UK 8 August 2011 Our streets are aflame. Now black Britain will be allowed its say The politics of race has, at best, retreated to a narrow debate around the issue of Islamophobia. Print HTML Like most of those leaping on the flaming bandwagon of Tottenham, I have no idea what lay behind the weekend's disturbances. It may well be, as some have suggested, that the chaos represented a realisation that the idyllic existence enjoyed by black inner-city youth during our years of plenty is now drawing to a close. Perhaps the Metropolitan Police is now so cash strapped it is no longer able to deploy significant manpower to low priority targets such as the prevention of a full blown riot. Or maybe we've simply been made aware of the full length to which London's drug gangs are prepared to go to defend their lucrative trade. But now these issues will be debated. Crime, the cuts, drugs, social policy, policing policy. Oh, we'll debate them. There's nothing like a burnt out high street or two to get us debating. And something will happen during the course of this debate. Something different. We will invite black people to contribute to it. To be precise, we will invite members of the Afro-Caribbean community to participate in our political discourse. There will be youth workers. Community leaders. Street kids. A local politician or two. They will all be allowed to articulate their case. Tell us about what it's like to be black, as opposed to white or Asian, in Britain. Because we are happy to let black people speak about politics, just so long as they have flames or body bags as their backdrop. The riots of the 1980s produced some positives. The police finally dropped the 'one or two rotten apples' mantra, and embarked on a far reaching, and genuine, process of modernisation and reform. Casual social tolerance of racism became the exception, rather than the norm. Politicians of all persuasions began to focus seriously on inner-city, not jut regional, regeneration. But those advances came at a price. And one of them was the de-politicisation and marginalisation of Afro-Caribbean politics, and with it the effective political disenfranchisement of an entire section of society. At the start of the 1980s, the black community had tribunes. Black politicians like Diane Abbott, Bernie Grant and Paul Boateng were elected to parliament speaking openly, honestly and provocatively about the issues affecting their communities. Where are those voices and advocates today? Before this weekend when did you last see David Lammy on your television screen? Probably not since the brief period when Tony Blair put his arm round him, told him he was a future leader of the party, then dumped him. A quarter of a century after our first black politicians were elected, how many currently sit around the cabinet or shadow cabinet tables? How many senior black parliamentarians chair our select committees? How many senior black advisors are part of either David Cameron or Ed Miliband's inner circle? This is not an issue about the exclusion of minorities. There are influential Asian politicians across the political spectrum. And they form the spearhead of similarly influential lobbying groups. Our Jewish community, our Indian community, our Muslim community; all have effective advocates who sit at the heart of the political process. The Afro-Caribbean community, almost uniquely, has no such representation. Of course there is Chuka Umunna, the great black hope of British politics. But he is totemic, his profile a symbol of what we have lost, rather than what we have achieved. And even Chuka is careful to represent himself as a politician who happens to be black, rather than a black politician. No one is expecting Chuka Umunna to stand at the Despatch Box at the next session of Treasury questions and give a black power salute. But there is no point pretending that black politics and politicians have successfully broken into the political mainstream. Nor that the handful who have made it have brought their community and its agenda with them. The politics of race has, at best, retreated to a narrow debate around the issue of Islamophobia. At worst, it has been pushed into a cul-de-sac of British Jobs for British Workers and cups of tea with Mrs Duffy. And as our streets burn, what plans are afoot to address this political gagging of black Briton? None. Our selection processes are geared exclusively to tackling the under-representation of women. Our policy agenda to addressing the plight of the squeezed middle, not those at the economic margins. Our entire political narrative built around an appeal to the White Working Class. And so there is silence. About the appalling levels of educational attainment by black male youth. About the scourge of gang culture that blights black communities. Or if there is not silence, the voices that are raised are not strong enough to force these issues to the top of the political agenda. But we've had our riot. So now we can have our debate. And once again, for as long as the flames continue to flicker, black Britain will be allowed to have its say. › Rioters, police, and sentimentality More Related articles Why Nicola Sturgeon is playing a long game on Scottish independence Why, in spite of everything, I'm hopeful about 2017 Leader: The new divides Subscription offer 12 issues for £12 + FREE book LEARN MORE Close This week’s magazine
Show Hide image The Staggers 6 January 2017 Never mind Thatcher - has Theresa May got more in common with Gordon Brown? Her critics increasingly think so. Print HTML Good news, Prime Minister: you're on the cover of this week's Economist. Bad news, Prime Minister: they've branded you "Theresa Maybe" and excoriated your approach to Brexit and your approach to running the government generally. Oh well. Still, never mind. Other magazines are available. But the more alarming thing from Theresa May's perspective is that this week's Economist merely says explicitly what much of the commentariat and the press is saying implicitly: that far from Thatcher 2.0 she is Brown 2.0: indecisive, unable to adjust to life in 10 Downing Street after years in a departmental brief, etc. Theresa May's problems are stacking up, and she doesn't seem to have a plan. Our Britain cover this week: pic.twitter.com/JdXV45zktV — The Economist (@TheEconomist) January 5, 2017 Are they right? The early day narrative of "May the destroyer of Labour" was overstated. So is the emerging one of "Brown with better clothes". For an indicator of the gulf between the two, compare how they managed the decision to have or not to have a snap election. Though May's decision not to ask for an early contest in the first weeks of her premiership may go down as a blunder every bit as big as Gordon Brown's, it wasn't accompanied by waves of contradictory briefing and blue-on-blue attacks on members of her inner circle. In fact, the line from Downing Street about why there wouldn't be an early election was decided on early and stuck to relentlessly. Where she's more like Brown is that the PM really only has one steadfast ally in the press: the Mail, which for all its general antipathy to the Labour party was rather sympathetic to Labour last's PM personally. The FT and the Economist incline more naturally to the brand of Cameroonism and pro-Europeanism that May has junked. The relationship with the Times and the Sun is nowhere as close or as sympathetic as with David Cameron. (Cast your mind back to how the Sun reported May's rather bland remarks about God for a sense of how much less friendly the new relationship with.) As for the Telegraph, they increasingly occupy a space to May's right. Which at the moment, doesn't seem to matter. The public still like May a great deal and overwhelmingly favour her to run the country over Jeremy Corbyn or Tim Farron. But if the economy goes south, if Labour or the Liberal Democrats' position in the polls begins to improve, the PM's weakness even among the usual allies of the right could come back to haunt her. Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics. More Related articles Why I made the TSSA film about rail privatisation benefiting foreigners Paddy Ashdown: "The House of Commons is a lapdog, not a watchdog" Why Nicola Sturgeon is playing a long game on Scottish independence