
90
52
23
77
55
24
76
64
29
71
Buddhist
6
94
4,653
136
4,180
18
82
5,884
11
89
5,850
27
73
All
8
92
168
34
66
179
13
87
237
39
61
Other
religions3
Table 58 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by religion and whether respondents actively
practise a religion
4,230
28
72
2,800
285
16
84
1,210
168
14
86
450
13
87
193
9
91
536
22
78
Hindu
82
11
89
201
9
91
96
12
88
237
23
77
Sikh
Respondents
Non-practising
Agree
Disagree
Respondents
29
71
What school you send/sent/would send your children to

Practising
Agree
46
Disagree
54
19
81
1,362
34
66
Muslim
327
8
92
3,452
24
76
Christian
5,038
Respondents
Non-practising
Agree
Disagree
Respondents

Practising
Agree4
Disagree5
Percentage1
422
7
93
412
6
94
58
13
87
64
16
84
Buddhist
27
73
4,957
150
4,895
43
57
5,889
8
92
5,895
25
75
All
22
78
193
38
62
177
8
92
244
39
61
Other
religions3
Table 58 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by religion and whether respondents actively
practise a religion (continued)
651
77
23
506
84
16
587
69
31
480
78
22
584
70
30
548
64
36
512
57
43
7,038
67
33
8,499
87
13
6,337
91
8,453
85
15
All
680
79
21
764
69
31
560
75
25
758
62
38
246
68
32
269
67
33
188
69
31
273
53
47
197
72
28
220
74
26
156
65
35
230
51
49
Indian
Muslim
140
79
21
168
75
25
107
75
25
168
62
38
Black
African
Strongly agree or tend to agree.
Strongly disagree or tend to disagree.
5,351
67
Disagree
Respondents
33
Agree
6,545
88
Disagree
Respondents
12
4,746
92
641
78
86
6,506
22
14
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Agree
Respondents
Disagree
Agree
Where you work
Respondents
Disagree
Agree3
Where you live
Aspects of day-to-day life
Percentage2
1,495
74
26
1,692
70
30
1,221
75
25
1,700
60
40
All
Table 59 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by ethno-religious group
508
86
14
607
81
19
514
86
14
606
70
30
Hindu
Indian
274
90
10
321
81
19
256
88
12
318
72
28
Sikh
Indian
1,407
69
31
1,666
77
23
1,329
81
19
1,661
73
27
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
6,187
68
32
7,543
86
14
5,509
90
10
7,504
83
17
All1
25
75
1,424
21
79
1,895
37
63
Non-UK
born
5,241
351
654
1,613
367
45
55
397
31
69
348
15
85
395
22
78
UK
born
912
35
65
1,106
27
73
818
22
78
1,101
30
70
Non-UK
born
Black
196
34
66
207
21
79
173
17
83
202
15
85
UK
born
143
27
73
173
21
79
136
21
79
176
27
73
Non-UK
born
Mixed
Respondents
20
80
27
73
594
21
79
707
34
66
UK
born

Agree
33
36
26
Disagree
67
64
74
438
17
83
344
10
90
437
19
81
Non-UK
born
Asian
1,884
6,414
13
87
4,620
9
91
6,372
15
85
UK
born
White
714
Respondents

Agree
Disagree
Respondents
Where you work

Agree
Disagree
Respondents
Where you live

Agree4
Disagree5
Percentage2
52
37
63
62
17
83
493
15
85
62
18
82
UK
born
319
28
72
385
24
76
322
20
80
381
34
66
Non-UK
born
Chinese/Other
6,511
33
67
7,795
13
87
5,785
9
91
7,739
15
85
UK
born
3,339
31
69
3,987
21
79
3,044
15
85
3,991
26
74
Non-UK
born
All
6,187
32
68
7,543
14
86
5,509
10
90
7,504
17
83
All1
Table 60 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by country of birth within ethnicity
2,590
68
Disagree
Respondents
32
Agree
3,212
85
Disagree
Respondents
15
Agree
2,487
90
Disagree
Respondents
10
3,595
68
32
4,328
86
14
3,020
90
10
4,298
83
83
3,203
17
Females
6,187
68
32
7,543
86
14
5,509
90
10
7,504
83
17
All
17
Males
Agree
Where you work
Respondents
Disagree
Agree2
Where you live
Percentage1
Table 61 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by sex
1,249
67
33
1,502
88
12
1,153
92
1,681
70
30
2,040
86
14
1,465
89
11
2,033
83
17
683
74
26
899
87
13
552
92
886
83
17
Routine
occupations
273
66
34
345
73
27
162
79
21
348
76
24
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
2,147
65
Disagree
Respondents
35
Agree
2,567
86
Disagree
Respondents
14
Agree
2,044
90
Disagree
Respondents
10
1,499
85
83
2,546
15
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
17
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Agree
Where you work
Respondents
Disagree
Agree2
Where you live
Percentage1
84
75
25
100
77
23
58
82
18
98
73
27
67
58
42
84
83
17
71
91
88
90
10
Not
stated or
classified
6,187
68
32
7,543
86
14
5,509
90
10
7,504
83
17
All

Full time
students
Table 62 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by socio-economic group
1,700
60
40
279
67
33
872
61
39
728
70
30
226
65
35
340
72
28
162
70
30
Hindu
330
71
29
107
58
42
140
76
24
83
77
23
Sikh
8,453
85
Disagree
Respondents
15
Agree
All
4,144
83
Disagree
Respondents
17
Agree
Age 50+
3,186
87
Disagree
Respondents
13
548
56
88
1,118
44
Muslim
12
Christian
Agree
Age 30-49
Respondents
Disagree
Agree5
Age 16-29
Where you live
Percentage2
119
73
27
383
76
24
493
78
22
323
58
42
Buddhist
Table 63 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by age within religion
418
74
26
190
69
31
171
78
22
57
77
23
Other
religions4
7,504
83
17
3,955
82
18
2,621
85
15
923
83
17
All1
6,337
91
2,454
91
2,909
92
1,221
75
25
163
83
17
645
76
24
412
71
90
971
29
Muslim
10
Christian
613
86
14
174
85
15
298
89
11
141
82
18
Hindu
266
87
13
71
86
14
126
88
12
69
85
15
Sikh
Respondents
Disagree
Agree
All
Respondents
Disagree
Agree
Age 50+
Respondents
Disagree
Agree
Age 30-49
Respondents
Disagree
Agree5
Age 16-29
Where you work
Percentage2
101
82
18
303
96
463
77
23
25
**
**
Buddhist
306
80
20
102
82
18
152
78
22
52
82
18
Other
religions4
5,509
90
10
2,310
91
2,392
90
10
804
87
13
All1
Table 63 The extent to which religion affects certain aspects of day-to-day life, by age within religion (continued)
1,692
70
30
271
74
26
868
70
30
730
82
18
227
79
21
341
83
17
162
81
19
Hindu
Excludes respondents with no religion, those with missing answers or religion data, and those that answered dont know.
8,499
87
Disagree
Respondents
13
Agree
All
4,161
87
Disagree
Respondents
13
Agree
Age 50+
3,206
88
Disagree
Respondents
12
552
68
86
1,128
32
Muslim
14
Christian
Agree
Age 30-49
Respondents
Disagree
Agree5
Age 16-29
Percentage2
334
80
20
108
80
20
144
84
16
82
76
24
Sikh
122
85
15
393
91
503
94
333
59
41
Buddhist
424
77
23
191
71
29
171
82
18
62
79
21
Other
religions4
7,543
86
14
3,971
86
14
2,635
87
13
933
83
17
All1
Christian
1,495
74
26
210
81
19
806
75
25
619
86
14
180
90
10
310
87
13
129
82
18
Hindu
Excludes respondents with no religion, those with missing answers or religion data, and those that answered dont know.
7,038
67
Disagree
Respondents
33
Agree
All
3,118
70
Disagree
Respondents
30
Agree
Age 50+
2,916
64
Disagree
Respondents
36
478
70
65
1,001
30
Muslim
35
Agree
Age 30-49
Respondents
Disagree
Agree5
Age 16-29
Percentage2
284
90
10
82
90
10
134
89
11
68
91
Sikh
83
93
21
**
**
423
95
20
**
**
Buddhist
346
69
31
134
69
31
159
68
32
53
71
29
Other
religions4
6,187
68
32
2,960
71
29
2,399
65
35
825
67
33
All1
86
47
39
87
38
49
2,693
607
47
41
88
12
399
44
38
81
14
19
271
79
41
38
21
9
12
147
39
38
78
15
22
105
70
48
22
30
10
20
Black
375
144 1,297
41
88
12
111
80
48
32
20
4
16
450
51
33
84
10
16
194
81
36
45
19
5
13
Caribbean African
46
39
84
11
16
743
81
44
37
19
7
13
All
46
51
32
83
14
17
67
81
35
46
19
4
15
Other
All column based on core sample (England and Wales). Other columns based on combined sample (England and Wales).
Respondents
58
92
Not a very big problem/

a problem at all
Not a problem at all
Fairly big problem
34
Very big problem
Not a very big problem
300
14
4
11
1,119
Asian
13
3
10
White
Very/fairly big problem
Age 30-49
Respondents
Age 16-29
Very big problem
Fairly big problem
a problem at all
Percentage2
19
**
**
**
**
**
**
11
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
844
49
37
86
14
316
80
40
40
20
5
15
All
207
42
37
79
14
21
162
66
32
34
34
7
27
64
50
44
95
57
92
62
29
8
3
5
Mixed Chinese
Race
207
53
34
87
13
99
84
43
40
16
5
11
Other
84
38
46
16
4
12
All1
56
35
91
2,619 3,068
47
38
85
10
15
1,377 1,306
80
43
37
20
6
14
All minority
ethnic groups
Table 64 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by age within ethnicity,
England and Wales
7,850
1,319
46
42
88
12
412
52
39
91
799
42
39
81
13
19
129
47
40
87
13
288
32
45
76
16
24
353
34
59
94
Asian
Black
749
267 2,673
38
87
10
13
263
66
26
91
759
48
35
83
11
17
115
41
39
80
12
20
Caribbean African
49
40
84
11
16
632
50
40
90
10
All
44
51
32
83
14
17
56
62
27
89
11
11
Other
= 0.
Respondents
63
93

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
30
Very big problem
4,034
All
Respondents
74
96

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
22
Very big problem
White
Age 50+
Percentage2
48
37
84
11
16
389
56
30
86
10
14
All
413 1,549
29
38
67
29
33
11
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
456
42
33
75
19
25
87
65
24
89
11
150
42
51
94
29
**
**
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
411
51
35
86
14
105
62
25
88
12
Other
74
22
96
All1
61
30
92
5,239 8,590
45
39
84
11
16
1,242 4,212
55
35
89
11
All minority
ethnic groups
England and Wales (continued)
2,552
604
48
41
88
12
299
39
46
86
11
14
397
44
37
81
14
19
269
37
42
79
12
21
144
39
38
77
15
23
105
22
48
70
20
10
30
Asian
46
38
84
11
16
740
37
44
80
13
20
All
142 1,287
52
33
85
13
15
67
46
35
81
15
19
Other
All column based on core sample (England only). Other columns based on combined sample (England only).
Respondents
58
92

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
34
Very big problem
1,054
Age 30-49
Respondents
49
86

a problem at all
11
Fairly big problem
38
Very big problem
14
White
Age 16-29
Percentage2
375
46
41
88
12
111
32
48
80
16
20
447
51
33
84
10
16
194
45
36
81
13
19
Caribbean African
Black
19
**
**
**
**
**
**
11
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
841
49
37
86
14
316
40
40
80
15
20
All
205
42
37
79
14
21
160
35
33
68
25
32
63
51
45
96
57
29
62
92
Mixed Chinese
Race
205
53
33
86
14
99
40
43
84
11
16
Other
46
38
84
12
16
All1
56
35
91
2,601 2,922
47
38
85
10
15
1,372 1,240
37
43
80
14
20
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
England
7,373
1,311
46
42
88
12
408
51
40
91
794
41
40
81
13
19
128
46
40
87
13
285
32
44
76
16
24
353
94
34
94
59
Asian
44
41
84
11
16
626
50
40
90
10
All
264 2,654
51
33
84
14
16
55
60
28
89
11
11
Other
Black
747
49
38
87
10
13
261
66
26
91
755
48
35
83
11
17
114
41
39
80
12
20
Caribbean African
= 0.
Respondents
63
93

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
30
Very big problem
3,763
All
Respondents
75
96

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
22
Very big problem
White
Age 50+
Percentage2
449
413 1,543
33
76
18
24
84
65
25
90
10
43
36
84
11
16
386
56
30
86
10
14
All
48
29
38
67
29
33
11
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
149
43
51
94
29
**
**
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
402
51
35
85
15
98
62
25
86
14
Other
74
22
96
All1
61
30
91
5,197 8,101
45
39
84
11
16
1,223 3,935
54
35
89
11
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
England (continued)
491
Asian
960
52
38
91
353
31
51
82
12
18
517
43
41
85
11
15
281
39
37
76
15
24
225
34
45
79
13
21
63
24
45
68
24
32
1 Excludes respondents who answered dont know and those with missing answers.
All columns based on combined sample (England and Wales).
Respondents
58
91

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
33
Very big problem
7,358
Not born in the UK
Respondents
63
93

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
30
Very big problem
White
Born in the UK
Percentage1
48
39
87
10
13
724
34
43
78
15
22
All
239 1,941
53
33
86
11
14
27
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
Black
404
57
33
90
10
344
40
44
84
13
16
674
49
35
84
10
16
81
40
37
77
17
23
Caribbean African
51
34
86
14
441
40
42
82
15
18
All
25 1,103
**
**
**
**
**
**
16
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
187
50
30
80
13
20
267
38
35
73
22
27
123
45
48
93
25
**
**
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
349
53
34
87
13
59
42
40
81
16
19
Other
63
30
93
All
54
35
89
11
3,703 4,195
49
37
87
13
1,516 8,875
36
42
78
16
22
All minority
ethnic groups
Table 66 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by country of birth
within ethnicity, England and Wales
475
Asian
953
52
38
91
352
32
51
82
11
18
514
43
41
85
11
15
279
38
37
75
16
25
222
34
44
79
13
21
63
24
45
68
24
32
Respondents
59
91

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
33
Very big problem
6,897
Not born in the UK
Respondents
64
93

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
29
Very big problem
White
Born in the UK
Percentage1
48
39
87
10
13
721
34
44
78
15
22
All
236 1,925
53
34
86
11
14
27
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
403
57
33
90
10
343
41
44
84
13
16
670
49
35
84
10
16
81
40
37
77
17
23
Caribbean African
Black
51
34
85
10
15
440
40
42
82
15
18
All
25 1,098
**
**
**
**
**
**
16
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
186
49
30
80
13
20
261
38
35
74
21
26
122
45
49
93
25
**
**
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
347
53
34
87
13
53
38
41
79
18
21
Other
Table 67 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by country of birth
within ethnicity, England
63
30
92
All
54
35
89
11
3,678 4,154
49
37
87
13
1,500 8,398
36
42
79
16
21
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
6,347
627
49
39
88
12
65
29
94
561 8,231
49
35
84
10
16
All
773
42
39
81
13
19
278
32
44
76
16
24
Respondents
65
94

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
28
Very big problem
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Percentage2
229
43
42
85
11
15
Indian
Muslim
162
45
35
80
15
20
Black
African
1,726
43
37
81
13
19
All
609
49
41
90
10
Hindu
Indian
315
42
45
87
11
13
Sikh
Indian
1,626
50
34
84
11
16
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,533
54
36
90
10
No
religion
8,590
61
30
92
All1
Table 68 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by ethno-religious group,
England and Wales
6,001
625
49
39
88
12
65
29
93
560 7,871
49
35
84
11
16
All
768
41
39
81
13
19
275
32
44
76
16
24
228
42
43
85
11
15
Indian
Muslim
Respondents
66
94

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
28
Very big problem
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Percentage2
159
45
34
80
15
20
Black
African
1,710
43
37
80
13
20
All
604
49
40
90
10
Hindu
Indian
314
41
46
87
11
13
Sikh
Indian
1,582
50
34
83
11
17
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,425
55
35
90
10
No
religion
8,101
61
30
91
All1
England, 2007-08
Table 69 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by ethno-religious group, England
4,379
665
46
38
85
11
15
654
46
45
91
374
40
42
82
11
18
425
43
38
80
14
20
152
34
38
72
15
12
28
136
30
50
80
16
20
Asian
44
42
86
11
14
All
44
39
82
12
18
139 1,330
49
34
82
13
18
128 1,343
53
31
84
14
16
Other
Black
437
47
42
89
11
312
51
34
85
12
15
456
48
31
79
14
21
303
47
40
87
13
Caribbean African
Respondents
62
91

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
29
Very big problem
3,469
Females
Respondents
64
95

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
31
Very big problem
White
Males
Percentage2
28
**
**
**
**
**
**
13
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
921
47
36
83
12
17
628
49
37
86
10
14
All
286
45
29
73
21
27
170
40
38
77
16
23
92
40
53
93
58
44
50
94
Mixed Chinese
Race
205
48
37
86
14
206
53
33
86
14
Other
62
31
93
All1
61
30
90
10
2,834 4,784
45
37
82
12
18
2,405 3,804
46
40
86
10
14
All minority
ethnic groups
Table 70 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by sex within ethnicity,
England and Wales
4,095
662
47
38
85
11
15
649
46
46
91
374
40
42
82
11
18
420
42
38
80
14
20
149
34
38
72
16
13
28
136
30
50
80
16
20
Asian
44
42
86
11
14
All
44
39
82
12
18
137 1,322
48
34
83
14
17
127 1,332
54
31
85
14
15
Other
Respondents
62
91

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
29
Very big problem
3,276
Females
Respondents
64
94

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
30
Very big problem
White
Males
Percentage2
436
47
42
89
11
311
51
34
85
12
15
454
48
31
79
14
21
301
47
40
87
13
Caribbean African
Black
28
**
**
**
**
**
**
13
**
**
**
**
**
**
Other
918
47
36
83
12
17
625
49
37
86
10
14
All
282
44
28
73
21
27
167
41
39
80
14
20
92
40
53
93
57
45
50
95
Mixed Chinese
Race
200
48
37
85
10
15
202
52
33
86
14
Other
62
31
93
All1
61
29
90
10
2,814 4,493
45
37
82
12
18
2,383 3,606
45
40
86
10
14
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
Table 71 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by sex within ethnicity, England
Fairly big problem
1,684
65
29
94
2,246
61
29
90
10
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
All columns based on core sample (England and Wales).
2,993
62
Respondents
32
94
Very big problem
Not a very big problem/a problem at all
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Percentage1
1,002
62
27
89
11
Routine
occupations
410
53
33
86
11
14
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
149
42
39
81
14
19
Full time
students
101
53
36
88
12
Not
stated or
classified
8,590
61
30
92
All
Table 72 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by socio-economic group,
England and Wales
Fairly big problem
1,582
65
28
94
2,094
61
29
90
10
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
All columns based on core sample (England only).
2,869
62
Respondents
32
94
Very big problem
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Percentage1
936
62
27
89
11
Routine
occupations
380
51
34
85
12
15
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
139
42
40
82
12
18
Full time
students
96
52
36
88
12
Not
stated or
classified
8,101
61
30
91
All
England, 2007-08
Table 73 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by socio-economic group, England
858
97
26
71
3
1
3
1 (least
deprived)
870
96
27
69
4
1
4
888
96
26
70
4
1
3
820
97
26
71
3
1
3
898
95
29
65
5
1
4
733
91
31
60
9
3
6
769
93
36
57
7
1
5
794
84
35
49
16
4
11
734
82
34
48
18
5
12
737
80
34
46
20
6
14
10 (most
deprived)
8,101
91
30
61
9
2
6
All
England, 2007-08
6,760
90
34
56

Respondents
10
3
7
Urban

Very big problem
Fairly big problem
Percentage1
1,830
98
17
81
2
*
1
Rural
8,590
92
30
61
8
2
6
All
Table 75 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by type of area, England and Wales
All columns are based on core sample (England and Wales only).
* = Less than 0.5%.
All columns are based on core sample (England only).
Respondents

a problem at all

Very big problem
Fairly big problem
Percentage1
Table 74 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by the Index of Multiple Deprivation, England
All columns are based on core sample (England only).
* = Less than 0.5%.
6,422
90
33
56

Respondents
10
3
7
Urban

Very big problem
Fairly big problem
Percentage1
1,679
98
16
82
2
*
1
Rural
8,101
91
30
61
9
2
6
All
England, 2007-08
Table 76 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by type of area, England
506
1,157
63
29
92
854
67
26
93
792
67
27
94
825
52
38
90
10
North Yorkshire
East
West
West
and the Midlands Midlands
Humber
All columns are based on core sample (England and Wales).
Respondents
67
93

a problem at all
Fairly big problem
26
Very big problem
North
East
Percentage1
889
66
27
93
East of
England
948
43
41
84
11
16
London
1,305
65
28
93
South
East
825
70
25
95
South
West
489
61
34
95
Wales
8,590
61
30
92
All
Table 77 Perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is in the respondents area, by Government Office Region,
England and Wales
8,517
2
6
30
63
4,391
2
6
28
64
2,922
2
5
31
62
1,199
2
6
32
61
White
1,360
11
24
45
21
418
10
28
42
21
632
10
23
43
23
310
14
20
50
17
817
11
22
43
24
136
5
20
47
28
404
11
25
42
22
277
12
20
44
25
293
15
26
39
19
383
4
49
21
26
149
16
24
42
18
105
16
23
42
20
Asian
11
24
42
22
762
13
21
46
21
All
11
24
43
22
652
8
28
41
23
280 2,750
10
26
42
22
60
6
31
40
23
150 1,335
11
25
41
22
70
9
24
44
22
Other
Black
804
4
15
42
38
286
5
14
33
48
399
5
16
48
31
118
4
16
40
40
815
11
19
39
31
122
8
18
43
31
483
12
18
38
32
210
9
20
39
32
Caribbean African
Respondents
All
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 50+
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 30-49
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 16-29
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Percentage2
8
17
40
34
420
6
16
37
41
904
9
17
42
31
340
7
19
40
34
All
463 1,665
6
22
50
22
12
**
**
**
**
22
**
**
**
**
12
**
**
**
**
Other
485
8
16
38
38
96
5
16
33
46
216
7
16
43
34
172
9
15
36
40
165
6
19
47
28
323
19
49
32
72
6
17
50
27
61
7
20
45
27
Mixed Chinese
Race
438
9
19
37
35
116
9
16
37
38
221
13
18
35
33
101
2
22
41
35
Other
4
8
32
55
All1
3
7
33
57
2
7
28
63
3
7
31
59
5,503 9,286
10
21
42
28
1,316 4,574
7
22
39
31
2,748 3,314
10
21
42
27
1,436 1,393
10
20
43
27
All minority
ethnic groups
Table 78 Percentages of people who are worried about being physically attacked because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion,
by age within ethnicity, England and Wales
8,005
2
6
30
62
4,101
2
6
28
64
2,768
2
5
32
61
1,131
2
6
32
60
White
1,352
11
24
45
21
414
10
28
42
20
629
10
23
43
23
309
14
20
50
17
812
11
22
44
24
135
6
20
47
28
402
11
25
42
22
275
12
20
45
24
290
15
26
40
19
383
4
49
21
26
146
17
23
43
17
105
16
23
42
20
Asian
11
24
42
22
759
13
21
46
20
All
11
24
44
21
646
8
28
42
22
277 2,731
10
26
42
22
59
6
32
42
20
148 1,325
11
26
40
23
70
9
24
44
22
Other
Black
802
4
15
42
4
284
5
14
33
48
399
5
16
48
31
118
4
16
40
40
811
11
19
39
11
121
8
18
43
31
480
12
18
38
32
210
9
20
39
32
Caribbean African
= 0.
Respondents
All
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 50+
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 30-49
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Respondents
Age 16-29
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Percentage2
8
17
40
34
417
6
16
37
41
901
9
17
42
31
340
7
19
40
34
All
463 1,659
6
22
50
22
12
**
**
**
**
22
**
**
**
**
12
**
**
**
**
Other
478
8
15
39
38
93
5
16
32
47
214
7
16
44
33
170
9
13
37
41
164
6
19
47
28
323
19
49
32
71
7
17
49
28
61
7
20
45
27
Mixed Chinese
Race
429
9
19
38
34
109
10
16
39
34
219
14
19
35
33
101
2
22
41
35
Other
4
9
33
55
All1
3
7
34
56
2
7
29
62
3
7
31
58
5,461 8,762
10
21
42
27
1,297 4,278
7
23
40
30
2,730 3,155
10
21
42
27
1,431 1,324
10
20
43
27
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
by age within ethnicity, England
672
38
43
15
65
29
599 8,231
31
40
19
All
790
24
43
22
10
283
19
39
26
16
233
20
42
25
12
Indian
Muslim
177
35
32
20
13
Black
African
1,726
43
37
13
All
627
19
44
25
11
Hindu
Indian
328
22
49
20
10
Sikh
Indian
1,741
48
34
12
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
1,676
63
31
No
religion
9,286
59
31
670
38
43
15
61
30
598 8,495
31
40
19
All
785
24
43
22
10
280
19
40
25
16
232
19
43
25
13
Indian
Muslim
6,491
62
Not at all worried
Respondents
30
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Very worried
Percentage2
174
35
32
19
13
Black
African
1,760
26
41
21
12
All
622
20
45
24
11
Hindu
Indian
327
21
49
20
10
Sikh
Indian
1,694
46
35
13
Other
religions and
ethnic groups
All1
1,561
62
32
No
religion
8,762
58
31
All1
England, 2007-08
by ethno-religious group, England
6,862
62
Not at all worried
Respondents
30
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Black
African
Christian
Black
White Caribbean
Very worried
Percentage2
by ethno-religious group, England and Wales
692
19
45
23
14
668
23
44
25
386
21
46
21
12
431
26
42
23
154
15
42
27
16
139
23
38
26
14
Asian
24
42
24
10
All
19
45
23
13
145 1,379
23
44
27
132 1,371
21
40
26
13
Other
Black
476
33
47
14
328
45
36
17
495
29
35
21
15
320
34
43
16
Caribbean African
4,812
60
Not at all worried
Respondents
32
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Very worried
Females
3,701
65
Not at all worried
Respondents
28
Fairly worried
Not very worried
White
Very worried
Males
Percentage2
308
323 1,003
39
19
177
44
38
11
34
41
18
11
662
38
40
17
All
31
24
51
16
10
14
**
**
**
**
Other
105
31
45
16
60
25
49
22
Mixed Chinese
Race
224
33
32
25
10
214
36
41
15
Other
61
30
All1
57
32
3,019 5,244
26
42
21
11
2,484 4,038
30
42
21
All minority
ethnic groups
by sex within ethnicity, England and Wales
689
19
45
22
14
663
22
44
25
386
21
46
21
12
426
25
42
23
10
151
14
43
27
17
139
23
38
26
14
Asian
23
42
24
10
All
19
45
23
13
145 1,371
23
44
27
132 1,360
21
40
26
13
Other
Black
475
33
47
15
327
45
36
17
493
29
35
21
15
318
34
43
16
Caribbean African
4,500
60
Not at all worried
Respondents
32
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Very worried
Females
3,501
64
Not at all worried
Respondents
29
Fairly worried
Not very worried
White
Very worried
Males
Percentage2
304
323 1,000
39
20
174
45
39
34
41
18
11
659
38
40
17
All
31
24
51
16
10
14
**
**
**
**
Other
105
31
45
16
59
25
49
22
Mixed Chinese
Race
219
33
33
24
10
210
35
42
15
Other
60
30
All1
56
33
2,999 4,925
25
42
21
11
2,462 3,833
29
42
21
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
by sex within ethnicity, England
31
53
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Asian
983
23
41
25
11
371
16
52
22
11
529
23
44
23
10
287
26
43
20
10
230
19
38
29
13
63
21
44
16
19
538
10
Fairly worried
Respondents
Very worried
Not born in the UK
7,978
63
Not at all worried
Respondents
30
Fairly worried
Not very worried
White
Very worried
Born in the UK
Percentage1
23
41
25
11
748
20
48
21
11
All
249 1,994
23
38
27
11
27
**
**
**
**
Other
Black
436
43
37
16
367
34
46
15
721
31
40
19
11
89
36
36
18
10
Caribbean African
34
39
18
474
34
44
16
All
28 1,185
**
**
**
**
18
**
**
**
**
Other
202
34
38
19
280
41
39
14
136
29
48
17
27
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
369
31
37
22
10
66
52
38
Other
62
30
All
42
35
16
3,886 4,424
27
40
22
10
1,595 9,573
29
45
18
All minority
ethnic groups
by country of birth within ethnicity, England and Wales
32
53
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Asian
976
23
42
24
11
370
16
52
22
11
526
22
44
23
11
285
25
43
21
11
227
18
39
29
14
63
21
44
16
19
All columns based on combined sample (England only).
521
11
Fairly worried
Respondents
Very worried
Not born in the UK
7,483
63
Not at all worried
Respondents
30
Fairly worried
Not very worried
White
Very worried
Born in the UK
Percentage1
22
41
25
11
745
20
48
21
11
All
249 1,978
23
38
27
11
27
**
**
**
**
Other
Black
435
43
37
16
366
34
46
15
717
31
40
19
11
89
36
36
18
10
Caribbean African
34
39
18
473
34
44
16
All
28 1,180
**
**
**
**
18
**
**
**
**
Other
201
34
38
19
274
41
40
12
135
29
48
17
27
**
**
**
**
Mixed Chinese
Race
367
31
37
22
10
60
50
38
Other
62
31
All
41
36
16
3,861 4,382
27
40
22
10
1,579 9,062
28
45
18
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
by country of birth within ethnicity, England
3,228
2
6
30
62
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
Respondents
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Percentage1
3,094
2
6
31
61
Higher/lower
managerial
and
professions
1,706
1
7
31
61
2,276
4
8
32
56
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
2,436
4
7
32
57
1,079
3
10
31
55
Routine
occupations
451
7
10
31
51
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
158
7
9
30
54
Full time
students
111
4
9
34
53
Not
stated or
classified
9,286
3
7
31
59
All
1,007
3
11
32
55
Routine
occupations
418
8
11
31
50
Never
worked/
long-term
unemployed
148
7
8
30
54
Full time
students
106
4
9
35
53
Not
stated or
classified
8,762
3
7
31
58
All
England, 2007-08
by socio-economic group, England
1,816
1
6
31
62
Intermediate
Lower
occupations/
supervisory
All columns based on core sample (England and Wales).
Respondents
Very worried
Fairly worried
Not very worried
Not at all worried
Percentage1
by socio-economic group, England and Wales
2003
909
Respondents
557
51
12
N/A
22
13
844
33
40
23
497
45
12
27
22
Reasons for being

Reasons for being
refused a job in refused a promotion
the last five years4 in the last five years5
2005
913
36
33
23
497
40
12
16
29
21
Reasons for being

Reasons for being
2007-08
England and Wales, 2003, 2005 and 2007-08
Figures exclude respondents with missing data. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had looked for work in the last five years.
Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work with regard to promotion in the last five years.
Includes respondents who had said that they had been discriminated against at work with regard to promotion in the last five years based upon respondents who were currently employed as an employee
or who were currently self-employed (please see Annex A).
Includes respondents who were currently employed as an employee and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work with regard to promotion in the last five years (please see Annex A).
53
Dont know
Where you live

15
Colour
None of the above
Religion
N/A
Race
Other reason
28
Reasons for being

Reasons for being
Age
Gender
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 88 Reasons for being refused a job or discriminated against regarding promotion, 2003, 2005 and 2007-08
5
23
8
1
5
4
33
35
5
689
220
Aged 25-64
2
23
4
1
4
3
32
37
4
Aged 16-24
913
4
23
7
1
5
4
33
36
5
All
Excludes respondents with missing answers. Results for the category Aged 65+ have been omitted due to a very small base size. Percentages
sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
2 Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had
looked for work in the last five years.
Respondents2
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 89 Reasons for being refused a job, by age
433
53
Respondents2
497
21
29
16
3
12
4
40
9
1
All
Excludes respondents with missing answers. Results for the category Aged 65+ have been omitted due to a very small base size. Percentages
sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
2 Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work
with regard to promotion in the last five years.
= 0.
23
23
17
2
13
3
41
9
1
Aged 25-64
11
51
11
8
9
7
37
7
Aged 16-24
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 90 Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion, by age
5
20
6
1
4
2
33
39
4
462
451
Females
3
26
8
1
6
5
32
33
6
Males
913
4
23
7
1
5
4
33
36
5
All
Excludes respondents with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of
reasons.
2 Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had
Respondents2
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 91 Reasons for being refused a job, by sex
32
23
11
3
7
2
42
7
1
270
226
Females
11
33
21
3
17
5
38
10
1
Males
497
21
29
16
3
12
4
40
9
1
All
reasons.
2 Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work
Respondents2
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 92 Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion, by sex
4
14
20
5
18
6
30
26
11
1,093
767
All ethnic
minority groups
3
25
4
1
1
4
33
38
5
White
913
4
23
7
1
5
4
33
36
5
All1
reasons.
Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage2
Table 93 Reasons for being refused a job, by ethnicity
12
12
49
13
45
4
18
5
3
560
420
All ethnic
minority groups
23
31
8
2
4
3
46
9
1
White
497
21
29
16
3
12
4
40
9
1
All1
reasons.
Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage2
Table 94 Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion, by ethnicity
3
24
5
1
2
4
34
33
7
523
471
Non-practising
3
27
8
*
6
3
30
35
3
Practising
Christian
995
3
25
6
1
3
4
33
34
6
All
384
3
15
21
12
13
9
36
26
8
Practising
173
2
16
13
2
7
3
27
40
5
Non-practising
All other religions
538
3
16
18
8
11
7
32
32
6
All
304
5
23
2
*
1
3
31
44
6
No
religion
913
4
23
7
1
5
4
33
36
5
All1
Excludes respondents with missing answers or religion data. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
3 Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had looked for work in the last five years.
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage2
Table 95 Reasons for being refused a job, by religion
21
32
7
1
6
3
48
7
1
317
258
Non-practising
23
25
24
3
17
4
33
9
1
Practising
Christian
576
22
30
12
1
9
3
44
7
1
All
196
18
13
37
22
22
7
24
6
2
Practising
94
10
28
29
8
17
2
35
2
2
Non-practising
All other religions
284
16
17
35
18
20
5
27
5
2
All
113
24
28
5
2
5
1
45
14
1
No
religion
497
21
29
16
3
12
4
40
9
1
All1
Excludes respondents with missing answers or religion data. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work with regard to promotion in the last five years.
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage2
Table 96 Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion, by religion
8
31
11
2
6
1
49
21
4
136
776
Does have long-term

limiting illness/disability
3
22
6
1
5
4
30
38
5
Does not have long-term

913
4
23
7
1
5
4
33
36
5
All
Excludes respondents with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
Includes responses relating to illness or disability.
3 Includes respondents who said that they had been refused a job in the last five years based upon respondents who had been employees or had looked for work in the last five years.
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason2
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 97 Reasons for being refused a job, by whether the respondent has a long-term limiting illness or disability
18
33
12
8
10
5
47
4
2
96
399
Does have long-term

21
27
17
2
13
3
38
10
1
Does not have long-term

497
21
29
16
3
12
4
40
9
1
All
Excludes respondents with missing answers. Percentages sum to more than 100 as respondents could mention an unlimited number of reasons.
Includes responses relating to illness or disability.
3 Includes respondents who had been employees in the last five years and people who said that they had been discriminated against at work with regard to promotion in the last five years.
Respondents3
Gender
Age
Race
Religion
Colour
Where you live
Other reason2
None of the above
Dont know
Reasons
Percentage1
Table 98 Reasons for being discriminated against regarding promotion, by whether the respondent has a long-term limiting illness
or disability
3,854
62
Have taken part in civic engagement or formal volunteering in the last twelve months
Respondents
28
Males
2,084
65
32
Aged 50-64
Take part in civic engagement or formal volunteering at least once a month
Percentage
2,449
70
32
Aged 35-49
Table 100 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by sex
1,319
61
25
Aged 25-34
727
55
Have taken part in civic engagement or

formal volunteering in the last twelve months
Respondents
26
Aged 16-24
Take part in civic engagement or

formal volunteering at least once a month
Percentage1
Table 99 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by age
4,946
64
32
Females
1,148
64
34
Aged 65-74
8,804
63
30
All
8,804
63
30
All
England, 2007-08
1,072
51
26
Aged 75+
England, 2007-08
1,361
50
23
812
52
21
292
47
18
Asian
51
22
All
280 2,745
56
29
Other
Black
808
60
30
818
57
29
Caribbean African
8,036
64
Have taken part in civic

engagement or formal volunteering
in the last twelve months
Respondents
30
White

engagement or formal volunteering
at least once a month
Percentage
Table 101 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by ethnicity
479
462 1,672
33
61
30
All
58
76
53
Other
165
47
16
Mixed Chinese
Race
432
46
17
Other
63
30
All1
5,493 8,804
53
25
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
71

engagement or formal
volunteering in the
last twelve months
5,063
60
25
8,540
64
31
All
1,416
51
23
Practising
3,468
43
Respondents
Christian

volunteering at least
once a month
Percentage1
350
50
17
Nonpractising
Muslim
1,768
51
22
All
Table 102 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by religion
545
47
23
Practising
203
58
27
Nonpractising
Hindu
749
50
24
All
242
41
23
Practising
97
43
13
Nonpractising
Sikh
340
41
20
All
England, 2007-08
66
Respondents
62
52
128
63
26
238
77
57
69

volunteering in the
last twelve months
12
169
59
26
409
67
41
33
Other Religions2
Buddhist

volunteering at least
once a month
Percentage
Table 102 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by religion (continued)
5,975
69
41
5,944
60
25
63
31
All
11,934
All Religions
1,565
64
27
No
Religion
8,804
63
30
All1
England, 2007-08
Respondents
Have taken part in civic engagement or formal volunteering at least once a month
Percentage
8,306
30
63
Heterosexual
6,793
31
64
Does not
have long-term
limiting illness/
disability
Table 104 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by sexual identity
Respondents
Have taken part in civic engagement or formal volunteering at least once a month
Reasons
Percentage
140
28
68
Gay/lesbian/bisexual
1,981
26
58
Have
long-term
limiting illness/
disability
8,804
30
63
All
England, 2007-08
8,804
30
63
All
England, 2007-08
Table 103 Participation in civic engagement or formal volunteering, by whether the respondent has a long-term limiting illness
or disability
717
44
45
10
1
*
725
27
57
13
3
*
711
22
53
19
5
1
676
42
48
7
2
*
Aged 16-24
1,305
39
50
9
2
1
1,314
26
56
15
3
*
1,239
25
50
16
7
2
1,191
45
45
9
1
*
Aged 25-34
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
At work/school/college
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Percentage1
2,433
38
52
9
1
*
2,437
22
60
16
2
*
2,235
21
54
19
4
2
2,183
45
46
7
2
*
Aged 35-49
Table 105 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by age
2,075
44
48
6
1
*
2,073
27
60
12
1
1
1,869
26
54
13
4
3
1,571
50
43
5
1
*
Aged 50-64
1,144
58
37
4
1
*
1,143
38
53
8
1
*
1,048
36
49
9
2
3
341
53
42
3
*
1
Aged 65-74
1,065
67
30
3
*
*
1,046
52
42
6
*
*
960
45
42
7
2
4
199
53
43
2
1
1
Aged 75+
8,744
45
46
8
1
*
8,743
29
57
13
2
*
8,067
27
52
15
4
2
6,164
46
45
7
1
*
All
England, 2007-08
* = Less than 0.5%.
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Percentage1
3,821
46
45
7
1
*
3,828
29
57
12
2
1
3,515
26
53
15
4
3
2,855
44
47
7
2
1
Males
Table 106 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by sex
4,919
44
47
8
1
*
4,911
28
56
14
2
*
4,548
27
51
15
4
2
3,306
49
44
6
1
*
Females
8,744
45
46
8
1
*
8,743
29
57
13
2
*
8,067
27
52
15
4
2
6,164
46
45
7
1
*
All
England, 2007-08
7,987
44
47
8
1
*
7,984
28
57
13
2
*
7,325
26
52
15
4
3
5,536
46
45
7
1
*
White
1,354
43
48
8
1
*
1,353
39
52
9
1
*
1,295
32
51
14
2
1
1,096
49
45
5
1
*
802
42
49
7
1
1
800
36
58
6
*
*
766
30
55
11
3
2
644
48
45
6
1
*
286
44
42
13
1
*
288
38
52
10
1
*
282
31
51
16
2
1
225
43
50
6
Asian
48
45
6
1
*
All
32
51
13
3
1
38
53
8
*
*
43
47
8
1
*
275 2,717
46
44
7
2
1
277 2,718
39
49
12
*
1
275 2,618
36
45
13
4
2
237 2,202
51
38
10
*
*
Other
Black
802
39
51
9
1
*
799
32
51
15
1
1
782
26
47
21
3
2
639
42
47
10
1
*
807
44
43
12
1
*
806
37
44
17
1
*
800
30
43
24
3
1
683
41
42
15
2
*
Caribbean African
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Percentage2
Table 107 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by ethnicity
42
44
13
1
*
All
28
45
22
3
1
34
48
16
1
*
42
47
10
1
*
453 1,654
28
65
5
1
453 1,650
18
59
19
3
463 1,628
23
55
12
11
373 1,359
39
56
5
1
Other
471
48
41
8
2
*
475
35
49
14
2
462
28
45
20
6
1
397
47
41
11
1
*
160
43
44
11
1
1
163
36
51
11
*
2
159
30
53
13
2
2
145
38
48
13
*
1
Mixed Chinese
Race
423
51
39
9
430
43
46
10
1
419
37
45
14
3
1
356
53
37
8
1
1
Other
46
45
7
1
*
All1
27
52
15
4
2
29
57
13
2
*
45
46
8
1
*
5,425 8,744
44
46
9
1
*
5,436 8,743
37
51
11
1
*
5,286 8,067
31
49
16
3
1
4,459 6,164
47
44
9
1
*
All minority
ethnic groups
England, 2007-08
3,445
49
44
7
1
*
3,445
34
53
12
2
*
3,268
31
51
12
3
3
2,323
50
44
6
1
*
5,031
44
47
8
1
*
5,031
26
58
13
2
*
4,628
25
52
16
4
3
3,667
46
46
7
1
*
Christian
8,485
45
46
8
1
*
8,485
29
57
13
2
*
7,903
27
52
15
4
3
5,996
47
45
7
1
*
All
1,403
44
46
9
1
*
1,401
39
51
10
*
*
1,352
33
48
15
2
2
1,096
47
43
9
1
*
Practising
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Percentage1
345
51
42
6
1
*
346
40
52
7
*
*
332
35
50
12
2
1
298
49
44
5
1
*
Nonpractising
Muslim
1,750
46
45
8
1
*
1,749
39
51
9
*
*
1,686
34
48
14
2
1
1,395
48
43
8
1
*
All
544
45
46
8
1
1
541
39
54
7
*
525
34
51
13
2
1
441
48
46
4
1
*
Practising
Table 108 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by religion
202
49
45
6
*
202
42
48
10
194
29
46
20
3
1
185
58
37
5
Nonpractising
Hindu
747
46
46
7
1
*
744
40
52
8
*
720
33
49
15
2
1
627
51
43
4
1
*
All
239
41
50
7
1
241
36
55
8
1
229
29
54
14
2
*
182
53
43
4
Practising
97
38
52
8
2
97
26
60
12
2
90
20
64
12
5
84
36
56
8
Nonpractising
Sikh
337
40
51
8
1
339
33
56
9
1
320
27
57
14
3
*
266
47
47
5
All
England, 2007-08
50
39
10
*
54
45
33
13
8
1
60
22
64
13
62
35
55
9
1
1
60
36
45
12
1
6
61
28
59
9
3
1
66
47
42
10
1
64
43
46
10
1
*
124
26
61
10
2
1
128
39
41
13
3
4
121
45
39
16
*
107
43
51
5
1
236
36
47
16
1
235
29
45
20
4
2
229
55
41
4
1
161
42
46
8
4
166
31
54
12
3
168
29
54
11
3
2
156
42
45
11
1
*
131
42
50
6
3
404
35
50
14
2
405
31
49
15
3
2
387
49
42
8
1
*
294
42
39
19
53
Other Religions2
Buddhist
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
Percentage2
All Religions
48
44
7
1
*
5,931
34
52
12
1
*
5,929
32
50
13
3
2
5,664
50
44
6
1
*
4,256
44
45
47
46
8
8
1
1
*
*
5,90111,847
27
29
58
56
13
12
2
2
*
*
5,90611,850
25
27
52
52
16
15
4
4
3
2
5,46011,137
46
47
45
45
7
7
1
1
*
*
4,419 8,685
Table 108 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by religion (continued)
41
48
9
1
*
1,549
22
58
15
3
*
1,554
22
52
18
6
2
1,461
44
46
8
2
*
1,300
No
Religion
45
46
8
1
*
8,744
29
57
13
2
*
8,743
27
52
15
4
2
8,067
46
45
7
1
*
6,164
All1
England, 2007-08
50
41
7
1
*
1,247
26
52
15
4
3
1,527
26
58
14
2
*
1,703
41
50
8
1
*
1,703
25
53
16
4
2
2,859
26
59
13
2
*
3,088
42
49
7
1
*
3,093
47
43
8
1
*
2,276
29
57
12
1
*
2,276
27
51
15
4
2
2,103
44
46
8
1
1
1,513
Intermediate Lower supervisory

occupations/
and technical/
small employers
Semi-routine
48
46
5
1
*
2,396
Higher/lower
managerial and
professions
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
Percentage1
51
42
6
1
*
1,008
36
49
11
3
1
1,014
30
50
14
3
2
945
44
44
10
2
*
587
49
40
9
2
1
421
34
50
12
3
1
417
28
49
15
6
3
397
31
50
13
4
2
194
Routine Never worked/

occupations
long-term
unemployed
Table 109 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by socioeconomic group
48
43
6
*
2
145
34
54
10
2
147
26
54
16
4
146
39
53
6
2
147
Full time
students
49
45
6
92
35
55
9
1
92
29
53
16
1
2
84
53
40
6
1
75
Not
stated or
classified
45
46
8
1
*
8,744
29
57
13
2
*
8,743
27
52
15
4
2
8,067
46
45
7
1
6,164
All
England, 2007-08
* = Less than 0.5%.
= 0.
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
When shopping
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents

All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Respondents
All of the time
Most of the time
Some of the time
Rarely
Never
Percentage1
8,265
45
47
8
1
*
8,267
28
57
13
2
*
7,627
26
52
15
4
2
5,856
46
45
7
1
*
Heterosexual
140
39
48
8
2
2
139
20
64
14
2
133
15
56
17
7
4
114
40
46
12
1
1
Gay/lesbian/bisexual
Table 110 Perceptions of the level of respect respondents are treated with, by sexual identity
8,744
45
46
8
1
*
8,743
29
57
13
2
*
8,067
27
52
15
4
2
6,164
46
45
7
1
*
All
England, 2007-08
ISBN: 978-1-4098-2091-8

Citizenship Survey

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Citizenship Survey

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

2007-08 Citizenship Survey

Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

2007-08 Citizenship Survey

Chris Ferguson, Steven Finch and Ola Turczuk, NatCen

Department for Communities and Local Government

inside front cover

Perceptions of racial discrimination by

Perceptions of the extent to which the Government

How religion affects day-to-day life

Racial and religious harassment and fear of attack

Chapter 11 Formal volunteering and civic engagement across

Definitions and Terms

Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and

6 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

8 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

10 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

Racial and religious harassment and fear of attack

12 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

The Citizenship Survey is designed to contribute to the evidence base across a

The Survey is based on a nationally representative sample of approximately

The five reports are:

The report begins by examining peoples expectations of how they would be

14 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 15

This section explores perceptions of racial discrimination by public service

16 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

This section presents detailed analysis of responses to this question. It begins

Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 17

Health service organisations, such as a local doctors surgery, a local hospital

The health service 3

The Prison Service

Your local police

The Crown Prosecution Service

The education system

The immigration authorities

Expect better treatment than other races

18 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

Most of the 2007-08 findings in relation to peoples perceptions of being treated

A local doctors surgery

Your local police

The education system

The Crown Prosecution Service

The immigration authorities

A council housing department or

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 19

Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

20 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 21

Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

Perceptions of racial discrimination by all public service

22 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

Perceptions of racial discrimination by at least one of eight

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 23

Perceptions of racial discrimination by at least one of eight key

24 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

All ethnic minority groups

Chapter 2 Perceptions of racial discrimination by pubic service organisations | 25

All ethnic minority groups

Base: Combined sample, England & Wales (2005:14,081; 2007-08:14,095);

Characteristics of people who feel that they would be treated

26 | 2007-08 Citizenship Survey Race, Religion and Equalities Topic Report

non-practising Christians, practising and non-practising Buddhists (compared to