It's never a promising sign when a Minister comes up with a proposal to promote integration that requires some of the most integrated members of civil society to swear an oath declaring their commitment to it whilst leaving many of those who are supposedly the problem unaffected. And so, Sajid Javid's idea that civil servants should swear an oath of allegiance to 'British values', is a pointer towards an administration who are desperate for anything that might deflect even a little attention from the elephant in their particular room, Brexit.
Sajid, I joined the Civil Service precisely because I believe in the democratic process, and because I understand the vital nature of civil society. You need people who believe in tolerance, the rule of law and due process because, without them, people like you have no means of governing. A politically-neutral Civil Service is the mechanism by which the aims of any administration are delivered and, believe me, regardless of what we think of you as an individual, most of us understand that, even if we don't agree with you, you're the Government, and you get what you want, so long as it's legal and possible.
I certainly didn't join for the money - indeed, I am effectively paid for a four-day week because of the impact of years of real terms cuts in pay, brought about by people like you who don't understand what happens when you consistently undermine the pay and conditions of those who are expected to deliver your priorities under fire from both the public and, more insidiously, you, your colleagues and your friends in the national media.
No, I joined for reasons that would now seem altruistic at best, naive at worst. I thought that, by doing my job well, I could make society a little bit better, government a little less impersonal. And, I like to think, I've achieved that, despite the obstacles that have littered my path.
Like you, my father came here from the Indian subcontinent, so the concept of British values comes with some mixed connotations. One might joke that British values revolved around invading someone else's country, stealing the raw materials and imposing a Parliamentary system that seldom worked well for the locals. But, seriously, there is a debate to be had about what British values really are in a country as divided as Britain is at present.
Is tolerance a British value when we've just undergone a campaign where migrants have been vilified for political advantage? Is democracy a British value when 37% of the voting population can cause a major change to our society and then insist that the rest of us blithely accept it? Is respect for the rule of law a British value when elements of our national media seek to undermine it and distort it when it doesn't agree with them?
Now, I believe that those things are part of a decent, value-based society. And I believe that most British people believe in them, and live by them most of the time, albeit occasionally grudgingly. But then, so do most people, in most countries, so why are they described as 'British values', as though other nations are somehow less principled?
And, to be honest, oath swearing is something done to convince others and is, in itself, pretty meaningless. Swearing loyalty to a concept implies that it is constant, unchanging, whereas society is fluid, adapting and changing as circumstances develop. Besides, how do you determine whether or not someone actually means it when they swear an oath? What penalty is there for breaking it, and who decides upon it?
No, it's a stupid idea from a desperate politician, and that comes from someone who has no problem with the principles of civil society, of democracy and of tolerance. Perhaps that's why I criticize Mr Javid whilst not denying him his right as a Minister of the Crown to introduce the idea, should he really believe that it's worthwhile.
My advice to him, however, would be to dedicate the effort he's expended on this to better effect. Finding a solution to the housing crisis might be more helpful, but I'm sure that my readers can come up with other ones...
I think it's vital now that Sajid Javid should clarify his own support for "British values", because what he is proposing suggests he doesn't understand them at all.
ReplyDeleteIn particular, I think Mr Javid needs to make it clear whether he agrees with the following:
(1) Tolerance for people with political views different from your own includes allowing them to work as public servants and even to hold elected office,
(2) Democracy means that if people are democratically elected to public office, they should not be barred because they disagree with the opinions of those currently in power, and
(3) The rule of law means that so long as they stay within the law, people shouldn't be penalised for their actions, and they certainly shouldn't be penalised for their thoughts, just because their political opinions aren't in tune with those of the government.
If Mr Javid doesn't understand these "British values" sufficently, then according to his own proposal, he is not fit to hold office, and should resign. (I wouldn't go so far as to say he should be forcibly deprived of office, because I am a liberal.)