DOCSLIB.ORG

Gordon Brown, 'The Future of Britishness'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gordon Brown, 'The Future of Britishness' The future of Britishness Publication date: 14/01/2006 Full text of Gordon Brown's keynote speech to the Fabian Future of Britishness conference, arguing that British values demand a new constitutional settlement and a renewed civic patriotism. (14th January 2006). • Fabian Britishness conference: : Full reports and reaction • Should we do more to define a positive sense of Britishness? Send your views to [email protected]. When we take time to stand back and reflect, it becomes clear that to address almost every one of the major challenges facing our country – our relationships with Europe, America and the rest of the world; how we equip ourselves for globalisation; the future direction of constitutional change; a modern view of citizenship; the future of local government, ideas of localism; and, of course, our community relations and multiculturalism and, since July 7th, the balance between diversity and integration; even the shape of our public services – you must have a clear view of what being British means, what you value about being British and what gives us purpose as a nation. Being clear what Britishness means in a post-imperial world is essential if we are to forge the best relationships with the developing world and in particular with Africa. But take Europe also: there is no doubt that in the years after 1945, faced with relative economic decline as well as the end of empire, Britain lost confidence in itself and its role in the world and became so unsure about what a confident post- imperial Britain could be that too many people defined the choice in Europe as either total absorption or splendid isolation. And forgot that just as you could stand for Britain while being part of NATO, you can stand for Britain and advance British national interests as part of the European Union. Let me also suggest that it is because that loss of confidence led too many to retreat into the idea of Britain, Britain as little more than institutions that never changed – so for decades, for fear of losing our British identity, Britain did not face up to some of the great constitutional questions, whether it be the second chamber, the relationship of the legislative to the executive or the future of local government. Take also the unity of the United Kingdom and its component parts. While we have always been a country of different nations and thus of plural identities – a Welshman can be Welsh and British, just as a Cornishman or woman is Cornish, English and British - and may be Muslim, Pakistani or Afro-Caribbean, Cornish, English and British – there is always a risk that, when people are insecure, they retreat into more exclusive identities rooted in 19th century conceptions of blood, race and territory – when instead, we the British people should be able to gain great strength from celebrating a British identity which is bigger than the sum of its parts and a union that is strong because of the values we share and because of the way these values are expressed through our history and our institutions. And take the most recent illustration of what challenges us to be more explicit about Britishness: the debate about asylum and immigration and about multiculturalism and inclusion, issues that are particularly potent because in a fast changing world people who are insecure need to be rooted. Here the question is essentially whether our national identity is defined by values we share in common or just by race and ethnicity – a definition that would leave our country at risk of relapsing into a wrongheaded 'cricket test' of loyalty. Equally, while the British response to the events of July 7th was magnificent, we have to face uncomfortable facts that there were British citizens, British born, apparently integrated into our communities, who were prepared to maim and kill fellow British citizens, irrespective of their religion – and this must lead us to ask how successful we have been in balancing the need for diversity with the obvious requirements of integration in our society. But I would argue that if we are clear about what underlies our Britishness and if we are clear that shared values – not colour, nor unchanging and unchangeable institutions – define what it means to be British in the modern world, we can be far more ambitious in defining for our time the responsibilities of citizenship; far more ambitious in forging a new and contemporary settlement of the relationship between state, community and individual; and it is also easier too to address difficult issues that sometimes come under the heading 'multiculturalism' – essentially how diverse cultures, which inevitably contain differences, can find the essential common purpose without which no society can flourish. So Britishness is not just an academic debate – something just for the historians, just for the commentators, just for the so-called chattering classes. Indeed in a recent poll, as many as half of British people said they were worried that if we do not promote Britishness we run a real risk of having a divided society. And if we look to the future I want to argue that our success as Great Britain, our ability to meet and master not just the challenges of a global economy, but also the international, demographic, constitutional and social challenges ahead, and even the security challenges, requires us to rediscover and build from our history and apply in our time the shared values that bind us together and give us common purpose. I believe most strongly that globalisation is made for a Britain, that is stable, outward looking, committed to scientific progress and the value of education. And that by taking the right long term decisions Britain can stand alongside China, India and America as one of the great success stories of the next global era. But it is also obvious to me that the nations that will meet and master global change best are not just those whose governments make the right long term decisions on stability, science, trade and education, but whose people come together and, sharing a common view of challenges and what needs to be done, forge a unified and shared sense of purpose about the long term sacrifices they are prepared to make and the priorities they think important for national success. And just as in war time a sense of common patriotic purpose inspired people to do what is necessary, so in peace time a strong modern sense of patriotism and patriotic purpose which binds people together can motivate and inspire. And this British patriotism is, in my view, founded not on ethnicity nor race, not just on institutions we share and respect, but on enduring ideals which shape our view of ourselves and our communities – values which in turn influence the way our institutions evolve. Yet as Jonathan Freedland has written in his 'Bring Home the Revolution', Britain is almost unique in that, unlike America and many other countries, we have no constitutional statement or declaration enshrining our objectives as a country; no mission statement defining purpose; and no explicitly stated vision of our future. So I will suggest to you today that it is to our benefit to be more explicit about what we stand for and what are our objectives and that we will meet and master all challenges best by finding shared purpose as a country in our enduring British ideals that I would summarise as – in addition to our qualities of creativity, inventiveness, enterprise and our internationalism, our central beliefs are a commitment to – liberty for all, responsibility by all and fairness to all. And I believe that out of a debate, hopefully leading to a broad consensus about what Britishness means, flows a rich agenda for change: a new constitutional settlement, an explicit definition of citizenship, a renewal of civic society, a rebuilding of our local government and a better balance between diversity and integration. And around national symbols, that also unite the whole country, an inclusive Britishness where, as a result of our commitment to liberty for all, responsibility by all and fairness to all, we make it possible for not just some, but all, people to realise their potential to the full. So what do we mean when we talk about Britishness? Remember when we were young, we wrote out our addresses: our town, our county, our country, our continent, the world. Like James Joyce jokingly at the start of 'Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man': Stephen Dedalus, Class of elements, Clongowes Wood College, Sallins, County Kildare, Ireland, Europe, The World, The Universe. I will say something more about the importance to identity of neighbourhoods, towns, villages and communities and about our global responsibilities. But, while a few years ago only less than half – 46 per cent – identified closely with being British, today national identity has become far more important: it is not 46 per cent but 65 per cent – two thirds – who now identify Britishness as important. And recent surveys show that British people feel more patriotic about their country than almost any other European country. So what is it to be British? What has emerged from the long tidal flows of British history – from the 2,000 years of successive waves of invasion, immigration, assimilation and trading partnerships; from the uniquely rich, open and outward looking culture – is a distinctive set of values which influence British institutions. Even before America made it its own, I think Britain can lay claim to the idea of liberty. Out of the necessity of finding a way to live together in a multinational state came the practice of toleration and then the pursuit of liberty.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Two Case Studies in Self-Determination: the Rock and the Bailiwick
    Two Case Studies in Self-Determination: The Rock and the Bailiwick INGE V. PORTER* TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 340 II. SELF-DETERMINATION ....................................................................................... 342 A. History...................................................................................................... 342 B. General Scope and Content...................................................................... 345 1. Decolonization................................................................................... 345 2. Post-Decolonization.......................................................................... 349 3. Historic Title ...................................................................................... 350 4. Limits to the Principleof Self-Determination.................................... 354 C. M icrostates ............................................................................................... 356 D. Future Trends ........................................................................................... 357 1. The Demise of the Principle of Self-Determination?......................... 357 2. Self-Determination as Customary Law .............................................. 358 3. Self-Determination as a Right to a Democratic Form of Government ......................................................................... 360 III. THE CASE OF GIBRALTAR ................................
    [Show full text]
  • Empire and English Nationalismn
    Nations and Nationalism 12 (1), 2006, 1–13. r ASEN 2006 Empire and English nationalismn KRISHAN KUMAR Department of Sociology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA Empire and nation: foes or friends? It is more than pious tribute to the great scholar whom we commemorate today that makes me begin with Ernest Gellner. For Gellner’s influential thinking on nationalism, and specifically of its modernity, is central to the question I wish to consider, the relation between nation and empire, and between imperial and national identity. For Gellner, as for many other commentators, nation and empire were and are antithetical. The great empires of the past belonged to the species of the ‘agro-literate’ society, whose central fact is that ‘almost everything in it militates against the definition of political units in terms of cultural bound- aries’ (Gellner 1983: 11; see also Gellner 1998: 14–24). Power and culture go their separate ways. The political form of empire encloses a vastly differ- entiated and internally hierarchical society in which the cosmopolitan culture of the rulers differs sharply from the myriad local cultures of the subordinate strata. Modern empires, such as the Soviet empire, continue this pattern of disjuncture between the dominant culture of the elites and the national or ethnic cultures of the constituent parts. Nationalism, argues Gellner, closes the gap. It insists that the only legitimate political unit is one in which rulers and ruled share the same culture. Its ideal is one state, one culture. Or, to put it another way, its ideal is the national or the ‘nation-state’, since it conceives of the nation essentially in terms of a shared culture linking all members.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Huddersfield Repository
    University of Huddersfield Repository Ward, Paul The end of Britishness? A historical perspective Original Citation Ward, Paul (2009) The end of Britishness? A historical perspective. British Politics Review, 4 (3). p. 3. ISSN 1890-4505 This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/id/eprint/7726/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ British Politics Review Journal of the British Politics Society, Norway Volume 4 | No. 3 | Summer 2009 The Britishness debate Identity issues in a contested United Kingdom CONTRIBUTORS Paul Ward • Arthur Aughey • Christopher Bryant • Vron Ware Espen Kallevik • Dana Arnold • Kristin M. Haugevik British Politics Review Editorial Volume 4 | No. 3 | Summer 2009 Identity in an age of uncertainty ISSN 1890-4505 Questioning national identity is a sign of our times.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3 Poetics of the Shipping Forecast
    chapter 3 Poetics of the Shipping Forecast Sanna Nyqvist Abstract This essay investigates the intertextual manifestations of radio shipping forecasts in fiction, poetry and non- fiction from the United Kingdom, Ireland, Sweden and Finland. The literary adaptations and appropriations of the functional meteor- ological report often retain its peculiar melodic character that results from the compressed, elliptic listing of observations or warnings. In the listening experience evoked by many authors the relative safety of the radio listener’s everyday surround- ings contrasts with the threat of gales and harsh conditions for seafarers. A compar- ative analysis shows that despite the insularity of the shipping forecast as a cultural phenomenon, the “literature of the shipping forecast” is surprisingly similar in dif- ferent countries, exploring the same themes of nostalgia, loss of signification and definition of borders. The essay also investigates how the shipping forecast inevitably evokes questions of territorial conquest and exclusion of others, and how its literary adaptations tend to bracket the natural phenomena that are the very raison d’être of the shipping forecast. The shipping forecast is a curious radio broadcast. Issuing gale warnings for seafarers and communicating weather information from coastal stations, it is reminiscent of a time when reliable and up- to- date weather reports were avail- able only through radio. Nowadays, professional mariners as well as pleasure boaters get the necessary weather information through modern wireless tech- nologies, and the shipping forecast has become a relic in the radio’s programme schedule. Most of the avid listeners to the radio’s shipping forecast do not need the information it conveys: they are safely situated inland, far away from the rough seas and gushing winds.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Feels Scottish? National Identities and Ethnicity in Scotland
    August 2014 DYNAMICS OF DIVERSITY: EVIDENCE FROM THE 2011 CENSUS ESRC Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE) Who feels Scottish? National identities and ethnicity in Scotland Summary • 83% of Scotland’s residents feel Scottish. • About 25% of Scotland’s residents born outside Scotland • 61% of Scotland’s residents identify as being of White do feel Scottish, and this is no less for those from South Scottish ethnicity and feel Scottish is their only national and East Asia, Africa and the Middle East, than it is for identity. A further 22% are from other ethnic groups and those born in England or other parts of Europe. About a feel they have a Scottish national identity, or are White third of Scotland’s residents born in North America, the Scottish whose Scottishness is combined with British or Old Commonwealth and Western Europe feel Scottish. other national identities. • The Polish ethnic group, who have recently had the • Catholics, Protestants and those of no religion share highest migration rates into Scotland, expressed most similar levels of commitment to a Scottish only national affiliation to a non-UK identity only (80%). identity, while two-thirds of Muslims in Scotland identify • For other groups, including Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, as Scottish or British. Africans, Indians and Chinese, British only was chosen • The ‘White: Other British’ are the largest ethnic minority in as frequently as Scottish only. This perhaps reflects the Scotland, and the ethnic group least likely to feel Scottish emphasis on Britishness in citizenship regulations, and national identity (11% feel Scottish, with or without other was also found in England where minorities identified identities).
    [Show full text]
  • Debate on 19Th June: Britishness
    Debate on 19th June: Britishness This Library Note aims to provide background information for the debate to be held on Thursday 19th June: “To call attention to the concept of Britishness in the context of the cultural, historical, constitutional and ethical tradition of the peoples of these islands” This Note provides an overview of the various debates that have taken place on the concept of Britishness. These include historical accounts, current commentaries and research into public attitudes. The Note also considers various Government proposals regarding British citizenship, shared values and rights and responsibilities, along with reaction to these proposals. Ian Cruse 16th June 2008 LLN 2008/015 House of Lords Library Notes are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of the Notes with the Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. Any comments on Library Notes should be sent to the Head of Research Services, House of Lords Library, London SW1A 0PW or emailed to [email protected]. Table of Contents 1. The Backdrop to Debates on Britishness, National Identity and Citizenship ................ 1 1.1 The Concept of National Identity ............................................................................. 1 1.2 Britishness as a Historical Phenomenon ................................................................. 1 1.3 Britishness as a Social and Legal Construct—British Citizenship ........................... 2 1.4
    [Show full text]
  • Britishness and Problems of Authenticity in Post-Union Literature from Addison to Macpherson
    "Where are the originals?" Britishness and problems of authenticity in post-Union literature from Addison to Macpherson. Melvin Eugene Kersey III Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. University of Leeds, School of English September 2001 The candidate confirms that the work submitted is his/her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been possible without the generous help, encouragement and support of many people. My research has benefited beyond reckoning from the supervision of Professor David Fairer, whose inspired scholarship has never interfered with his commitment to my research. It is difficult to know whether to thank or to curse Professor Andrew Wawn for introducing me to James Macpherson's Ossianic poetry during my MA at Leeds, but at any rate I am now doubly indebted to him for his insightful reading of a chapter of this thesis. I am also grateful to Professor Paul Hammond for his enormously helpful comments and suggestions on another chapter. And despite the necessary professional distance which an internal examiner must maintain, I have still enjoyed the benevolent proximity effect of Professor Edward Larrissy. I am grateful to Sue Baker and the administrative staff of the School of English for providing me with employment and moral support during this thesis, especially Pamela Rhodes. Special thanks to the inestimable help, friendship and rigorous mind of Dr. Michael Brown, and to Professor Terence and Sue Brown for their repeated generous hospitality in Dublin.
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers to Britishness
    Barriers to Britishness Report of the Alberto Costa Inquiry into Citizenship Policy December 2020 Published 2020 by: British Future Kean House 6 Kean Street London WC2B 4AS Registered Charity Number: 1159291 Secretary to the Inquiry: Jill Rutter Editor: Steve Ballinger © British Future 2020 The authors’ rights have been asserted. British Future is an independent, non-partisan thinktank and registered charity engaging people’s hopes and fears about integration and migration, identity and race, so that we share a confident and welcoming Britain, inclusive and fair to all. Registered Charity Number: 1159291 +44 (0)20 7632 9069 @BritishFuture www.britishfuture.org 2 British Future / Barriers to Britishness Contents Foreword – Alberto Costa MP 4 Executive summary 6 Citizenship: key facts 15 Introduction 19 Today’s legal framework 22 The Inquiry’s findings and recommendations What is citizenship and what should citizenship policy aim to achieve? 25 Routes to British citizenship 34 The application process 41 Vulnerable groups 51 English language requirements and the Life in the UK test 57 Citizenship ceremonies 66 International dimensions: British citizenship outside the UK 70 Appendices Citizenship policy in selected OECD countries 77 Evidence Submitted to the Inquiry 80 Endnotes 81 Acknowledgements 84 About British Future 84 British Future / Barriers to Britishness 3 Foreword By Alberto Costa MP I was born in England and raised in Scotland, by parents who came to this country from Italy in the mid-1960s. I am proud to be a British citizen and now represent South Leicestershire in the House of Commons. Yet my parents have not become British citizens in the half-century for which they have lived in this country.
    [Show full text]
  • National Identity Choice Among Northern Irish Youth
    Comparative Sociology 16 (2017) 716-745 COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY brill.com/coso National Identity after a Conflict: National Identity Choice among Northern Irish Youth Natasha Bingham Assistant Professor, Loyola University New Orleans, USA [email protected] Christopher Duffy Loyola University New Orleans, USA [email protected] Abstract This work uses multinomial logistic regression to explore how Northern Irish youth view their national identity and the factors that shape their self-identification post- 1998 Good Friday Agreement. We use the 2005-2015 Northern Ireland Young Life and Times Surveys of 16-year-olds to investigate these questions. The results indicate that intergroup contact is less influential than environmental factors on national identity. Residential and school composition has more of an effect on solidifying Irish identity than British identity (relative to that of a Northern Irish identity). Our work adds to the literature on national identity development and choice among young adults in post- conflict and post-peace-agreement environments. Keywords national identity – post-conflict nationalism – religion and nationalism – youth identity development – Northern Ireland According to the 2011 census, the number of individuals who identified as Catholic was 45 per cent and those who identified as Protestant was 48 per cent (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency 2011). However, 40 per cent of the population identified as British, 25 per cent as Irish, and 21 per cent as Northern Irish. The national identity question was absent from the 2001 © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2017 | doi 10.1163/15691330-12341443Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 02:37:08AM via free access National Identity after a Conflict 717 census when the religious breakdown was 44 per cent Catholic and 53 per cent Protestant (Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Welshness in 'British Wales': Negotiating National Identity at The
    This is an Open Access document downloaded from ORCA, Cardiff University's institutional repository: https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/107 5 0 3/ This is the author’s version of a work that was sub mitted to / accepted for publication. Citation for final published version: Evans, Daniel 2019. Welshness in British Wales: Negotiating national identity at the margins. Nations and Nationalism 25 (1) , pp. 1 6 7-1 9 0. 10.1111/nana.12390 file Publishers page: https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12390 <https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12390> Please note: Changes made as a result of publishing processes such as copy-editing, formatting and page numbers may not be reflected in this version. For the definitive version of this publication, please refer to the published source. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite this paper. This version is being made available in accordance with publisher policies. S e e http://orca.cf.ac.uk/policies.html for usage policies. Copyright and moral rights for publications made available in ORCA are retaine d by the copyright hold e rs. **Author’s version, pre-publication. Accepted for publication in Nations and Nationalism.** Welshness in ‘British Wales’: negotiating national identity at the margins. Nationalism and national identity are traditionally seen to be ‘horizontal’ or ‘equalizing’ concepts (Anderson, 1983). People from all corners of the nation are assumed to be joined together by their shared nationality and national characteristics (or the national ‘habitus’- De Cillia et al, 1999). In reality, however, societies frequently draw hierarchical distinctions within the national polity between those who are ‘most’ ‘national’, or most ‘authentic’, and those who are ‘least’ national (Triandafyllidou & Veikou, 2002; Seol & Skrentny, 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Rockall and the Cold War Fraser Macdonald
    Journal of Historical Geography 32 (2006) 627e647 www.elsevier.com/locate/jhg The last outpost of Empire: Rockall and the Cold War Fraser MacDonald School of Anthropology, Geography & Environmental Studies, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne 3010, Victoria, Australia Abstract This paper is about what can be seen at sea. It considers the historical geography of a site at the geo- political axis of the British Empire and the Cold War. It focuses on a hitherto unacknowledged historical reference point: the last territorial expansion of the UK, which laid claim to the tiny islet of Rockall, lying some 300 miles west of the Scottish mainland. Rockall was annexed in September 1955 because it was sit- uated within radio-electrical range of a test site for Britain’s first nuclear missile, the American-made ‘Cor- poral’. As a ‘tactical’ nuclear missile designed for potential deployment in Eastern Europe, the Corporal was a central part of NATO defence policy in the 1950s. Crucial to its development was a testing station in the Outer Hebrides, from which the guided missile could be fired and its ballistic trajectory tracked over the North Atlantic. Occupying an area only 83 feet across and 100 feet wide, Rockall represented a strategic vantage point for the rival gaze of Soviet intelligence. Following Paul Virilio’s argument that the logic of war is less about scoring territorial or material victories than about securing ‘the ‘‘immateriality’’ of per- ceptual fields’, this paper details the ceremonial annexation of Rockall and the subsequent transformation of the Hebridean seascape into a vast topography for military surveillance.
    [Show full text]
  • Brexit in Northern Ireland: Consequences and Political Divisions
    Brexit in Northern Ireland: Consequences and Political Divisions Jon Tonge (University of Liverpool) Thomas Hennessey (Canterbury Christ Church University) James McAuley (University of Huddersfield) Sophie Whiting (University of Bath) The implications of Brexit are profound for the UK as a whole and especially so for Northern Ireland, whose trade, border and internal political structures are all affected. Efforts by the UK government to reach a bespoke deal with the EU, on the basis of the sensitivities accruing to the British border on the island of Ireland, may not meet with universal approval from remaining EU member states beyond the Republic of Ireland. Objector states may be resentful if the (cherry-picked) benefits to the UK are not accompanied by any fulfilment of obligations. The Interlaken Principles of trade relations between EU and non-EU countries make clear that the EU will a) prioritise internal integration over relations with non-member states and b) the EU will always safeguard its own decision-making autonomy. The Principles declare that any relationship with the EU must be based on a balance of benefits and obligations. Non-member states will not be able to choose what aspects of EU integration they particularly favour. As such, prospects for a bespoke, tariff-free Northern Ireland-EU cross-border trade arrangement appear slim, although the non-trade base relationship, a continuing Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland, will surely continue. Northern Ireland is in a very weak position in shaping Brexit. The UK-EU relationship is not a matter devolved to the Northern Ireland legislature.
    [Show full text]