Archive | December, 2008

First Hand Experiences Of The Troubles – by John Bradley

When I jumped into the Learners’ Pool for the first time, not knowing to hold my nose, the bubbles filled my nose and mouth.  Almost 40 years later, I remember it still. However, it is what happened outside The Baths that I remember more vividly, brought to mind quite often by photographs or a chance moment of Television footage.  Memories that children should not really have.

I came across a photo recently of a young man wounded – shot in the back, to be precise – by the British Army on Bloody Sunday, January 1972, in my home town.  The entry wound was small and dribbled just a bit of blood.  It fascinated me. “You’re obsessed,” said my wife.  “Obsessed with any aspect of that period.”  Perhaps I am.  However, for me, these are more than just photos.  They bring back very real memories. The vague white smoke in the pictures ?  That’s the CS gas that clawed at my throat, made me choke as an 11 year old, got through closed windows and tore at my brothers’ eyes.   The gas that I walked through many afternoons on leaving “The Wee Nuns” Primary School.

Those rifles ?  I can tell you the sound of each one.  The report of a British Army Self Loading Rifle in the streets behind our house.  It doesn’t sound like in a movie, it’s a shockingly loud, sharp report that bounces off the walls of the street – and left the gable end of the house at the top of Beechwood Avenue pock-marked,  just like in “real” wars.  The M16 Armalite sounds more lethal than its toy-like appearance suggests and left bullet hole after bullet-hole in the breeze-block wall beside “The Baths.”

It’s Eugene Dunne, called out of our French class at 16 years old to be told his father had been blown up “accidentally.” Or my other classmate, Bernie McGuigan, whose Dad is the man in the photograph with the huge puddle of blood around his head on Bloody Sunday. Or seeing the Paratroopers who did that, earlier in the day, on my way to church, ready for action, their faces blackened, heads covered with the cropped helmet of their regiment.  Or my Primary Teacher, Mr. Carr, who taught us to sing songs, making little circles with his tuning fork in his right hand, coached us to recite poetry for the annual Feis: he was blown into a tree in his school grounds by a Booby Trap.  Or the Petrol Tanker which was blown up in front of Strand Road RUC station.  Do you know that there is a short gap between the sound of a bomb going off and the red glow of the explosion ?  Or watching virtually all the shops in Foyle Street being blown up in front of my eyes, bursting into flame.  Or, on a beautiful summer’s day being told that my “A Level” schoolmate was being charged with a double murder.  Or that our next door neighbour was blown on fire into the street while his pal, also making bombs, was blown to pieces.   Or seeing our Gym’s huge windows cave in all around the 12 year old boys herded there for safety.  Or seeing our Irish language teacher blown across the room as the IRA launched a bomb against an Army “sangar” in the school grounds, just yards away, destroying the look-out post and probably the people in it. Or watching the corner of our little cul-de-sac every afternoon, to make sure that my brother Paul returned safely each day. Or witnessing, as a 10 year old, our policemen baton charge a Civil Rights march in Shipquay Street. Or my Aunt’s neighbour, a policeman and family friend, shot 9 times in the back in Donegal. Or taking cover in Stanley’s Walk as the bullets zinged down the street at the Army patrol in front of us.

Of course, that’s one aspect of my childhood.  A hint of new-mown grass takes me immediately to week-ends and summers spent with my parents’ families,  learning to milk cows, perching on top of a trailer loaded unsteadily with bales of hay, driving a tractor at – well, almost – break-neck speed, watching the sun set, counting the stars on a dark, silent night. Doing what little boys like to do – playing by the river, fishing, making model aeroplanes, climbing trees.  Listening to stories about everyday adventures, woven by Brendan Brolly, pulling slowly on his pipe, his eyes scrunched into a constant smile, sharing with us yarns of every sort that had us laughing into the early hours.

One August, that changed.  With no television in our mother’s home, my brothers and I listened to the RTE news on the old radio up on the shelf in the kitchen, the windows open to cool things down.  We heard how our City was alight, how thousands of CS gas canisters had been fired and knew that our Father was in the middle of it all, besieged by crash-helmeted policemen in his workplace.  We never had to worry about our parents’ safety.  Until then.  Jack Lynch, the Irish Prime Minister was to add more concern with his announcement that he was ordering Army Field Hospitals to the border with Northern Ireland.  Was an invasion the next step?

Our schoolmates, when we returned in September, had all manner of tales of adventure, mostly involving throwing stones at the police and seeing petrol bombs hurled from the top of high-rise flats. They helped to build barricades made up of planks, old oil drums, paving stones and barbed wire. What fun !  To encourage their dads’ petrol-bombing prowess in hitting their black-coated targets, they found new rhymes to sing: “Throw well, throw Shell’” In the school playground we played “Rioters and Police” with all of us wanting to be the goodies – the rioters, of course and chanting a favourite slogan: “SS RUC.”  Our lives were never quite the same, as stones and petrol bombs gave way to shooting and violent death.  We did not know we were going through the process of losing our childhood, of losing our innocence, of being thrust into history and a welter of violence which we neither requested nor enjoyed.  That’s why I’m obsessed.

The seeds of peace took a long time to germinate.  My Father survived working in the midst of violence and remained the gentlest of men, both in word and deed.  The lad with the bullet wound in the back ?  He, too, survived.  My school, you would be forgiven for thinking, must have become a nest of violent upbringing ?  Quite the contrary.  It now boasts of two Nobel Laureates, one of them for Peace.  My own family now hears of bombs and bullets only through my stories that seem almost ancient history for them.

In the darkest days of my young memory, I listened to my mother praying for peace every day.  She prayed, not just for the dead or injured, but for the mother of every person killed, because she could feel their sorrow.  She never doubted that peace would come. Sadly, it came 10 years too late for her.

Her hope of peace never wavered.  Perhaps she could sense that the future would bring the most unlikely of partnerships formed between previously bitter enemies. Her hope that her children, grown used to the sound of explosions and gunfire, would bring up their children to know the sound of peace, has come true. She would be pleased that disputes would be resolved by discourse, not force.  That people would not lose their lives because of the church they attended or the job they chose to do. That old misunderstandings would begin to be resolved.

I am proud of where I come from and of the city’s history since its founding in the 6th century, to its stout walls and ancient buildings.  I am proud of its location, of the fabulous views across Lough Foyle and out to the Atlantic Ocean in the distance.  Proud, too, of the different communities, going back centuries, whose traditions and shared history make my hometown what it is. Its people have not been broken by violence and mayhem.  We have a way to go, but we are getting there.

At a time when violence seems to grow more common every day, whether in the streets of Gandhi’s Mumbai or in the seemingly unending tragedies unfolding daily in Palestine and Israel and elsewhere in the Middle East, I can only offer one thought: “Hope.”  When needless death clouds a country, its cities, its people, Hope must never be allowed to be extinguished.  In the darkest of hours, the seed of peace may be sown.  It was so in Ireland, where the most dreadful of deeds resulted in the beginnings of a dialogue between enemies. Good can be harvested from the evil that is violence.

Not an advocate of violence in any way, nor of violent men, my father knew what Presidents may not – that, through discourse between enemies and the uncovering of common ground, old hatreds can begin to be overcome, barriers brought down and the basis for a lasting Peace can be established.

Always Hope.

Speech on the Equality Bill – by Lord Bhikhu Parekh

Lord Bhikhu Parekh is Patron of The Gandhi Foundation and a Labour Peer. The following speech was delivered in the House of Lords on 10th December 2008

My Lords, I shall begin with an apology. Although I have a very bad throat, I put my name down to speak in this debate because it raises some extremely important issues on which I want to share a few thoughts. The gracious Speech commits the Government to creating a single Equality Act. In so doing, it redeems the Government’s pledge given in the 2005 election manifesto. The proposed Equality Act will reduce nine major pieces of legislation and around 100 statutory instruments to a single Act and will harmonise different strands of equality. I welcome the Bill and many of its provisions.

As the Government rightly note, equality is vital for the development of individual talents and for creating a cohesive society. It is precisely because I welcome the Bill that I shall concentrate on four or five areas where it needs to be strengthened. First, the Government spend between £160 billion and £175 billion on procuring goods and services from the private sector. This gives them powerful leverage, which should be used effectively to ensure that the private sector fulfils their equality objectives. In the 1980s and 1990s, the American Government did that with considerable success in the name of contract compliance. The Bill refers to the Government’s power, but it is not entirely clear what pressure they intend to exert on the private sector, how they will enforce and monitor such powers, and what incentives and penalties they will rely on to make sure that the private sector realises their objectives.

Secondly, the Government are rightly worried about ensuring equal pay for women. The difference in earnings between men and women is 17.1 per cent in the public sector and 21.7 per cent in the private sector. For part-time workers, the figure can be as high as 36.6 per cent. An average full-time weekly earning for men is £521, as opposed to £412 for women. Not surprisingly, the World Economic Forum placed Britain 81st in the world in terms of equal pay. Something needs to be done.

While 43 per cent of public sector organisations have completed or are planning to conduct an equal pay review, only 23 per cent of private sector organisations are doing that. As has been pointed out, at this rate, we will have to wait for 150 years to ensure equal pay for women. How will we tackle this? The Government rightly talk about a mandatory pay audit. Obviously, there is something to be said for that, but it is a strong, blunt instrument. One way would be to make the organisation concerned transparent so that these things can be easily understood. Another would be to make it easier to pursue and resolve the complaints that individuals might make within an organisation or in a court.

The same problem occurs in relation to the ethnic minorities where the disparity is even greater. Equally qualified men receive highly unequal pay, which is sometimes known as the “ethnic penalty”. I am a little surprised that the Bill is silent on that and concentrates almost entirely on gender equality.

Thirdly, the Bill also is silent on the regular audit of government policies with regard to their impact on equality. The Government have rightly agreed on a £700 billion package to bail out banks and the financial sector. But they have offered only £1 billion to help out small- and medium-sized businesses, which is to be delivered through the banks. Let us look at this from the standpoint of ethnic minorities. Most ethnic minorities work not in banks and the financial sector, but in small- and medium-sized businesses, and they get a very tiny slice of the national cake.

More importantly, banks have not been even-handed in their lending practices or risk assessment. The Runnymede Trust, of which I am a patron, recently published a report called, Financial Inclusion and Ethnicity. It showed conclusively that the banks have been deeply biased in their lending practices. If that is the case‚ I hope that the Government will commission a survey on this, what provisions have the Government made to ensure that support for small- and medium-sized businesses is channelled through banks, but is carefully monitored?

Unless carefully planned, government policies‚ the example that I have given confirms this‚ are likely to marginalise ethnic minorities, and recovery from recession, as and when it occurs, which I hope will be soon, will not be inclusive and fair. It is striking and somewhat disappointing that in the debate the other day on business, no mention was made of how the Government policies of bailing out banks or small businesses are likely to impact on ethnic minorities. Even my noble friend Lord Mandelson, whom I admire, made absolutely no reference in opening the debate to how government policies are going to affect ethnic minorities and whether they might not turn out to be deeply discriminatory‚ unintentionally, of course‚ in their impact on ethnic minorities.

My third point concerns the policy of positive action. The Government are rightly committed to a policy of positive action, which broadly states that if two candidates are equally qualified, a member of an under-represented and disadvantaged group might be preferred. We see this sort of positive action in many areas, and it is permitted through case law in the European Court of Justice. That is fine, and I welcome the policy, although it seems to have been opposed by the CBI and many other institutions. I want to go a step further. To say that preference will be given to under-represented and disadvantaged groups when the candidates are equal raises two questions. First, it is never easy to decide whether two candidates are equally qualified. When someone is to be appointed to the House of Lords and one candidate is a professor and the other a businessman, both equally qualified in their fields, how do we decide? Secondly, and more importantly given past experience, there is no guarantee that bias and discrimination would play no role in the judgment of candidates. It is because we realise these difficulties that we have talked in terms of targets, which offer a broad indication of what an organisation should look like if it is fairly and justly run. Targets are not quotas, which everyone knows are unacceptable.

When we note that women MPs make up only one-fifth of the membership of House of Commons and say that something needs to be done, we are neither advocating a quota nor saying that women should be selected only when they are equal in all other respects. What we are saying is that given women’s representation in the country at large, there is no good reason, unless we assume that they are less intelligent, why women should not be more or less equally represented. Starting from that kind of self-evident premise, how do we explain the failure of an organisation to come up to these norms? Such thinking is even more necessary in relation to ethnic minorities, the disabled and other under-represented and disadvantaged groups. I would suggest that the fact that a group is under-represented and disadvantaged does not come into play only after other factors are taken into account. Instead it should be one of the important factors to be taken into consideration in the first instance when deciding who is best qualified for a particular job.

Finally, I turn to the specific duty that the Government intend to place on public sector inspectorates to monitor how well public bodies comply with their equality obligations. I like this proposal, but in order for it to be effective, there will have to be greater transparency in the organisations concerned, both private and public, and greater powers for the inspectorates to name and shame organisations; and perhaps even the power to impose penalties. I see no reference to such measures in the Bill. It becomes particularly important in relation to the private sector, which is beyond the ambit of official inspectorates. What is going to be done in relation to that sector? I draw attention to the simple fact that 11 per cent of the directorships in FTSE 100 companies are held by women, fewer than 2 per cent by ethnic minorities and even less by other disadvantaged groups. What do the Government intend to do about that?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 683 other followers