It was reported on 7 October , the second anniversary of the appalling, deadly attacks on Israel by Hamas, that Prime Minister Keir Starmer had described protests planned across the country on that day as ‘un-British’.
Writing in the Times, the Prime Minister was said to have “urged for the protests not to go ahead claiming they show a lack of respect for others. Sir Keir claimed that pro-Palestine protests have been used by some as a ‘despicable excuse to attack British Jews’”.
This got me thinking, not so much about the student protests, but about Starmer’s own behaviour since becoming Prime Minister and just how much that was in line, with what might be called ‘British values’.
It also of course reminds us that the whole term ‘British values’ is to some extent completely meaningless, as we all have our own definition of what ‘British values’ might mean.
But anyway, here goes…
Does Starmer always follow British values?
Cuts to International Aid
The first example that comes to mind goes back to February this year, when it was reported that Starmer was going to slash the UK’s foreign aid budget from 0.5 per cent of gross national income (GNI) to 0.3 per cent to fund the largest increase in defence spending since the Cold War. The Prime Minister was reported as saying that the extra £13.4bn for defence every year from 2027 was needed to “counter ‘tyrants’ like Vladimir Putin”.
The UK is still, despite all our problems, one of the richest countries in the world, but of course much of our wealth is concentrated at the top end of the income scale. Indeed it was noted in January that a new report had claimed that growing wealth inequality in the UK could be a “major driver of societal collapse” within the next decade.
It was said that, “the warning comes from an expert roundtable of senior figures from politics, government, academia, business and civil society, which concluded the country is currently on a trajectory of decline, with wealth inequality undermining social cohesion and a risk of further deterioration without intervention”. Yet despite these inequalities and the huge concentration of wealth at one of our society, Starmer chose not to ask the very wealthy to contribute to extra funding for the armed services to protect their wealth, but rather to cut Foreign Aid, claiming it was making a hard choice, when in reality he was making an easy one by picking on people who couldn’t fight back.
And just how ‘British’ was it to cut International Aid? Not very British at all, I would venture. After all the scale of the harm done by the cuts was outlined in the British Medical Journal in September with Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy and advocacy for Bond, the UK network for organisations working in international development stating that “those countries where health programming disappears or is drastically cut are going to face some serious challenges”.
It was also of course, a British Labour government who proudly lead the way 20 years ago in encouraging other wealthy governments to help poorer countries more, while another 20 years before it was British musicians and the British public that led the way, with support for those starving in the terrible Ethiopian famine of 1984-5.
So, is cutting Foreign Aid and putting children’s lives at risk across the world, while cutting the opportunities for girls, a ‘British’ thing to do? I would say not.
Palestine Action
Meanwhile, in June it was reported that the then Home Secretary, working under Stamer, had proscribed Palestine Action, an activist group, members of which had been accused of causing £7 million damage to a plane at Brize Norton airbase.
This then lead to hundreds of people being arrested for simply holding up signs stating, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”. At least one person was arrested for holding up a sign supporting Plasticine Action
Peaceful protest has long been part of British life, with a long and honourable tradition stretching back many decades if not centuries. When people are being arrested by the police on the orders of Starmer’s government, is Starmer acting on ‘British values’? I think not.
Island of Strangers
In May this year, in a now notorious speech, Kier Starmer used inflammatory language about immigration to warn us all that we were on the way to becoming an ‘island of strangers’. So toxic were the unwise words that Starmer used, that the speech was instantly compared to Enoch Powell’s infamous ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech in 1968, when shadow minister Enoch Powell made numerous lurid predictions, none of which ever came true.
So, was Starmer’s speech in line with so-called ‘British values’? Well, according to the government’s own guidance, one of the fundamental British values is aimed at furthering “tolerance and harmony between different cultural traditions by enabling students to acquire an appreciation of and respect for their own and other cultures”.
Was Starmer really doing this in his speech in May? Was Starmer really standing up for ‘British values’? It would seem not.
Knowing right from wrong
Another of the stated fundamental values of this country, according to the government, is distinguishing right from wrong. This is quite an interesting value with regards to Starmer, who when asked in 2023, when he was Leader of the Opposition, if it was right for Israel to withhold power and water from the people of Gaza, firmly replied that it was, even though it is against international law.
A year later, on a visit to Saudi Arabia, Kier Starmer light heartedly suggested that he and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman could watch a game of football together. This was despite the fact that Bin Salman is effectively the ruler of one of the world’s most oppressive regimes, where children are tortured after being arrested for attending protests and funerals , people can be executed for tweeting their concerns about the regime, forced labour is common under the Kafala System and women are treated as second class citizens under the law, under the Guardianship System. Bin Salman is also generally considered to have ordered the murder and dismemberment of the New York Times journalist Jamal Kashoggi in 2019 .
So, if knowing right from wrong and acting upon it is a fundamental British value has Starmer always demonstrated his support for this? Well, he hasn’t really, has he?
British values and rank hypocrisy
Kier Starmer clearly needs to think very carefully before accusing anybody of not following so-called British values. The evidence seems to be clear; on occasion after occasion, he has not followed what might be termed ‘British values’ in any generally recognised sense.
Of course, the same goes for others who often promote what they call British values. For example, Nigel Farage is on the record as saying that if he and Reform UK came to power, he would like to dismantle the NHS as we know it and has also expressed his support for Vladimir Putin and his actions in Ukraine. Do these examples show respect for what are generally considered ‘British values’?
Perhaps the moral of this tale of hypocrisy and double standards is staring us in the face. shouldn’t we all be sceptical of any politician claiming to stand for our values, when we all have a different definition of what they mean?
There are however, clearly some well-defined values, which this country has been built on for centuries, and our heritage of struggle for human rights would seem to suggest that fairness, tolerance and solidarity with others are among our values and crucially have enabled countless people to have better and more fulfilled lives. Perhaps our political leaders should remember that and concentrate more on upholding these particular values.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
