You are here: Home / Archives for David Cameron

A Response to the Prime Minister

17/12/2011 By 27 Comments

Dear Dave

I thought that some kind of response was needed to your recent speech about the King James Bible. As you’ve chosen to speak to the church with the media listening in, I hope you won’t mind me responding in this way on my blog.

Firstly, there’s some positive things that I want to say. That must begin by a big thank you for engaging in a debate about religious matters. Though (as I think we’ll discover a little lower down the page) I don’t agree with much of what you said, full marks for trying. It is good that the anniversary of the translation of the King James Bible has given people the excuse to reflect on the influence of the Bible on society. It was good that though you gave something of a nod to the particular translation in question, your remarks were generally about the Bible itself rather than the KJV in particular. After all, though we in the churches often claim to love it, we don’t actually read that translation any more than you do. Some would think that the country went to the dogs when the KJV stopped being the religious soundtrack of choice in our churches. Be boldened by the knowledge that the translators themselves, though they would have every right to be proud of their achievements, might well dismiss this cloying sentiment as very far from what they were trying to achieve.

Now, you say that the Bible gave Britain a set of values and morals which make the nation what it is and we need to actively stand up and defend them. You know Dave, life is just a bit more complicated than that. What values are we talking about? Those that people in our nation used to argue in favour of slavery? Those they used to argue against women’s suffrage? Those they use still to argue against accepting the full humanity and citizenship of God’s gay children? Is it those values that you’re keen on or others?

You referred to some of these things in your speech. Curiously, you seem to think that the Bible argues for human rights. Most peculiarly, you argue that the Bible has been at the forefront of the emancipation of women. Have you ever read it? (Oh, and by the way, did Samantha promise to obey you? Just wondering).

The point of recognising that people have inalienable human rights is that we do so because we are agreed that they have them not because we have a mandate from scripture.

Has it occurred to you that the ethics of the Bible are as much a pick and mix morality as anything you’ll find in our gloriously multi-ethnic Britain. How are we to interpret the Bible, Prime Minister? You seem to speak as though there is one view about morality that comes from the Judeo-Christian tradition. What is it, now? Maybe we should ask the Rabbis – after all they had the chance to sort out the bulk of the text before Christians got their hands on it, and we know they all agree, don’t we?

You refer to “Values and morals we should actively stand up and defend. The alternative of moral neutrality should not be an option. You can’t fight something with nothing.”

Well, what values? What morals? Can we come to a language of common morality in our nation today? You know, I bet we can but I bet the starting point is moral neutrality not Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, or….. well maybe I’ve made my point already.

You go on later to speak against “secular neutrality”. Oh David, please. Don’t you know that some of us (including some of us religious types) will thrive best in a state that embodies the best and highest goals of secular neutrality? There are strong voices who believe that the state should be founded on religious values. You know, those people frighten me Dave. Don’t add your voice to theirs.

Prime Minister, ethics and religion are different things. You’ve got them muddled in a way that the press just love, but they are muddled in your mind all the same. Oh yes, religious people have ethics and quite a lot to say about how to behave. However, our common life in the UK needs to come from a place where laws are recognised as good because they are, well, good. We can’t be in the business of commending some laws more than others because they have their genesis in one religious text or another, now can we?

I do admire your gall in suggesting that we need to so vigorously defend the Christian heritage of our nation whilst describing yourself as merely vaguely practising as a Christian yourself. Full marks for honesty. Full empathy marks from the religiously bewildered public I bet, but go on, show us you mean it. Take the kids to church.

Finally, you said that “The Bible has helped to shape the values which define our country.” and immediately went on to say, “Indeed, as Margaret Thatcher once said, …we are a nation whose ideals are founded on the Bible.” Oooh, tricky thing to invoke Lady T in this argument, PM. Tricky, tricky, tricky. Do you think her values align with the Biblical values you want us to follow?

One last thing. You seemed to imply that the churches had short-changed the country in not standing up for these good decent biblical values that you are on about. This, you seem to say, has led to the decline in public life – the politicians expenses scandal, the awful mess that the bankers have made and so on. Lucky you to have the Christians to blame. (Throw them to the lions….). We could add the trouble with the tabloid press too, couldn’t we?

You know what, I think it was dishonest politicians who brought parliament into disgrace.  I think it was greed that got the bankers into the mess we are in. Not just their greed either. We’ve shared our greed rather than our prosperity in recent years and that has not brought us to a good place. And, I think it was behaviour verging on the criminal at the highest editorial levels that got the press into such a pickle. Still, at least we know you had nothing to do with those kind of people.

Anyway, enough from me for now. All good wishes for Christmas when it comes. Who is coming to lunch at Chequers this year?

Wishing you every blessing, as they say,

KELVIN

PS – full marks for taking a sideswipe at the Archbishop of Canterbury for not being robust or clear enough in his liberal Christian concern for the poor and the marginalised btw. He is so hard to understand, even if you are religious. That is what you meant, right?

Tagged With: ,
27 Comments

The Prime Minister’s Speech I’d like to Hear

10/08/2011 By 4 Comments

Parliament is being recalled tomorrow to discuss the English Riots that have been unfolding in that last few days. Here is the speech I would like David Cameron to make.
Mr Speaker. The streets of this country are in uproar and people live in fear for their lives and property. Parliament has been recalled because people rightly look to us for leadership. I have come to this house today to make a personal statement and then to hear the views of others. I look for a constructive debate and as it begins I commit myself, as I believe we must all do, to eschew knee-jerk reaction and short term political gain. We must seek to mend what is broken and that is likely to take time, commitment and money – resources which lie within our common gift. The well-being of us all depends upon peace in our streets.

I begin by acknowledging that I know what it is to share in the excitement of lawless behaviour when young. My membership of the Bullingdon club whilst at University is well documented and a period of my life which I look back on with shame and regret. Of course, I came from a background where the distruction wrought by that club could be paid for from the immense priviledge that my friends and I had been received in life. My revulsion at my youthful association with a lawless (if immensely rich) gang leads me now to a determination to fight back at all gang cultures wherever they are found. Gang membership provides a narrative to youth – the task for us today is to outline a narrative for the nation that will capture the imagination of the country.

We will be able to do that only when we have acknowledged all that is wrong. A few MPs have stolen from the common purse and are perceived as having been treated lightly by the law. Our Metropolitan police force is accused of longstanding and deep-seated corruption at the top. Senior officers are believed to have taken bribes. This disrupts fundamentally the morale of the overwhelmingly vast number of decent police officers and undermines the ability of those aiming to police by consent the streets of our cities. Our newspapers are likewise tarnished by those who have engaged in lawless behaviour for the simple motive of making a fast buck. People rightly ask whether there is any difference between those in high office who break the law for financial gain and self interest and those who ransack shops for trainers, MP3 players and cigarettes. The truth is, Mr Speaker, I don’t believe there is much difference at all. We have been weighed in the balance of modern life and are found wanting.

Who is there left with the authority to speak the truth and establish the common good? People are asking who will restore our common life? That task must begin with us today.

Parliament has been recalled so that different members can give their views. Parliament should note the following principles which I would like to establish for this debate. I will then hear the views of others and where appropriate work with Honourable Members on a cross-party basis to implement the best ideas for dealing with the immediate crisis that we face.

Firstly we must learn again that the wellbeing of us all is enhanced by the prosperity of the many and not the few. There is no point in being rich and living in a street that is not safe to walk down.

Secondly we must look again at the question of access to education. I benefited from a free education, as did most Honourable Members of this house. We must face the possibility that by removing a pathway to eduction for those from the most challenging backgrounds we condemn people to remain within an underclass with no way out. We may well have got the decision on student fees entirely wrong.

Thirdly we must use the same technology that gives people the freedom to organise on the streets, to police the streets and keep citizens safe. (I will be meeting today with mobile phone companies to establish whether it is possible for them to provide the police, under current legislation, with a real-time recordable map of mobile phone use in areas, and only those areas, that have been declared as zones of major public disorder).

Fourthly, we must celebrate the tens of thousands of young people from all backgrounds who make us proud to be British and proud of their achievements.

Fifthly, I am glad to have received the prompt resignation of the Home Secretary this morning. She was right in saying that she simply was unable to retain her post whilst the streets of the capital were ablaze. I have invited Mr Kenneth Clark to take up this important post and am delighted that he has accepted this task and expect support from all sides of the house for him, the police, the courts and all who work in the prison and probation systems.

Sixthly, those who advocate the use of more violent methods of policing are speaking from their fears rather than their wisdom. We do not need a greater escalation of violence in our streets. My revulsion at seeing 11 year olds rioting and looting would be far eclipsed by the sight of police officers beating 11 year olds on our streets or the army shooting at the them.

Finally we must look again on a cross-party basis at the way in which we will face the difficult economic times that we currently face. We must live within our means and not extend further this country’s debt. At a time when money is short, we must each of us face the fact that this means less disposable income. We must establish a new economic narrative which seeks the common good and not only individual financial gain. Such uncontested craving for individual gain has brought us to this point where our institutions are corrupted and our streets are not safe. We are coming too late to the realisation that the country needs a more just and progressive economic system rather than a system whereby the great financial institutions face little penalty for gambling away the pensions of the country and taxation is based on how little we can justify as payment for paltry public services. There is change in the air and the challenge I offer the House today is the challenge to win the battle for hearts and minds in the struggle for fair and just taxation and not merely the lowest common denominator taxes which have been at the heart of our political debates for decades.

Mr Speaker – those keeping peace on the streets need the support of every member of this house and every citizen of this country. I now need the same support as I seek to lead the country in a new direction.

Change begins today.

Change begins here in parliament.

Change begins with me.

Tagged With: , , ,
4 Comments
« Previous Page