The day before the election and another story explodes of UKIP racism. I am not hugely surprised but I am a bit shocked at the failure of other UKIP candidates to speak out against this, or indeed, as I did over Humza Yousaf, to resign. It is not enough to have this man suspended. He contaminates the brand as much as David Coburn did.
UKIP in other words is not just racist, it is aggressively so. Councillor Ranil Jayawardena is a fellow of the RSA and a Freeman of the City of London. He is a natural successor to James Arbuthnot and I imagine he will do well tomorrow.
The issue with UKIP goes deeper than the news we read today. This is a group that is thoroughly infiltrated by BNP thugs, may well retain links with the National Front, became buddies with Lega Nord, and seems to tolerate holocaust deniers. This is a party where the simple fact is misrepresented again and again- EU migrants are not an economic liability. They are NET contributors. We need to wake up to this fact. The absurd idea that underpins UKIP thinking is that the more migrants we get rid of, the more access we will have to public services. But the simple fact remains that many of these migrants contribute significantly to the upkeep of these self-same services and more than that, often staff the services. The NHS for instance would be a pitiful shell of an institution without the migrant labour force of nurses and cleaners and doctors.
At the point of writing, Farage has not spoken out and apologised to Rabil as he did not apologise to Humza. I suppose he regards this as just another joke, which is why UKIP candidates clearly feel there is licence to overstep the mark.
This evening I am blogging about a National story. But it has relevance to Daventry and, indeed, to any political campaign.
Let me put this in context: A few weeks’ ago, I felt a red line had been crossed when an elected MEP, David Coburn, compared a Scottish Parliamentary Minister to a convicted terrorist. I had written to the leader of the relevant party (my own) asking for a clear letter of apology to be sent to Humza Yousaf and when no such letter was forthcoming, and equally when the said MEP failed to resign, I did what I thought was the honourable thing and resigned myself both as a Parliamentary candidate and as a member of the said party. In this way, I found myself as an independent candidate standing for the District Council in Drayton.
I am proud that I stood up for what is right. We need to respect one another and we need to stand up to bullies, whoever and wherever they are. Sometimes falling on your sword is the only way to make a point, pun intended. And the point MUST be made that Racism and homophobia are simply unacceptable in today’s society.
I was verbally savaged after I resigned, and then my family was attacked. The savaging I accept- the attack on my family I denounce. It is plucked from the same cupboard as the racism and the homophobia, a cupboard full of the “dark arts” of Politics. It has no place in our world and those who use, or even dip into these dark arts do not deserve public office.
I believe passionately that bullies should be ridiculed. I was a teacher and remain an educational consultant: I know the harm that bullies can do, but I also know how readily they collapse when we laugh at them. I think of the “Ridikulous spell” against the Boggarts in Harry Potter- I think it is not surprising that it features in the best Harry Potter book, “the Prisoner of Azkaban”. That’s how to deal with bullies!
Both racism and homophobia are mostly about bullying, calling people by foul names, of demeaning a person by reference to race, creed, gender. Of course, in extreme cases this can also lead to actual violence. But name-calling is quite bad enough, and it is worth reflecting on the old adage about “sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never harm me.” They may not, but the person who uses racist or homophobic “names” is exposed there and then as a pathetic individual, quite unworthy of election. Anyone who defends that person is smeared by association. Names may not hurt me, but they should certainly hurt the name-caller!
Of course, when you stand up to a bully, as one brave boy I know did a few weeks’ ago in one of our major Public Schools, there is every chance the bully himself will start crying and claim he has been the victim. Though soon after that, he was into blackmail: “By their fruits shall ye know them”!
Today, there is a news story about a Labour man called Ian Smart who referred to the SNP as “fascist scum” and Neil Hay who is himself an SNP candidate has called UK supporters “quislings” or traitors. He has done this rather more shamefully under a pseudonym, and he has rightly been exposed and asked to account for what he has written. It seems he was also fairly outspoken about elderly people, questioning their ability to vote. We can’t have that!
His blog has now been deleted but that is never enough. Nicola Sturgeon said this, “I do condemn the language used and I condemn the comments made – as I always do when anybody steps out of line on Twitter, on Facebook or any medium.”
There is the famous story of S. Jean Vianney, the Curé d’Ars, canonized in 1925, who was faced by a penitent, a lady who claimed to have been gossiping. He asked her to bring him a chicken and, because lunch was calling, to pluck it as she walked from her home to church. When she arrived with the freshly plucked bird, he told her to go back and collect all the feathers. “But that’s impossible,” she said, “Many of them will have blown away”. And so it is, said the priest, with gossip and name-calling. It spreads. The damage that is done when we write a stupid blog cannot be undone simply by taking down the blog. And an apology needs to be made good by a proper demonstration of repentance. (I knew a wonderful man in Greece called Roger de Ponton d’Amecourt who was writing a comprehensive biography of the Priest. I do not know whether he has finished it and we have sadly fallen out of contact.)
I resigned from UKIP because I felt the need to sever the link from a party that condoned racism and homophobia. My penance is not finished. I must now try to repair some of the damage done by my association with that party. The least I can do is to continue writing to Mr Farage and demanding Mr Coburn’s resignation as well as a letter of apology to Mr Yousaf. So far, Mr Farage has failed to respond directly, though I gather he has made national funds available to target my campaign in Drayton.
But it is surely time that politics in the UK changed, and politicians of all parties grew up. Three things need to be said. First of all, some of the greatest politicians have changed party allegiance. That is nothing shameful or new. Churchill, for example, did so. Secondly, there used to be a code of honour because we are all, after all, in the same business: we want to change the way that things are done, and we feel propelled to do this in the public eye. We do not set out to be savaged personally, or to be lynched, and nor should we expect our families to be attacked. Instead, we stand up, we speak out and we, alone, should be held to account. And thirdly and finally, regarding the name calling that has taken place today- there was a referendum only a few months’ ago and Scotland voted very clearly to remain in the Union. That may not be the result the SNP wanted to hear, but it is a democratic decision and until there is a further vote, it should be accepted. The people who voted for the Union are not “quislings”- they were exercising a democratic right. And the SNP is one of the most socially aware parties in our United Kingdom – to call the SNP “fascist scum” is to belittle the people who died fighting genuine fascism in the Second world war; Fascist scum would not welcome immigrants. Fascist scum would not put out one of the most generous education packages for University students in the country.
We need to be less tribal in our politics and there is no need at all for British Politics to be so grubby.
I was appalled to walk around Daventry a few weeks ago with Councillor Sean Connors who, like me has a keen belief that we can do better, work harder, enjoy life, when we live in a beautiful place. He is a man who really does have “green fingers” and is trained as a horticulturalist. I think we need to recognise that the contracted park service we currently use is not fit for purpose and we need to set up something we can be proud of. I don’t doubt that this will take a bit of time to arrange, but I am sure the goodwill is there to support such a scheme. We need a trained team of responsible people, properly equipped and motivated to give dignity to Daventry. Since I resigned last Tuesday, I have been approached by many people asking me to stand as an Independent candidate. I worry that time is short and also I cannot begin to describe the exhaustion of facing up to all the savagery from UKIP that followed by resignation.
Here, anyway is a video I made with Sean a few weeks’ ago. The contents remain relevant today.
And here is a link to an earlier film I made walking down Sheaf street in Daventry. Daventry has tremendous history and it is something to celebrate publicly. I think within 3 years, we should be winning a Britain in Bloom award!
This is a thoughtful and insightful blog.I could not say anything in any clearer way frankly. TIM WILSON
though-
The story did not seem to me to be “a non-story” and Coburn and Farage compound the original insult by referring to it as a joke however crass or tasteless they may describe it. these people deserve to be thoroughly and mercilessly ridiculed until they sit up and pay attention. It is time they understood and appreciated what a joke can be!
James Gillray is one of my heroes
this is what the UKIP spokesman said at the time:
Glenn Campbell, BBC Scotland political correspondent
UKIP said David Coburn had apologised to Humza Yousaf.
They said he would be making no further comment on what a spokesman described as a “non-story”.
But that’s unlikely to be the last word on the matter.
Mr Yousaf said he was taking “legal advice” to see if he could pursue a complaint under legislation against race or religious hatred.
It has also emerged that the Scottish government is inviting MSPs to vote to express their disapproval.
Cabinet minister Alex Neil has tabled an amendment to a motion celebrating Scotland’s diverse communities.
It says parliament “unites in condemning the recent comments by David Coburn MEP”.
MSPs will decide on Wednesday whether or not to endorse that rebuke to Scotland’s most outspoken Euro MP.
David Coburn, the openly gay Kipper MEP for Scotland, is in the Groanoiad and Scottish Daily Mail for allegedly referring to Humza Yousaf as Abu Hamza in an interview with the latter paper. Yousaf is the MSP for Glasgow, and the Minister for Europe and International Development in the Scottish parliament. Yousaf and Coburn were due to take part in the BBC’s Big Immigration Debate, but Yousaf did not arrive. Coburn said of Yousaf’s failure to appear, “Humza Yousaf, or as I call him, Abu Hamza, didn’t seem to turn up.”
His remarks have been condemned by Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, the Conservative’s leader in Scotland, Ruth Davidson, and Kezia Dugdale, Labour’s deputy leader north of the border. Coburn, however, has said that the remark was supposed to be private, while the Kipper’s Scottish chairman, Arthur Misty Thackeray, said he had simply got the name wrong through a…
Rachel Cooke can barely restrain her contempt for Mr Farage as she pens this rather fascinating article in the magazine section of the Observer today. I am sure it was set up by the media boffins in the Dorset HQ of UKIP with the thought that Nigel is the party’s greatest asset, but he is a bit like Marmite. I have never really liked Marmite. And I get the impression from this article that he is actually a bit out of his depth. He is running a National election with a sticking plaster and a rubber-band. Whatever your views about his policies, hats off to him for his spunk.
Given my own recent brush with the powers of UKIP, I thought it would be interesting to analyse the main points in the piece.
Firstly there is a photo which is captioned, “Whatever my faults, I have some principles.” Certainly not any ones I would admire, Mr F! Not anymore. My eyes have been thoroughly opened (and incidentally, I am still waiting for a response to my letter!)
But what is interesting about the article is that, given Rachel’s evident dislike of the man’s policies, he comes across as someone we would all enjoy meeting, actually someone we might actually like. He describes himself as a “sentimentalist” and as a man who wants to watch lots of theatre when he retires – I certainly hope he has booked himself into plenty of shows after May 7th, then- She does her level best to do him down “looking at his weary face, clammy and puce”, but for all her efforts, what I felt by the time I finished was a wave of sympathy for a man against the odds. And I liked his observation that politics is full of “corruption and laziness.” Having had a brush with it, I concur.
I remembered the awful pictures taken of him getting out of the plane wreck, as I was reading Rachel’s article and urge you to check above his brilliant summary of what happened and the way it has affected him. Then, of course, there was the terrible melee last week when his family was attacked by the “hope not hate” people. Also, I realise I must know some of his contemporaries at Dulwich. There are moments, certainly for me, when the Farage image moves from marmite to something rather more all-embracing, and there is undoubted warmth. He has the theatricality and actually the charisma and “common touch” to appeal to a much wider audience, but something stops him doing that.
There was a bit where Rachel pressed him about his family, and I felt his discomfort. (“his absolute refusal to wheel out his family. .. I won’t even let you through the front gate.”) But then, he tells us that his wife would pass the Australian migrant points scheme, and that made me cringe.
Some of the points he makes are blatantly wrong of course – he claims that Blair is responsible for the influx of “hard-working Polish builders”. It was not Blair, but John Major who signed the Maastricht treaty and Blair was simply following the inevitable progress of the Brussels juggernaut. The treaty guaranteed European Citizenship over and above National citizenship. This allowed for freedom of movement within the community, the right to vote and stand for elections in the country of residence and the right of petition to the EU parliament and of complaint to an ombudsman. It also provided for monetary union. A number of subsequent treaties (including Nice, Lisbon and Amsterdam) may have had some Blair input but they were essentially tinkering with what was set up in 1992.
Mrs Thatcher rejected Maastricht saying that she “could never have signed that bill”. And the rebellion against Maastricht formed the centrepiece in the Government of Mr Major, with famously the approval of the Maastricht agreement inching through the Commons with a majority of only 18 votes.
But despite the title on the front page, Rachel does not really draw any conclusion about “what drives Farage”, though I certainly have my suspicions.
A few months ago, I wrote a blog-piece here in response to claims by Chuka Umunna who said there was racism at the heart of UKIP. This is a party I know well and I was, until two days’ ago the Parliamentary Candidate for South Northants.
Review of recent events
About 10 days ago I learnt of a comment tossed off by David Corburn, UKIP’s only MEP in Scotland, who compared the Scottish Minister for Europe, Humza Yousaf to convicted criminal Abu Hamza, a man who is serving a life sentence in New York for terrorism. I immediately requested a meeting with Mr Farage which was denied- I am too much of a small-fry! I was told to go through the hierarchy and approach my “Regional Organiser” whose name is Paul Oakden. Oakden had already revealed himself to be a thug who threw his weight around, and never returned telephone calls. Time dragged on and I spoke to Humza early the following week to ask what I could do to help, talked to the Daily Mail and found myself resigning. For the next few days, I was at the centre of a media circus that was actually located somewhere in Edinburgh.
Bits of the furore tricked down to Northampton, and Oakden went in for the kill, accusing me on live radio of behaving like a brat, throwing his toys out of the pram. He questioned my competence as a candidate and so on, which meant I was obliged to answer back and the thing duly had a more local manifestation. But I was at pains to stress I had no evidence nor suspicions about any member of the local party being racist, homophobic or prejudiced.
And then came Adam Collyer’s blog which was a nasty attack on my partner- suggesting that he was not the victim of a torture event in Greece but probably the aggressor. It undermined my integrity, of course, and seriously upset my partner who had suffered 11 years’ of a legal battle for proper redress through the ECHR.
Adam Collyer, like David Coburn is an elected UKIP politician, one of the current high ranking and experienced leaders of the party. As a UKIP ranker, I think he must be held to higher standards than ordinary members who might aspire to but have not attained elected office. In other words, he is on the same rank as David Coburn and I hold him to the same standards. If he wants to lambast me, well I am fair game of course, but if he wants to attack my family, he should check his facts first and also make sure that what he writes is unambiguously clear.
One significant fact was wrong: Necati did not enter the UK as an asylum seeker. Another fact was presented in such a way as to be misleading: here is the offensive phrase: “… Necati Zontul, a Turkish asylum-seeker who has been involved in allegations of torture against the Greek police.” I was first alerted to this by a Greek friend who sent me a message : Κάποιος κύριος γράφει άρθρα σε “blog” για εσάς και τον Necati. Αυτός ο άνθρωπος δηλώνει πως Ο Necati δεν είταν’ το θύμα αλλά ο κατηγορούμενος της υπόθεσης. Αυτή την εντύπωση μου δίνει.
This person tried to leave comments on the blog, but was unable to do so. Adam does not like feedback.
Two points: firstly I am proud of what we did to bring Necati’s case to a successful conclusion – against the odds and under serious pressure to keep silent, and secondly, I do not doubt that Adam might have intended to write something else, and I agree what he writes is also open to a number of interpretations, but one of them is utterly wrong. We are in the business of using words to change people’s lives: that is what we do in politics. It’s also what we do when we make films and work in the media. That gives us a responsibility to do the job properly. We cannot make stupid jokes and get away with it. We cannot write things and say we did not mean it. People have lost their jobs for less- and today a bad tweet can cost us everything. Adam and Coburn just were not careful enough…And moreover, there was no reason at all to bring the story of Necati’s torture back into the public arena.
Anyway, where does this lead us?
The bottom line is very simple- the ordinary activist in UKIP may not be racist or homophobic, but it is quite clear that senior UKIP rankers will do anything they can to seize or hold on to power, often with personal abuse or inuendo. They are also equipped with the sort of thuggish views that should never be expressed or even considered – and Farrage will endorse the lot! Roger Helmer was excused for making a series of homophobic comments, Coburn was excused for making his racist attack on Humza, Collyer remains undisciplined for attacking a torture victim and on it goes.
Westminster
These people are ready to pontificate about our lives, and look set to be thoroughly electable, many of them have already been elected to represent us in Brussels. UKIP will achieve a powerbase in Westminster in May. I wanted to ensure that among those elected were some reasonable individuals and they certainly exist too- I have met many of them. Douglas Carswell is a fine example, Tom Rubython, Rose Gibbins, Michael Gerard – all people who I am sure are as appalled at the racist stuff emerging from the ill-toothed mouth of Coburn, and yet I was the only one to resign.
This is it: the thugs have bullied their way to the top and they are the ones who, regrettably, control the destiny of the party. And racists attract racists – we should not be surprised by some of the astonishing things written on pro-UKIP websites and facebook pages. Bile against Islam features prominently.
The Black hole and personal Regret
My great regret about resigning the other day is this- that the media storm focused a little too much on the resignation rather than the reason. I thought I might stimulate debate on racism, but what happened was alot of questions about why I took this so seriously when Farage did not. I take it seriously because it is almost the most important thing in life- to have respect for the person sitting next to you. Humza and Coburn may be in different parties, and be political opponents but Coburn does not have the sense or the prudence to realise he is in the same business – and that fact alone should command proper respect. Coburn used his mass and stupidity in an attempt to belittle a good, no a great man. If we take an astronomical image, Humza is the rising star and Coburn is a black hole and the sooner he implodes completely, the safer we will all be.
Apologies
So, apologies Chuka – you are not entirely wrong. But racism is not found at the heart of UKIP, it is found at the head (the Greeks say the fish smells from the head). The heart of UKIP, I think, beats with a passion that questions the wisdom of Brussels and the efficacity of the Brussels bureaucracy, something any Greek would be eager to applaud. But the UKIP rankers look down from their turreted fortifications – oddly for the most part in Brussels not the UK- and wince when they hear people on the train who do not speak english, whose skin is a different colour, whose religion is not anglican. There really is a danger that these people will have power.
And across the way will be the Scottish nationalists – I cannot say I favour a fractured Kingdom at all, but I have never met an SNP politician I do not like. It’s odd- it’s obviously nothing to do with being Scottish- because I detested Gordon Brown in a way I can barely describe in words. (I will add a picture of him in a few minutes to entertain). I think it is something about being fresh and having a very specific message. It does not matter whether we like that message- we have to admire the way it is presented. Now, UKIP also is relatively fresh and focuses on a single message. In so many ways, there are parallels, except that UKIP is top-heavy with racist, homophobic “has-beens” and the SNP is quite free of these. Even Alex Salmond is endearing. And just think back to the speed of his resignation: that is a picture-book demonstration of honour and integrity.
We hear all this nonsense these days about the importance of policies, but UKIP has yet to publish a manifesto and the election inches forward. I rather fancy making my mind up on the basis of who is the most polite, the most honourable, who has the most integrity and is the most personable. I think I would fill the whole of Westminster with the SNP!
Coda:
Despite claims by Adam Collyer to have resigned and to have left UKIP, after a short illness during which he said he felt his family was under attack, he has returned to work as usual. He was assisted in this process by none other than Paul Oakden.
It is always a pleasure to be able to put up a picture of Margaret Thatcher. She was a dream to draw so any excuse to do her in black and white or in colour as here is wonderful and today, the current leader of the Labour Party (and a man I remember meeting on occasion as he flitted out of Corpus where a great friend of mine – a committed Thatcherite- was ploughing away at a doctorate), has come out with a plan that categorically demands to be slapped down by the Lady in blue. She would have said of this plan as she famously said of Socialism in general, “the problem …is that you eventually run out of other people’s money”.
Now, Miliband proposes to cut the University tuition fee from £9000 by £3000 or so, and to do this, he plans to tax savers. In other words, all those people who have dutifully followed present Government advice and put money away for a rainy day will have it pinched and given out willy nilly to students who think the world owes them a living. I wonder how many times Ed plans to raid the piggy-bank? Specifically, the costs would be met, he said, by reducing tax-relief on pensions for anyone earning over £150,000 per year. I am sure that was greeted, even in Labour circles, by barely disguised squeals of pain! It’s like handing the teenager the family car to crash.
Miliband is quite right that the current trail of debt that lies in the wake of our further education experiment is wrong, leaving many students with over £44000 to pay off after graduation, but it is not as simple as that. The whole system creaks because it is allowing enormous debt to build up all over the place, and some of it that must inevitably be written off. (I would make the case case, incidentally, against conscription, surely a waste of so much money in so many countries across Europe. If you want an army, you have to set one up with a serious plan, proper training on proper equipment; it is not a serious fighting force if it is simply seen as a rite of passage) At the same time, the caps on tuition fees mean that Universities cannot really charge what they feel they are worth and everyone in this deal is struggling to make ends meet. Often when there is a mess like this and on this scale, we can look around and see at least someone leaping around with a smirk of satisfied delight, but in this case there seems to be no one. Everyone suffers! It becomes even worse when you reflect that it was the Blair government that put pressure on smaller universities to expand their campuses and trade in their carefully hoarded private wealth for reliance on state funding. (Why would they do this?) You only need to look at the mess of the Stockton campus in Durham to see just how badly this sort of thing can go, and Durham was certainly not alone.
We were wrong to try to send 50% of all school leavers to university. That is the bottom line. University should be an exceptional experience and not a routine rite of passage. It is not about drinking ale and recreating scenes from the “Inbetweeners’ movies”. University life is about learning how to process information at speed and under pressure. It might also be about gathering specific skills, but it is a privileged time and we should teach students they need to value that experience. In fact, by demanding that so many students pass through the University gates, we have cheapened the further education brand, jacked up the overall cost and encouraged the development of a range of “mickey mouse courses” that beggar belief.
Miliband’s proposal is more extreme- he is taking from Peter to pay Paul. But essentially, while they maintain this fantasy that 50% of all students deserve a University place, any plans are merely an attempt to rearrange the bunting at “Freshers’ Fayre”.
UKIP does better than the other parties, demanding a reduction in that 50% aim and offering to cut the tuition fees on key subjects. I think these would be things like Physics, Medicine, Computing and engineering. While I might quibble with the subjects on offer “at discount rates”, I think the overall vision is remarkably clear. It is not yet clear how this would be funded- in my own opinion, and in the long run, if our universities were to recover their reputation for overall excellence, the number of foreign students might well provide an opportunity to raise enough money to fund scholarships to cover the tuition costs of education National students in important subjects. But this might take time and Heavens! We need to start treating foreign students better than we do now. Not only do they pay more but if we get it right, and they profit from their education here, they will be the leaders of their own countries in a few years and it will be to them that we turn for alliances and assistance. If we treat them badly, why would we expect them to want to do business with us? This was one of the great principles of the British Raj and one of the great disasters when Edward Heath turned his back on the Commonwealth. We need those committed international alliances that are forged over decades, not weeks and that are of mutual benefit. We need to know there are people across the world who speak our language, both culturally and linguistically. In short, abandoning the Tier 1 visa, like so much of the visa bullying that surrounds the education of foreign students in the UK is stabbing ourselves in the collective foot, and we will suffer greatly in years to come for our short-sightedness and parsimony. More on this later in a dedicated post!
Today, Mr Farage made it clear that cutting the deficit remains an absolute priority so again echoing the Lady: We cannot spend what we do not have. Mr Farage criticised Osborne for failing to grasp the nettle- “George Osborne was right to say he would eliminate the deficit by the start of 2015 but he failed to do it because he had coalition partners who did not appear to be very interested and he did not himself make some of the tough choices.”
Putting our house in order, not promising to spend more than we can afford, while rewarding those who put in the time to study those skills we badly need- all this is simple, as Mr Farage would say simply a matter of “Common Sense”.
This is a claim made today by Labour’s shadow business Secretary Chuka Umunna, a man I admire and who was I think unreasonably attacked a few years ago by my MP Chris Heaton Harris for criticising so-called celebrities posturing in the West End. I should clarify reasons for my admiration because he is not a natural bed-fellow. I was particularly impressed with the way he handled a recent Sky interview- on a subject, about Eric Pickles’ letter to muslim leaders which I felt was misguided and which I have already discussed: here is Chuka’s response to the Sky bullying.
Today, he speaks in response to Mrs Rozanne Duncan’s absurd comments today about the “problems” she faces sitting next to black people. The lady’s problems are astonishing, of course, and the biggest problem she has- quite apart from her inability to recognise racism- is her apparent inability to filter things that emerge as thoughts in her brain and then pop unaccountably into her gaping mouth. Fish would have more common-sense. Now here is the warning- because what she says is deeply offensive, but – Do listen to her comments if you are brave enough to do so- because, once she starts, she seems unable to stop. Pity is really my first response for her and for anyone who is forced to listen to her. Is it a form of Tourette’s syndrome or is it simply rank stupidity? I don’t think she intended harm, and I suppose that is why she is so astonished anyone would accuse her of racism, but she caused harm because (a) she did not take care over what she said and (b) what she said and how she justified it was simply obnoxious. When one reflects that she is an elected Councillor, then pity must turn to rage that this is someone who wields power in our name.
Would I sit next to her? Oh, most certainly I would, and I would tell her very clearly that she is a stupid bigoted woman who should immediately resign her office. I certainly trust she will be replaced in May. Mr Farage is right to expel her without any further pause.
She says she does not regret saying anything.
She went on: “I used the word ‘negroes’ as you would do Asians, Chinese, Muslims, Jews. It’s a description, it’s not an insult – in the same way as you would say, ‘What do you mean by Jewish? Well, they belong to a community, they have got a certain faith, they have usually got noses that have got a bit of a curve to them, married women – if they are orthodox Jews – wear wigs.’ It’s description.” No, this is the sort of thing said by the Nazi authorities at the height of the Shoah. It just gets worse. And as for the word “negro”, it is worth taking a moment to reflect- this is not an innocent word. It comes from Spanish or Portuguese and was used specifically to describe slaves being transported across the Atlantic. It is a word imbued with prejudice. And to refer to the Latin word for black is again to get into a linguistic muddle, because the Romans had a word for “African”. It was “Afer”. So Mrs Duncan, the word used is not “a description.” It is definitely “an insult”. She understands neither english nor history.
Then she complained she had been expelled “without being offered the courtesy of a right to reply via a disciplinary hearing”.
So much for Mrs Duncan.
But what Chuka Umunna says is more worrying. I think there are a number of loonie activists in UKIP as in any party, and the focus of the media is on them. Certainly, the moment UKIP knew of Duncan’s outburst, they seem to have hurried to expel her, which was the right thing to do. But I would like to think this is more than damage limitation- this is because UKIP is not racist at all. After all, Stephen Woolfe, Winston McKenzie, the current Commonwealth spokesman, and even Amjad Bashir who has now gone over to the Conservatives, have all stood under the UKIP banner and Winston McKenzie even stood for leadership of the Party. This is what Stephen Woolfe said, “I am a proud Englishman, I am a proud Briton, I am a proud mixed race person and I am a proud member of Ukip.”
But there must be racists in UKIP. As indeed there have been stories of racist slips in the labour camp (remember Mr Lavery’s son? or more recently there was a so-called Labour twitterer who claimed UKIP was full of “evil money grabbing Jews” and then another twit who accused Mandy Boylett, who is herself Jewish and a prospective candidate for Stockton North, of being anti-semitic) and probably also in the Conservatives. Some of this is historical but much of this is simply a result of stupidity and narrow-mindedness. Not right at all, but I think it can be corrected.
Just think how far we have come in the last 50 years!
And that really is the point. I salute the fact that UKIP is exposing instances of racism today and bringing up a national debate about racism and how unacceptable it is. Because, if that debate is ever silenced or forgotten, there is a chance that our children will think it is right to make racist comments and that such comments are wholly innocent. They are not. They cause offence. They betray gross ignorance and they cheapen our society.
We are a society of individuals, each of us worthy in our own right of proper consideration. We are not defined by our race, colour, religion, gender, age, or our disability. That said, we might also elect to celebrate all of these features. But that is our decision and should not be imposed on us. We are not ciphers.
The Musical South Pacific put forward the idea that racism is something that is “taught” by an abusive society, “A mean little world”. I am not so sure, but certainly we need to be reminded and taught that racism is wrong.
So the debate about racism must be stirred up occasionally and I wrote to Mr Umunna to see what more we can do. This is not a subject about which anyone can afford to be complacent.
Here is a paragraph from today’s Spectator: It is part of Nigel Farage’s diary: It is entertaining and informative.
our conversation throughout the night was dominated by Amjad Bashir and our growing concerns about him, especially the rumours beginning to permeate about a gerrymandered selection in Keighley. Dan Hannan, the MEP who took Bashir as a defector into the Tory party, had no idea that a number of serious allegations against him had been coming to a head for some time. Bashir knew we’d had enough of him, and decided to jump. And I was relieved that he went, too. He was the basis of numerous furious rows in MEP meetings. His political agenda appeared to be different from ours, and now he can lobby for an expansion of EU foreign policy including Turkey joining the EU, and for Palestine to be recognised as a state, from within the Tory party. Perhaps he’ll also get a more sympathetic hearing for his views on Pakistani blasphemy laws. I joked on Friday to Paul Nuttall that Bashir knew the end of the road had come, and that the other parties were welcome to him. I never for a second thought that the Tories would accept him. Caveat emptor.
I am sure there is alot waiting to spill out about this man. I worry when someone shifts too often and Bashir is clearly a bit shifty. However, some of the issues he has raised are valuable. We must never dismiss what someone says because he is himself unreliable. Bashir has some reasonable concerns about Palestine and maybe he has something to say about Pakistan: I do not know what his views on the blasphemy laws might be. Mine, obviously, tend towards the liberal, though of course I wince at the thought that one might ever cause another offence by taking the name of God in vain or mis-representing the Prophet. I certainly do not think such activity merits the death sentence or is an excuse to bomb people, That is absurd- God gave us intelligence to use it to convince our friends and our enemies to change their minds and change their behaviour. And the told we have at our disposal: come on- they are better than bombs: wit, academic scrutiny, questioning, analysis, humour, memory. Wow! What an arsenal!
There is an issue, however, that lies behind this paragraph and that needs attention. I worry that people still misunderstand the nature of Islam and try to impose a 19th Century western critical apparatus on the Koran- those verses we can and cannot “accept”. This is in fact what marks out the extraordinary letter sent by Eric Pickles in the wake of the Paris attacks to Imams throughout the UK and I wrote rather pointlessly to the Times about this. But let me repeat-
Two points need criticism in Pickles’ letter: What is missing from the letter is a reassurance that, while free speech is protected and promoted in the UK, it also comes at a price. Free speech is only truly possible when it is accompanied by mature responsibility and kindness (انظر أيضاً or חסד /XSD in Hebrew). Without these qualities, free speech can easily be abusive and descend into a form of bullying. Secondly, and maybe more worryingly, it should not be necessary for anyone who lives here by right to define or defend their “Britishness”. I am not even sure what Pickles even means by “promote a positive image of British Islam”. Not since the dark days before the Roman Catholic Relief Act of 1829 did a group of British subjects have to prove they were not “5th Columnists”. And years later, when Pugin designed and decorated the Palace of Westminster, that was never quite enough, was it! Yet today, the Queen reads her speech from the throne he created.
(I thought about this a bit and realised a few things: the first is that, left to its own devices, the Catholic Church in England has embraced many of the features assumed to be distinctive of the Anglican communion, as well as a particularly english form of triumphalism. Check here for a video of Benedict’s entrance to Westminster Cathedral. It is a stunning piece of music by James MacMillan, quintessentially British, though admittedly with a touch of Hammer Horror about it all.
and on the subject, check out this setting of Lux Aurumque: simply stunning and, I would argue, absolutely British! Do remember that Latin was the sacred language of the West and that Queen Elizabeth I was an expert , holding conversations and reading in Latin! In other words, here is a manifestation of a faith that shows “a positive image of British Catholicism”, but it was an organic development, not a packaged promotion. Pugin’s churches, likewise, promote “a positive image”, though the language that he used to promote this in “contrasts” was written when he was still an Anglican. This is about faith, not about a supermarket selection, and Pickles is absolutely wrong in the way he writes and what he expects. It is insulting, demeaning and futile. It serves only to breed resentment. By definition an British imam in a British Mosque is already “promoting a positive image of British islam”. In a way, he has to do nothing more.)
Here is the man who designed the Houses of Parliament. His son fought an uphill battle to get his father recognised as the designer, but until the 20th Century it was barely acknowledged by the establishment. A great shame.
Now, of course, there are 5th Columnists hiding in the Muslim community, but they are hiding in plain sight- and it should not be necessary for all Muslims to “prove” themselves because of the activities of a minority. Instead, the majority should be given support, not forced on to the defensive to say how they are promoting a “positive image”. Should we bother to read what are promoted by liberals as worrying texts of the Koran in context and within the context of helpful hadiths and commentaries, then we would never have a problem with Islam at all.
Today, it seems to me that Islam is going through a transition and there are three distinct forms of “interpretation”- the Wahabi (which we might see as a puritanical sect but which is also influenced by its cultural context – and of course is very wealthy), the Iranian model (which goes well beyond Shia and fuses radical politics with a fairly aggressive and expansionist ideology) and a version of Islam which has already reconciled itself to co-existence with the West and which the West long-ago accepted. We owe our Renaissance and advances in Astronomy and Medicine indeed to the links we already had 1000 years ago with Islam! There are various sub-catagories of course; the least “fundamentalist” of these is the Iranian version which interprets so much, it manages to reconcile the impossible- elevating the idea of “sahid”/martyrdom to such a level that it obliterates the absolute command in the Koran against suicide and against injuring women, children and the sick; that ignores appeals for peace. Islam is the only world religion that has a specific prohibition in the primary scripture against suicide.
What we need to do today is to encourage the third way- and to accommodate any group that fosters what Blair called “moderate” Islam. The Wahabi model and the Iranian model are, however, influencial and so appeal to a community that feels pressured. So, in this context, any links that can be fostered with Turkey are to be encouraged. Turkey is an example of a State that espouses the “third way”, and while some of its discussions seem arcane (the headscarf thing, for instance, which is actually, in part, a political statement- you can tell which party someone belongs to by the way she wears her scarf), it is on the right track and has dealt well with business. Indeed, it only took Turkey 4 years to build an excellent High speed rail link from Istanbul to Konya, further I note than the link proposed between London and Birmingham! Links with Turkey are within the UKIP remit which is to set up our own bilateral agreements rather than to have these agreements and associations imposed by the EU. Would we want Turkey in a wider trade association of European states- certainly, but would we want Turkey to be part of the EU as it currently stands? I think even Turkey has reservations about that one! Should it be treated by Brussels in the way it is currently treated? Absolutely not! But then Brussels treats too many nations with utter contempt – and the Greek debacle is the natural result (more on that later). To push Turkey aside is a silly and short-sighted vision, and in the end, the more it makes Turkey wait, the weaker the European project (in whatever form it finally emerges) will become. Turkey has a natural home within the European community- and we desperately need Turkey’s help if we are to deal with Islamic terrorism.
As for the Keighley thing- it is quite astonishing the way little people run around causing chaos when they are given a bit of power. Even without looking at the specific allegations, the range of Bashir’s affections from Galloway to UKIP is astonishing. Our job in politics is to create harmony and to get things done. Amjad Bashir has misunderstood his job and it augurs ill as Nigel Farage says that the Tories now want him.”Buyer beware” indeed!
We must find a more positive voice to speak about Islam and to promote those forms of Islam, in fact the dominant forms, that have co-existed with us already for so long and that today are threatened especially by the Iranian interpretation of Islam. This means that we must have a better relationship with Palestine and Pakistan as well as with Turkey. Only when we speak in one voice with Islam can we ever hope to confront the dangers of the Iranian experiment and the surge towards terrorism.
Here is a report by Will Kilner on the original allegations made in Yorkshire:
ALLEGATIONS of interference in UKIP candidate selection in Keighley are at the centre of a continuing row between Bradford businessman Amjad Bashir and his former party. An investigation is currently underway into the selection of UKIP’s local election candidates in the three Keighley wards at a hustings event held last week. E-mails outline how there were a dozen new membership applications at the beginning of the month, and there were question marks over a dozen new faces who appeared at the event claiming to be members. This saw complaints about “infiltration” by people not committed to UKIP and led to an internal party investigation over the selection process. Confirmation as to who will represent UKIP in the Keighley Central, Keighley East and Keighley West seats at May’s Bradford Council elections is expected in the next week. It comes as Yorkshire and Humber MEP Mr Bashir was suspended by UKIP over allegations of a “grave nature” shortly before announcing his defection to the Conservatives on Saturday. UKIP leader Nigel Farage said: “The final straw on Friday, was the hustings meeting that took place in West Yorkshire where gerrymandering appears to have taken place.” When Mr Bashir’s denials were put to him Mr Farage added: “He can deny that, but I tell you what he can’t deny and that’s his continuing association with political extremists from Pakistan despite us saying please, please, keep away. “Whichever way we look at this, he had reached the end of the road with us, he knew that.” Mr Farage expressed his surprise that the Conservative Party had accepted him, but Chancellor George Osborne insisted he was “not aware” of any reason why the Tories should have turned Mr Bashir away. Mr Bashir has dismissed his former party’s move as a “desperate attempt” to smear him to distract from the news of his decision to join the Conservatives and said there was “not a shred of truth” to the claims. Meanwhile Respect MP George Galloway has also claimed that Mr Bashir once joined his party, but was de-selected as a candidate for Bradford Moor prior to the council elections in May 2012 after concerns were raised about his fitness to stand. The Bradford West MP would not specify what the issues were, “but they were sufficiently grave to make us realise that he was not a fit and proper person to represent Respect. Clearly both UKIP and the Tories have lower standards,” he said. Mr Galloway has also tabled a parliamentary motion calling on the Government and Conservatives “to declare to the voters of Yorkshire and the Humber that Amjad Bashir’s relentless party switching and misrepresentation of his past makes him unfit to represent them, whatever party’s colours he temporarily wears”.
There is perhaps one final point: earlier I made reference to “5th Columnists” and this needs qualifying because while the Muslim Community is not harbouring or even encouraging a secret Cabal of terrorists in this country, it is quite true that many terrorists use the language of Islam and hide behind some of its doctrines. We will not find these people by shining a torch of suspicion on the whole community. That is childish and absurd. The only way we can eradicate this terror is to enlist the support of people who understand what Islam is about and who themselves would be shocked at the way it is perverted. It is as absurd to accuse Islam of harbouring terrorism as it was to accuse Catholicism of harbouring the IRA throughout the 1970s. Of course, there were links, and of course religion was used as a tribal weapon- of course most IRA were catholic as the UDA would have been Protestant, but religion itself was an incidental element in the troubles and as a British Catholic boy, I did not feel I had anything in common at all with the people planting bombs in London or Belfast.
I worry that in the West, Islam has been pushed into a position of defensiveness and I worry that because of media manipulation, many people have confused the tragedy of the Palestinians, for instance and the assault on Iraq with some sort of Western attack on Islam. What is more likely, of course, is that the West is indifferent to Islam in the same way that it has become largely indifferent to Christianity. There is no crusade here! There is certainly misunderstanding but, believe me, no crusade at all. I will write more on this at a later stage, but it is high time Western leaders stood up and saluted Islam for its persistence in the face of secularism.
Here is a man who said in 2010 that he wants to ban the Burka.
As a Roman Catholic, he should be familiar with images of the Virgin Mary or nuns – almost inevitably wearing a version of the veil.
In a debate then he was challenged by Sir Christopher Frayling who said, “If someone wants to wear the badge of their faith, why shouldn’t they? It’s not harming anyone.”
The point is really that this is becoming a fairly defiant statement.
In Turkey it is a political issue and the political faction can be determined by the way the scarf is tied.
I would like to hear his views now. He was particularly good responding to questions about a dual funded private/public NHS though UKIP is committed this election to a fully free and publicly funded NHS, albeit also committed to trimming the bureaucrats and cutting back PFI contracts.
I have promised a video on the variations of Islamic veiling… somehow the video list seems to get bigger and bigger.
I am scribbling this at 2am. there never seems to be enough time!
animate-tim.com 