The Conservative party is not endearing itself to the Muslim community. The "findings" of its policy group on national and international security has alienated many individuals who have dedicated days, weeks, months and even years striving to create greater harmony in the communities' co-existence with the rest of society.

While Mr Cameron has rightly identified five strands that need to be tackled in order to create greater social harmony, his isolation of the Muslim community to test this theory is both short-sighted and derogatory.

Issues of the immigration and integration of eastern Europeans within Britain should be a far greater concern for any prospective government, where the figures crossing the borders on a daily basis cannot even be counted and the economic implications remain uncertain. Instead, Mr Cameron has picked the easy target and backed a flawed report which was in all probability written after his theories were formulated, to give them credence.

In identifying extremists, the report talks about the Egyptian-born cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi. Mr Howard claims to have banned him from entry to the UK while he was home secretary, and the report suggests no conservative government would allow him access. A quick look at Sheikh Qaradawi's passport (which someone at the Muslim Association of Britain did) shows that between 1995 and 1997, he entered Britain no less than five times - on Mr Howard's watch as home secretary.

The new Cameron brand of multiculturalism will without a doubt require all-out assimilation for Muslims. This is unlikely to be a requirement a Cameron government will impose on any other minority British group, and thus the report and speech seem steeped in an already formulated ideology which has been supported by flawed evidence against organisations such as the Muslim Council of Britain who have worked tirelessly to bridge the gap between the Muslim community and Britain's mainstream. Not all Muslims support the MCB and the way it operates, but in the same breath they are unlikely to find reason to attack it as Mr Cameron has done.

The essence of the New Tory attack on Muslim integration is no doubt a political manoeuvre to show that they are not afraid to formulate hard-line policy on "problem issues". It is telling that they picked an easy target already steeped in distrust, instead of real issues such as the debt infested NHS.

If we are talking about creating a more inclusive Muslim community, one is forced to ask where the equivalent demands are for Britain's Jewish, Sikh and Hindu communities? For Britain 's Jewry, there are no questions about the availability of religious courts and community affairs are handled internally. Thus, the Jewish "sharia" is allowed to exist (and so it should), yet the same right is being denied to Muslims.

What does the sharia mean? It is surprising that an educated politician would exploit a word in such a way. Sharia is nothing to be afraid of and it merely encompasses a code which many Muslims already live by, regardless of where they are.

Sharia is the rules which regulate the life of a Muslim; there is no need to impose them on any other individual or at a state level as they are based on a person's religious convictions. When Muslims marry, many undertake a religious ceremony so they are married in the sight of God, and a civil ceremony so that they are married in the sight of the state. There is no conflict.

The only positive suggestion emanating from this episode is to encourage minorities to learn the English language, as this will help the wider community communicate with these individuals, and crucially, will take away the isolation that those who do not speak English find themselves facing in an English-speaking society.

The call for eradicating poverty actually resounds throughout all of Britain's working classes. It is not something that affects Muslims of ethnic minorities in isolation, and racially-motivated aggression usually stems from a cross section of ethnicities.

However, on the up side, perhaps it would have been prudent for Mr Cameron to also note the positives of the equation. Britain 's 2.5% Asians are thought to contribute approximately 10% of the country's GDP - £100 billion or so. It is difficult to miss the fact that glossing over issues such as this ensures that the minority community is blamed for ills but not celebrated for its achievements. For those who do face poverty, they do not need more suspicion and scepticism but rather openness which will foster trust.

Perhaps Mr Cameron needs to reflect on his accusation that most mainstream Muslim groups are "keener to promote ideologies than the totality of the communities they claim to represent", because for many of us, we seem to be thinking "ditto".

This article first appeared on www.commentisfree.guardian.co.uk