Increase in population mobility and the arrival of migrants from a wider range of countries than ever before has produced ‘ethni-cities’ (Hill 2003, p. 1) in western societies. These cities become places where the visibility of cultural diversity and the co-existence of different ethnic groups can generate feelings of anxiety and fear and attitudes that range from intolerance and indifference, to more cosmopolitan virtues of care, generosity and responsibility (Poynting & Mason 2008, Valentine 2008). But terms such as social fragmentation and unrest rather than harmony and intercultural understanding are increasingly associated with the multicultural societies of today (Wiles 2007). The fluctuation of attitudes and views towards diversity and immigration cannot be taken for granted as they reflect deeper and intersecting factors most notably social policies, public discourses, individual notions of attachment and identity, as well as opportunities for creative engagements with ‘lived’ diversity. Indeed, multiculturalism as a philosophy and a state-led policy of governing and recognising diversity in the public sphere was first introduced in white majority western liberal societies in 1970s to integrate and settle immigrants and ethnic minorities. However, this policy is less enchanting today in an era described as ‘supposedly post-multiculturalist’ (Nagel and Hopkins 2010, p. 2). No doubt, the goal of nation-building, co-existence and inter-communal harmony that underpins multicultural philosophy is being challenged and needs further exploration. Our focus in this paper is particularly on the discourse of social harmony and intercultural understanding within local governance that is central to managing ethnic and religious diversity and the tolerance of dissent in countries with white majority cultures (Valentine 2008; Chan 2010). Chan for example draws attention to the dominant narrative in Britain that associates the cause of disharmony and lack of intercultural interaction with ethnic self-segregation that is an outcome of the ‘over-tolerance of multicultural diversity’ (2010, p.36). On the other hand, Donnelly’s (2004) research on the tolerance and respect for religious diversity in schools in Northern Ireland underlines that harmony is a high price to pay and is superficial if it does not address contentious issues, deep-rooted stereotypes and suspicions. In France, social harmony is associated with equality that is interpreted as ‘cultural sameness’ (Wiles 2007, p.702) and demands the assimilation of immigrants.