This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2016/jan/18/david-cameron-migrants-learn-english-women-second-class-citizens-ftse-boardrooms

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Cameron should try telling the City that women aren't 'second-class citizens' Cameron should try telling the City that women aren't 'second-class citizens'
(7 months later)
A story used to be told to illustrate the benefits of the kind of liberal imperialism Britain liked to think it was spreading to what Rudyard Kipling called “lesser breeds without the law”. David Cameron’s latest intervention on making migrants learn English made me think of it.A story used to be told to illustrate the benefits of the kind of liberal imperialism Britain liked to think it was spreading to what Rudyard Kipling called “lesser breeds without the law”. David Cameron’s latest intervention on making migrants learn English made me think of it.
The story involves Gen Charles Napier, whose statue still adorns Trafalgar Square (where are the “Napier Must Go” students, eh?), a conqueror, but also a reformer. As such, he once told Hindu priests, protesting about the British ban on the tradition of having widows throw themselves upon their husband’s funeral pyre – suttee – that his country too had a custom. Burn the widow “and my carpenters will erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned”, Napier said.The story involves Gen Charles Napier, whose statue still adorns Trafalgar Square (where are the “Napier Must Go” students, eh?), a conqueror, but also a reformer. As such, he once told Hindu priests, protesting about the British ban on the tradition of having widows throw themselves upon their husband’s funeral pyre – suttee – that his country too had a custom. Burn the widow “and my carpenters will erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned”, Napier said.
Related: Cameron’s alienated the people he must ally with: Muslim women | Deborah Orr
How Victorian hearts must have swelled with pride on hearing that anecdote, which may even be true. It is an admirable story: we don’t approve of wife burning, do we? But the general died in 1853, so the Britain he lived in still denied women the vote, divorce, separate property rights and much else. It doesn’t invalidate Napier’s action, backed up by imperial military force, but it makes many post-imperial Brits a bit queasy.How Victorian hearts must have swelled with pride on hearing that anecdote, which may even be true. It is an admirable story: we don’t approve of wife burning, do we? But the general died in 1853, so the Britain he lived in still denied women the vote, divorce, separate property rights and much else. It doesn’t invalidate Napier’s action, backed up by imperial military force, but it makes many post-imperial Brits a bit queasy.
Unease of a similar kind is quickly detected when our prime minister makes outings into social policy and the reform of bad habits. It is harder for Cameron than it would be for his recent predecessors: John Major, Margaret Thatcher and Ted Heath. I’ll come to that.Unease of a similar kind is quickly detected when our prime minister makes outings into social policy and the reform of bad habits. It is harder for Cameron than it would be for his recent predecessors: John Major, Margaret Thatcher and Ted Heath. I’ll come to that.
Obviously he is not laying down the law in India, where the prime minister, Narendra Modi, would give Cameron short shrift. Quite the reverse in a sense, Cameron is arguing that those who come to the UK to live should accept the values of the host country and learn its language, or they may lose their right to stay.Obviously he is not laying down the law in India, where the prime minister, Narendra Modi, would give Cameron short shrift. Quite the reverse in a sense, Cameron is arguing that those who come to the UK to live should accept the values of the host country and learn its language, or they may lose their right to stay.
In his article in the Times on Monday, Cameron attempts to link the failure of socially isolated Muslim women to speak English to their children to the threat of teen radicalisation and lure of Isis, or “so-called Islamic State”, as he put it insistently on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.In his article in the Times on Monday, Cameron attempts to link the failure of socially isolated Muslim women to speak English to their children to the threat of teen radicalisation and lure of Isis, or “so-called Islamic State”, as he put it insistently on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
It has got people agitated on social media. But surely that is a side issue, not a very persuasive one. The ghoulish YouTube videomakers in the Raqqa edit suites speak excellent English; they are from comfortable, well-educated homes as well as from backgrounds in petty crime.It has got people agitated on social media. But surely that is a side issue, not a very persuasive one. The ghoulish YouTube videomakers in the Raqqa edit suites speak excellent English; they are from comfortable, well-educated homes as well as from backgrounds in petty crime.
It isn’t a language barrier that stops kids talking to their parents in the awkward years; it is hormones, and that separation is reinforced by fast-evolving social media which oldies (say over 35) struggle to understand. Napier did not have to deal with suttee “snuff videos” being posted online.It isn’t a language barrier that stops kids talking to their parents in the awkward years; it is hormones, and that separation is reinforced by fast-evolving social media which oldies (say over 35) struggle to understand. Napier did not have to deal with suttee “snuff videos” being posted online.
I’m not for cultural “anything goes” relativism; the burning of widows is always wrong and always has been. By and large, most societies today are less cruel, less misogynistic, than they used to be, most of the time. But I am for cultural space that tolerates differences, rival perspectives which may soften and evolve in time.I’m not for cultural “anything goes” relativism; the burning of widows is always wrong and always has been. By and large, most societies today are less cruel, less misogynistic, than they used to be, most of the time. But I am for cultural space that tolerates differences, rival perspectives which may soften and evolve in time.
Related: Cameron: migrants on spousal visas may have to leave if English doesn't improve - Politics live
Just as bearded Victorians who tut-tutted over suttee were insensitive to restrictions on their own wives and sisters – George Eliot’s radical Middlemarch wasn’t published until 1871-72 and George wasn’t a bloke, either – so Brits who deplore the unenlightened views held by some on capital punishment, divorce, abortion, homosexuality and other gender issues are forgetting their own recent past.Just as bearded Victorians who tut-tutted over suttee were insensitive to restrictions on their own wives and sisters – George Eliot’s radical Middlemarch wasn’t published until 1871-72 and George wasn’t a bloke, either – so Brits who deplore the unenlightened views held by some on capital punishment, divorce, abortion, homosexuality and other gender issues are forgetting their own recent past.
Our liberal revolution is barely 50 years old and is still disputed among us natives. Nostalgia for the good old days is part of Ukip’s appeal. It is not all about immigrants who don’t speak proper Scouse. And, incidentally, the battle over the duties of immigrants to learn English has raged in the US since Napier was a boy. The late, great Alistair Cooke, whom I knew, was very keen on it.Our liberal revolution is barely 50 years old and is still disputed among us natives. Nostalgia for the good old days is part of Ukip’s appeal. It is not all about immigrants who don’t speak proper Scouse. And, incidentally, the battle over the duties of immigrants to learn English has raged in the US since Napier was a boy. The late, great Alistair Cooke, whom I knew, was very keen on it.
So Cameron is partly right – most of us are most of the time – when he talks of inculcating shared values in a liberal society, values that stop well short of the French decision to ban the wearing of headscarves in public places. He is also right to deplore the “disgraceful” attacks on them, the “widespread and frightening” pulling off of headscarves in the street, as he put it in the Times.So Cameron is partly right – most of us are most of the time – when he talks of inculcating shared values in a liberal society, values that stop well short of the French decision to ban the wearing of headscarves in public places. He is also right to deplore the “disgraceful” attacks on them, the “widespread and frightening” pulling off of headscarves in the street, as he put it in the Times.
There’s a delicate balance to be struck here, between rights and responsibilities, tolerance and cultural space for difference and the need to stand up to intolerance, in the street or on university campuses. EU member states, especially Germany since the Cologne attacks and France since the Paris bombings, are struggling to get it right. Or wrong, in the Polish government’s case.There’s a delicate balance to be struck here, between rights and responsibilities, tolerance and cultural space for difference and the need to stand up to intolerance, in the street or on university campuses. EU member states, especially Germany since the Cologne attacks and France since the Paris bombings, are struggling to get it right. Or wrong, in the Polish government’s case.
Cameron’s particular problem is twofold. One is that when he seeks, as he did in a perfectly reasonable speech on life chances last week, to propose remedies, any interviewer or columnist can protest: “But you cut programmes designed to address that problem, prime minister.” The BBC’s Sarah Montague did so on Monday over language classes, which were cut in 2011. We’re “targeting” them now at Muslim women, said Dave. But it goes much further, as Polly Toynbee reminded No 10 when she gave him both barrels last week.Cameron’s particular problem is twofold. One is that when he seeks, as he did in a perfectly reasonable speech on life chances last week, to propose remedies, any interviewer or columnist can protest: “But you cut programmes designed to address that problem, prime minister.” The BBC’s Sarah Montague did so on Monday over language classes, which were cut in 2011. We’re “targeting” them now at Muslim women, said Dave. But it goes much further, as Polly Toynbee reminded No 10 when she gave him both barrels last week.
So the government’s own record undermines the prime minister’s credentials for delivering this kind of homily, however sensible much of it might be and was. Cameron identified four critical barriers to life chances: early years development, a good education, access to better social/career connections via mentoring and effective help with illness, particularly mental illness, and its consequences. Few could quarrel with that challenging list, but plenty would argue that governments, especially this one, have a bigger role to play.So the government’s own record undermines the prime minister’s credentials for delivering this kind of homily, however sensible much of it might be and was. Cameron identified four critical barriers to life chances: early years development, a good education, access to better social/career connections via mentoring and effective help with illness, particularly mental illness, and its consequences. Few could quarrel with that challenging list, but plenty would argue that governments, especially this one, have a bigger role to play.
Cameron also has a problem over who he is, where he comes from and what he is seen to represent, which is basically privilege of a not-very-earned kind. It is a bit like Jeremy Corbyn on Trident defence options. With his background and track record, the near pacifist has not earned the right to be taken very seriously on the subject.Cameron also has a problem over who he is, where he comes from and what he is seen to represent, which is basically privilege of a not-very-earned kind. It is a bit like Jeremy Corbyn on Trident defence options. With his background and track record, the near pacifist has not earned the right to be taken very seriously on the subject.
Related: Cameron should be careful of linking English skills and extremism
“Does he or she understand my problems?” is what voters want to know when they listen to a politician. It’s a good question, well encompassed by the word “security” in its widest sense. As Labour leader, Corbyn, like all his predecessors, struggles to convince sceptical listeners in times that are cynical and dangerously credulous. At least Major, Thatcher and Heath had sprung from modest backgrounds. People knew it too, not least because they reminded them. It is not Dave’s fault that he has a touch of the Napier, but it’s a problem.“Does he or she understand my problems?” is what voters want to know when they listen to a politician. It’s a good question, well encompassed by the word “security” in its widest sense. As Labour leader, Corbyn, like all his predecessors, struggles to convince sceptical listeners in times that are cynical and dangerously credulous. At least Major, Thatcher and Heath had sprung from modest backgrounds. People knew it too, not least because they reminded them. It is not Dave’s fault that he has a touch of the Napier, but it’s a problem.
When Cameron first love-bombed the NHS, many people gave him the benefit of the doubt, because they knew he had suffered heartache, and received NHS support, over his and Sam Cam’s disabled son, Ivan, who later died. As the NHS budget comes under increasing strain and hospital doctors go on strike, that judgment starts to unravel. It is the same on gender politics, where his laddish side is sometimes visible. We can be glad when Cameron says women are treated like “second-class citizens” and under “damaging control” by their menfolk. But we’re left being not sure how much he gets it.When Cameron first love-bombed the NHS, many people gave him the benefit of the doubt, because they knew he had suffered heartache, and received NHS support, over his and Sam Cam’s disabled son, Ivan, who later died. As the NHS budget comes under increasing strain and hospital doctors go on strike, that judgment starts to unravel. It is the same on gender politics, where his laddish side is sometimes visible. We can be glad when Cameron says women are treated like “second-class citizens” and under “damaging control” by their menfolk. But we’re left being not sure how much he gets it.
Or whether he was wise to link the gender dimension of life chances with stay-at-home Muslim women and radicalised offspring. “In Britain, men are not frightened of women’s success, it’s celebrated proudly,” he wrote in the Times. That’s not what the FT keeps reporting on the makeup of FTSE 100 boardrooms. Perhaps next time, he’ll make that speech in the City.Or whether he was wise to link the gender dimension of life chances with stay-at-home Muslim women and radicalised offspring. “In Britain, men are not frightened of women’s success, it’s celebrated proudly,” he wrote in the Times. That’s not what the FT keeps reporting on the makeup of FTSE 100 boardrooms. Perhaps next time, he’ll make that speech in the City.