Theresa May learned an important lesson this week: words
have meanings.
They also -- especially when spoken by government ministers
-- have consequences. Real consequences for real people.
People like Dexter Bristol, who came to Britain at the age
of eight from Grenada to join his mother, and who died suddenly last month at
the age of 57 after being classified as an illegal immigrant and losing his
job.
We'll return to him in a moment. But first, for the benefit
of Mrs May, a dictionary definition.
'Hostile: showing or
feeling opposition or dislike; unfriendly.'
Synonyms include antagonistic, aggressive, confrontational,
belligerent, bellicose, pugnacious, truculent, combative, and warlike.
Let's bear those synonyms in mind as we consider Mrs May's
now notorious promise in 2012 to 'create here in Britain a really hostile environment
for illegal migration.' A really hostile environment? How about a really
aggressive environment? Or even a really confrontational environment?
Words have meanings. They are conveyors of messages, both
open and hidden. A hostile environment for illegal migration? What a neat, snappy
phrase to aim at anti-immigration Tory voters defecting to UKIP. Not so much a
dog whistle, more an obscenity yelled through a megaphone.
Look at the timing: on 3 May 2012, UKIP had scored an
average 13% of the vote in local elections. The result was, according to one
report at the time, 'more than enough to ruffle Tory feathers and put pressure
on an already creaking coalition.' Just three weeks later, in an interview with
the Daily Telegraph, Mrs May pulled
her 'really hostile environment' rabbit out of her hat.
But when an incendiary phrase is translated into law (a law,
by the way, which the Labour party leadership did not oppose, although Jeremy
Corbyn, John McDonnell and Diane Abbott were among a handful of Labour
backbenchers who did vote against it), civil servants are duty bound to do what
it says on the tin.
Remember those words: 'Create a really hostile environment.'
Which brings us back to Dexter Bristol, whose story was told
by The Guardian's brilliant Amelia
Gentleman, whose meticulous and determined reporting over many months brought
this whole sorry saga to light.
Mr Bristol was born in Grenada when it was still a British
colony (it became independent in 1974). He was, therefore, a British subject
when he arrived in the UK in 1968 to join his mother, who worked here first as
a seamstress and then as a nurse. He believed, correctly, that he had every
right to live here.
But then -- 'really hostile environment' -- things changed.
At the end of 2016, his benefits were stopped, because he was unable to prove
that he was in the UK legally. He managed to find a job as a cleaner -- but was
sacked when his employers discovered that he had no passport. No other
employers would take him on for the same reason.
In fact, his mother had tried to get a passport for him in
the 1970s, but, according to The Guardian,
'the Home Office rejected her request because, although her passport included
his name, it had no photograph of him and was not signed by him.'
How old was he when he came to the UK? Eight years old.
And what documents did the Home Office demand from him,
when, in his late 50s, he tried to satisfy them that he was in Britain legally?
Among other things, school records -- from schools, both primary and secondary,
which had since closed.
Mrs May told Caribbean leaders this week that she is 'genuinely sorry' about the anxiety caused by her policy. After all, no one could have
predicted that creating a 'really hostile environment' might cause so much anxiety.
Well, yes, they could. And they did. An 11-page internal
Home Office impact assessment, first reported by the Daily Mail (a newspaper not exactly noted for its sympathetic
reporting of immigration issues), warned: 'Some non-UK born older people may
have additional difficulties in providing original documentation. Some may have
had their immigration records destroyed. Some will have originally come into
the country under old legislation but may have difficulty in evidencing this.'
So she knew. She was warned. But she didn't care. All that
mattered was that she was seen to be creating a 'really hostile environment.' Because
she and her party (and, let's be honest, the Labour party as well) were running
scared of UKIP and its xenophobic, rabblerousing leader, Nigel Farage.
They could have confronted him. They could have pointed to
the thousands of immigrants driving our buses and trains, staffing the NHS,
providing care for the elderly and the vulnerable, picking and packing the food
stacked high on supermarket shelves -- and paying their taxes.
Instead, they appeased him. To their everlasting shame, they
adopted his rhetoric. They decided to create -- what was the phrase? -- a
'really hostile environment'.
The treatment of the so-called Windrush generation was not, pace Amber Rudd, the 'appalling' result
of an unfeeling Whitehall bureaucracy -- it was precisely what the policy was
designed for: to make immigrants feel unwelcome, to make it all but impossible for
them to prove that they were entitled to be here, and to pander to the barely
concealed racism that festers just beneath the surface of 21st century Britain.
Three weeks ago, Dexter Bristol, who had been suffering from
depression, collapsed and died in the street outside his home. An inquest into
his death has been opened and adjourned until July.
But we already know what the verdict should be. Dexter
Bristol's death was caused by a really hostile environment.
October 2016, Tory Party conference:
ReplyDeleteTheresa May:
“If you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere. You don’t understand what the very word ‘citizenship’ means.”
A country which used (justly or unjustly) to view itself as generous and tolerant seems to be turning into one of the less lovely sorts of police state. I am ashamed to be British--and yes, I am British born and bred, and white, and with all the bells and whistles that this country can otherwise offer pretty well without exception--as long as an innocent, hard-working man can be hounded into a life of misery to benefit the political career of a self-seeking party leader.
ReplyDelete