Empire unravelled

David Olusuga's Empire documentary does an excellent job of linking the history of the British Empire to the immigration debate today Historian David Olusuga has produced a fascinating series of three programs linking the often censorious approach to the history of the British Empire to the immigration debate today. Olusuga runs through the history of the empire from its founding mother, Queen Elizabeth I, to the closing acts under Queen Elizabeth II. So the role of the East India Company in the colonisation of India is contrasted with the settlement approach and slave trade of the empire to the west in America.The role of tobacco and sugar as cash crops, accompanied by the brutal slave trade, also feature. The way in which so many English colonialists got rich via involvement in the likes of the East India Company, then repatriating their wealth to Britain, where it helped secure land and influence, is another highlight. One fascinating story is that of John Gladstone, the father of William, who created the Indian indentured Labour system. This came about as a result of the abolition of slavery, resulting in Indian workers being brought into replace the slaves in places like Guyana. The high point of the empire comes post World War I when colonies belonging to the defeated powers cede to Britain. But this is also the start of decline. The independence movements grow. A central theme of this series is the effective airbrushing of history to present a positive image of empire. Nowhere is this better illustrated than with the exposure of Operation Legacy. This has involved removing and destroying many documents associated with British atrocities in the likes of the Kenyan war of independence. Olusuga exposes how weeks before the declaration of Kenyan independence in 1963, planes left Nairobi with loads of documents destined for London. The whitewashing, Operation Legacy, relating to the whole empire, went on well into the 1990s. This process has helped build a view of the Empire being a great British civilising venture. Olisuga nicely pulls things together in the final episode, highlighting how the immigration debate particularly requires that people know the truth about empire. One particularly poignant and relevant vignette is when he examines post war migration. So there are Irish, Black and European people coming to help reconstruct Britain after World War II. But at the same time more people are emigrating out of Britain, with the encouragement of government, to Australia and New Zealand. This is nicely illustrated with details of the passengers on the ship Miloja leaving Tilbury on 10 June 1948 destined for Australia, just 15 days before the Windrush docked. The Miloja carried nurses and other hospital workers, just 25 days before the NHS opened its doors. A service at that time hamstrung with skills shortages. This story nicely juxtaposes with the debate over immigration today, in a country with an ageing population and skills shortages. Olusuga packs a lot of information into these three one hour programs but there is a good momentum about the narrative. A number of talking heads of mainly young people whose histories are tied up with empire help elucidate the story. Olusuga and the BBC got some stick from the right wing press for being anti-British. Both, though, deserve credit for putting the series together - it goes some way to explain, in accessible form, the real history of the British Empire and why that is so relevant today. Empire is available on BBC I-player

More than a tick box approach needed for those with disabilities

Internationally renowned poet Raymond Antrobus has written a fascinating book on living with deafness. The Quiet Ear chronicles Antrobus's life growing up as a mixed race male with deafness in 1990s Hackney. The struggle was, at first, be accepted - this led to confusion and isolation. Things improved when he went to a school for deaf children, Blanche Nevile in Hackney. Several teachers made a real difference to Antrobus's life. He continued with his writing. In the end, Antrobus came to recognise deafness as almost a way of life, rather than a condition to be endured. Something, even, to celebrate. What the book brings home is how antiquated British society is when it comes to dealing with conditions like deafness. At best you get the there, there pat on the head type approach. More usual, though, is to totally ignore those with the condition. A real tick box mentality pervades the culture. Yet, so many have hearing issues, from those like Antrobus born with deafness to the many who lose hearing along the way. A more inclusive society would recognise hearing issues. If people speak directly, clearly and visibly then many people will be able to hear better. There is assistance. Hearing aids, hearing loops signing all help. The NHS tries but the approach is often token. Dish out the hearing aids and then the person can get on with it. Come back again in four years. A lack of care. monitoring and support. The lack of resourcing is reflected in the fact that there are now more people with hearing difficulties, yet fewer schools and other support institutions than 20 years ago. It has not been easy being a councillor on Redbridge council with hearing difficulties over the past few years. A fellow councillor, with a number of disabilities is Rosa Gomez of Churchfields ward. Rosa lost most of her sight and use of her hands, after being shot 11 years ago in Columbia. Yet, this did not stop Rosa becoming a powerful advocate for the community. Her popularity resulted in an increased majority at the last election. Life has not been easy for Rosa trying to fulfil her role as a councillor. She has cncountered many obstacles along the way. There is much to be learnt to make things easier and more inclusive for future councillors with disabilities. The likes of Rosa Gomez and Raymond Antrobus are champions for those with disabilities. They show what can be done. However, much more needs to be done if the UK is to become a genuinely, inclusive caring society for everyone living here.

UK attitudes on immigration symptomatic of an increasingly insular country on retreat into international isolation

The present febrile atmosphere surrounding the immigration debate has led some to refer to the return of the no blacks, no Irish, no dogs era. This was the time when boarding houses would put up such notices in their windows to warn off immigrants, whilst displaying blatant racism. Irish and Black people have been on the receiving end of British racism for centuries. The treatment of dogs has probably improved! Most recently there were the Irish, who came to build Britain's roads, work in the NHS, teach in schools and a wide range of other occupations. Famously, there was then the Windrush generation, recruited from the Caribbean to work on the likes of London Transport. They were, in turn, vilified and abused. The most recent discriminatory acts came with the return to the Caribbean of many of these hard working people, who had made a home here, at the behest of an ungrateful British state. The Irish ofcourse suffered a further wave of discrimination throughout the conflict in the North of Ireland. Generally, the Irish were regarded as a suspect community. So what has brought the country to the present impasse, where a Home Secretary seems determined to treat all migrants as suspect, with the most desperate (asylum seekers) seemingly labelled criminals? Are even the Irish, born outside Britain safe? There have always been racist tendencies in Britain, towards incoming migrants, as alluded to earlier. But the genie was really taken out of the bottle, with the Brexit vote. This was largely achieved on anti-migrant, anti-European sentiments. The likes of Reform leader Nigel Farage and Tory leader in waiting Boris Johnson helped convince the population that their problems were largely caused, not by austerity policies pursued by Coalition and Tory governments, but Europe and particularly migrants. This myth was also fostered by a right wing media, whose ownership were also keen for the UK to leave the EU. The leave vote was seen as vindication for the take back control of our borders and sovereignty crowd. It was though also seen as beginning of open season on migrants, as the indigenous population turned everywhere more inward on itself. Fast forward a few years and the cheerleaders for Brexit are once again banging the anti-migrant drum. This has led to the absurd position where many in the population consider immigration one of the top issues effecting their lives. Not, poisoned waterways, a crumbling NHS, a fifth of children living in poverty and an under- resourced education system but a few people coming in on boats seeking refuge. The 38,000 who have arrived on British shores via the boats this year represent less than a full Premier League football stadium. It is not an invasion, neither is everyone coming a criminal set to prey on the innocent. What is required is safe routes and a speeding up of processing claims. The ludicrous efforts of Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood to stop people coming are bound to fail. She talks of push and pull factors. Never mentioned are the push factors of war and climate change.These are not being countered, indeed, British arms companies contribute more than their fair share to fuelling conflict around the globe. Other countries like Germany and France, let alone Turkey take far more refugees than the UK. Then their are those who come to work, filling skills shortages amid an ageing and increasingly sick population. And the overseas students who over recent years have increasingly funded the further education system. They apparently are also to be targeted by this government. So, TFL workers doing vital jobs on the transport system are to be thrown out because they don't earn enough to meet the latest arbitrary threshold introduced by government. Visit any hospital or care home and see who does the work. It is mainly migrants. The present obsession with creating an even more hostile environment for migrants will backfire. Eventually, many of those with the vital skills needed in the UK will not come here. They will go to more welcoming places, like Canada or Germany. Indeed, little is made in the immigration debate of the thousands actually leaving the UK. Recent figures show this phenomena rising. More widely, the British obsession with immigration shows an increasingly insecure, inward looking country. One seemingly happy to move ever further into isolation in an increasingly interconnected world. So having left the EU, the febrile right also want to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights and Refugee Conventions Such moves will have international implications. If undertaken they mean more isolation A reminder to the flag wavers: Britain does not and has not had for sometime an empire, nor does it have the power of somewhere like the US to go it alone. As Britain moves further in to isolation, Ireland moves in the opposite direction, putting itself at the heart of the EU and other international bodies. Yes, there are concerns about immigration in Ireland but nothing of the order of Britain. The Home Secretary faces substantial opposition, from both inside and outside Parliament, for her latest package of draconian measures. Irish born Labour MP Damien Egan put it well, when he said: "Controlling our borders and knowing who comes here is essential, not least to integration. "What can the Prime Minster say to my constituents that will give them an assurance that the reforms that he and the Home Secretary are proposing - which I support- will be firm, but also fair?" What needs to happen is for the case to be made for immigration, rather than follow down the Reform UK direction of travel. A more balanced debate could in the longer term take some of the heat out of the discussions and just maybe focus on dare I say it more pressing issues. Ofcourse, there needs to be a functional system for coming and going from the UK, securing borders, but not the frankly racist constructs now being contemplated. Meantime, where is that Irish passport?