“Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it’s against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it’s against the oppressor. You don’t need anything else.” – Malcolm X

Today’s recent race report by the UK Government can only be described as historical negationism, and an outright denialism of the experiences of People of African Descent in the country. 

The UK Government via this report has invented ingenious and implausible reasons to misinterpret genuine documents, whilst manipulating statistical series to support the given point of view, that deliberately absolves the UK Government of any responsibility in its role in maintaining a racially oppressive state lauded in historical and ongoing institutionalised racism. 

We do not need a report from a government rooted and built on anti-blackness to confirm our realities as directly impacted persons.  

In our comment we are reaffirming Black people’s autonomy within the Pan-African principle of doing for self. An embodiment of this principle can be seen  in 1967, when Stokely Carmichael/ Kwame Ture (honorary prime minister of the Black Panther Party) coined the term institutional racism to describe institutional discriminatory practices. He defined the term in Carmichael and Hamilton (1967) as the collective failure of institutions to provide appropriate and professional services to people because of their color, culture, or ethnicity, and gives the following example to explicate the definition, “when white terrorists bomb a black church and kill five black children, that is an act of individual racism … But when … five hundred black babies die each year because of the lack of proper food, shelter and medical facilities, and thousands more are destroyed and maimed physically, emotionally and intellectually because of conditions of poverty and discrimination in the black community, that is a function of institutional racism”

Institutional racism was a term created by the people and for the people. We must be ever vigilant of the government’s aim to co-opt our words and white wash our realities. 

We must also remember that Neo-colonialism, representation politics and tokenism will never serve the masses of Black people. We as a people continue to be oppressed collectively and our liberation can never be individualised. Audre Lorde reminds us that ‘without community, there is no liberation’.

We must also be mindful of the ready presence of Black people that are not kinfolk, that remain comfortable in working against the masses of Black people in order to receive a seat at the table at the expense of all of us. 

Further, the race report is even an international human rights issue as the UK  is failing its international human rights obligations under  ICERD- International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination  and international human right norms under UDHR- Universal Declaration on Human Rights. 

The UK’s inability to recognise and adequately deal with racially discriminatory outcomes in public institutions is a direct failing of Article 2 of ICERD: 

1. States Parties condemn racial discrimination and undertake to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in all its forms and promoting understanding among all races, and, to this end:

 (a) Each State Party undertakes to engage in no act or practice of racial discrimination against persons, groups of persons or institutions and to ensure that all public authorities and public institutions, national and local, shall act in conformity with this obligation; 

(b) Each State Party undertakes not to sponsor, defend or support racial discrimination by any persons or organizations; 

(c) Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists.

d) Each State Party shall prohibit and bring to an end, by all appropriate means, including legislation as required by circumstances, racial discrimination by any persons, group or organization;

The UK government’s inability to even recognise institutionalised racism means that it will not be able to rescind any policies and laws that allow racially discriminatory outcomes to thrive. The UK is failing to protect the international human rights of Persons of African descent in this country and is championing a culture of impunity within public institutions.

We would like to end this comment, reminding Black people to take time out and ensure they engage in radical self care today. This can look like : 

1. Periodically take a break from social media and the news and focus on self-care.

2. Further reading about the concept of racial trauma and how it continues to affect us as persons of African Descent can be a great place to begin empowering yourself. 

3. We would also encourage reconnecting with oneself. Creativity is a great way to connect with yourself and begin healing. Creatively expressing yourself, whether it’s writing, dance or music etc can allow you to gain clarity and autonomy over your feelings or trauma. Zuri Therapy provides both a safe and supportive space for people to share but also our final week includes a poetry workshop, allowing participants to use creativity as a form of healing.
4. Surrounding yourself with Black joy and texts that reaffirm our realities.

We live in a world which often disregards the effects that systemic, institutionalised and interpersonal racism can have on someone’s well being and so we often disregard the existence of our own racial trauma. But acknowledging and sharing these experiences (in a safe and supportive environment) can be the first step towards healing. Radical self-care is a part of this healing. 

The report in and of itself embodies the notion by Toni Morrison that Racism serves as a serious distraction. We must maintain our stance and champion our truth without fear. 

BLAM UK TEAM

A recent Guardian Report has further revealed the insidious and anti-Black nature of School Exclusions in the UK. The report found that ‘exclusion rates for Black Caribbean students in English schools are up to six times higher than those of their white peers in some local authorities’. These figures for organisations like BLAM UK sit as a reminder of the scale of the work that is required. As directly impacted persons, we have created projects and campaigns around this in the hope to bring about accountability and change. At BLAM UK we currently provide free school exclusions advocates for the Black community in the UK, to help redress the discriminatory exclusion practice we see rampant in UK schools.

The UK’s continued failure in ensuring a fair and non-discriminatory school exclusions policy exists in this country, is both a discrimination law issue and an international human rights issue.

The UK is continuing to fail its International legal obligations under ICERD ( International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination ) by allowing for this racist school exclusion policy to continue.

There is an ongoing culture from the State, that can only be seen as a complete disregard to the racialised outcomes of the School Exclusion policy in the UK.

ICERD’s General Recommendation 34, an instrument focuses on discrimination of People of African Descent, the UN has made it clear that States must : Review and enact or amend legislation, as appropriate, in order to eliminate, in line with the Convention, all forms of racial discrimination against people of African descent. It is our view at BLAM UK that rights holders under this convention are being neglected, as the UK Government has not put enough safeguards in place to protect persons of African Descent.

In September 2020 BLAM UK alongside Hackney Quest and Islington Law centre launched a campaign to abolish school exclusions in this country. We believe as stated by Martin Luther King Jr. ‘the time Is always right to do what is right’. Join our campaign here

By Ife Thompson – BLAM UK Founder

Blog Piece Summary:

This piece is an analytical review of the problems that Black people face with regards to the accessibility and provision of mental health care in the UK. Our Intercultural Therapist, Beverley J Weston also provides a therapist’s insight into Navigating the UK’s mental health services and how we can advocate for ourselves. 

By Christina Vassell

On March 2019, Windrush Lessons Learned Review was published. It came almost a year after the highly controversial, almost heinous and yet government sanctioned offences against any group of persons within its borders in recent times. 

In short, the Windrush Scandal was and still is, a British political scandal concerning those of Afro-Caribbean descent who were either wrongly detained, denied legal rights, threatened with deportation, or wrongly deported from the UK by the Home Office – the latter occurred in at least 83 cases. 

Yet, while the Windrush Scandal occurred in 2018, the cases included in Williams’ report seemingly evidence that such discriminatory legislations and practices occurred long before the scandal entered the public sphere and garnered mass media coverage. 

Contrary to popular belief, it is a scandal that is longstanding in British history and its genesis can be found in Britian’s imperial and colonial past as well as the many policies that were sanctioned in the mid-60s following the influx of British subjects from across the Commonwealth. 

The first of the arrivals was a passenger ship, The Empire Windrush, carrying 802 people from the Caribbean – including 492 Jamaican immigrants – arrived in Tilbury. The first wave of post-war Caribbean immigrants to arrive in the U.K. were predominantly male, from 1948 to 1950 were mainly men but women soon followed. Between 1948 and 1973, approximately 50,000 people from Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad and other Caribbean countries, that were part of the British commonwealth, were invited to emigrate to the UK in the aftermaths of WWII. That is, however, not to say that they were treated like British citizens.

Throughout the 50s and 60s it was evident that there was a colour problem in Britain. In 1955, it was said during a BBC television programme that: “Not for the first time in our history we have a colonial problem on our hands. But it’s a colonial problem with a difference. Instead of being thousands of miles away and worrying other people, it’s right here, on the spot, worrying us.” 

For Williams, “The causes of the Windrush scandal can be traced back through successive rounds of policy and legislation about immigration and nationality from the 1960s onwards, the aim of which was to restrict the eligibility of certain groups to live in the UK.” Such legislations that Williams is alluding to is the Commonwealth Act of 1962 controlled and arguably restricted the immigration of all Commonwealth passport holders (except those who held UK passports). 

The Race Relations Act 1965 also did little to stamp out the existing racism towards Black persons from across the Commonwealth, as in 1968, Conservative MP Enoch Powell made an inflammatory, racist and anti-immigration speech. In a few years, legislations would only make it difficult for those coming into the U.K. under the guise of reform. While the Immigration Act confirmed that the Windrush generation had, and have, the right of abode in the UK, Wendy Williams writes that during this period “many were not given any documents to demonstrate this status. Nor were records kept.”

Such a historical legacy would culminate in the “hostile environment” from the late 2000s under Theresa May. It was during this time that Pauline, one of the people included in William’s review experienced immigration problems. 

Born in Jamaica, Pauline (70), was brought up by her grandmother and aunt after her mother left for the UK and started a family in Manchester with a new partner while she was a baby. Pauline was only twelve when she arrived in the U.K. after her mother and step-father invited her to join them in Manchester in 1961. 

After a tumultuous childhood, taking up caring responsibilities only to be abandoned again after her mother would relocated to Canada, Pauline went on to have children and qualified as a social worker. 

Pauline’s Windrush (scandal) story begins in 2005, when she went to Jamaica with her daughter on “a two-week holiday that turned into an eighteen-month nightmare” after being refused re-entry into the UK and subsequently being detained in Jamaica. For Pauline, who had often travelled on her Jamaican Passport, her case demonstrates the wider consensus that many descendants of the Windrush generation felt – that they regarded themselves as British already, thereby not thinking to get British citizenship. 

However, Pauline’s case soon began to take a toll on her mental and physical wellbeing. While she was detained in Jamaica, Pauline could not afford adequate medication for her existing diabetes and almost died after falling into a diabetic coma. During this time, she also lost her job and her house that she planned to buy but was ultimately unable to pay for. 

But the biggest effect was on her children, some of whom were in their teens and didn’t have any resources to help. Her youngest daughter ended up living in a hostel until Pauline’s return. Eventually, a solicitor who specialised in immigration issues was able to help Pauline to return to the UK in 2007. Pauline’s story is one that is the direct result of the “hostile environment” created by Thereas May, then Home Secretary, which began in the early 2000s. 

In 2007, amendments to the UK Borders Act meant automatic deportation for Foreign Nationals who receive a 12-month custodial sentence. Or notably in 2012 when Theresa May’s government issued new a policy that instructed the NHS, landlords, banks, employers and many others with enforcing immigration controls. It would go on to deny many including those from the Windrush generation who had not obtained documentations, proof of status or granted with British citizenship despite their long-term residency, thereby seeing the Windrush Generation and their descendants continually denied, outcasted and exiled by a country that had promised them socioeconomic opportunities for over six decades. 

Instead, changes brought about under the Immigration Act in 2014 introduced additional obstacles for those seeking to challenge [their] deportation on the basis of their family ties or [private] life in the UK.  In order to succeed in a deportation appeal on the basis of your parental relationship, “it is necessary to show that deportation would be ‘unduly harsh’ to the child, which has been interpreted by the Home Office to mean ‘excessively cruel’. But the irony of this amendment is that it glosses over the mishandling of the parents themselves. 

Such is the case for Veronica (59), who lives in Nottingham and came to the U.K. with her father Nathaniel in 1956. Upon arrival, Nathaniel decided not to go for British Citizenship because he already had his “black book” (Citizen of UK and Colonies passport); and like Pauline, he felt that he had been invited to the UK and was already a British Citizen. 

Nathaniel’s troubles began shortly after he and Veronica went to go to Jamaica in 2002. It was while there that he was prevented from returning to the U.K. there despite living in for over forty years, building his life with his wife and three daughters. 

Following the ordeal, Veronica came back to the UK alone and made arrangements to return and care for her father who was becoming increasingly unwell. After spending several years in Jamaica for a total of seven years, with her newfound husband, she decided to return to the UK to sort out her mounting debt and gaps in NI contributions. While in the U.K. Veronica left provision for her father to be looked after by a live-in helper once Joseph, her husband, successfully secured his visa.  

Veronica’s father would never return to the UK, ultimately dying from prostate cancer in 2010. He was not able to afford the cost of treatment in Jamaica, and Veronica believes he could have survived longer if he’d been in the UK with access to NHS treatment. These experiences proved to be debilitating and effected both Veronica’s mental health and career progression. But she feels that partaking in the Review allowed her come to terms with the fourteen-year struggle her father faced. But the price of the scandal is still being paid by Gloria.

Born in Saint Kitts, Gloria (59), travelled to the UK when she was 10 and was raised by her elder sister following their mother’s death. During this time social services were involved with the family because of their young ages. Gloria believes her passport was taken by them and not replaced. 

She eventually found work as a caseworker for people with learning difficulties and mental health issues, and became the main breadwinner in her family following an accident that affected her husband’s ability to work. 

Gloria’s immigration problems began in 2011 when she tried to get a CRB check renewal for the company she had worked at for several years. She failed the check as she did not have a passport, which resulted in her losing her job. Unable to prove her status, Gloria took the company to a tribunal but ultimately lost the case.

Following the trial, Gloria contacted her MP who wrote on her behalf and pleaded her cases to UK Visas and Immigration and Department for Work and Pensions, but to no avail. It would take her seven years to prove her status in the U.K.

As publicity related to the scandal increased, the Taskforce was able to resolve her case in one hour, which was bittersweet to Gloria, who, since losing her job and the tribunal case, had subsequently not been able to work.

In the review, Gloria touches on how the scandal has been detrimental to her mental health and finances. Since the ordeal, she has had to pawn rings to pay for items and visited her doctor on a number of occasions with stress-related problems and depression. Today Gloria claims unemployment benefits and stays at home though nearly lost her house a number of times. 

Gloria’s story is testament to the wider bureaucratic and systemic oppression that targeted the Windrush generation and still affects immigrants thereafter. Today, two years since the scandal, the recommendations of Wiliam’s Review are still under consideration. 

Priti Patel, the Home Secretary, has promised a systemic reform of the Home Office, citing in a Commons statement that the government is committed to introduce a new Home Office mission statement based on “fairness, humanity, openness, diversity and inclusion”. Her response was met with criticism. The Shadow Home Secretary, Nick Thomas-Symonds, criticised the Government for only compensated “just 60 people in its first year of operation”. 

Such a revelation highlights the slow progress in compensating those affected by the Windrush scandal, which up until now exacerbated the lack of trust between the Windrush community and the government. Only 221 out of 1,392 claims have been processed according to Home Office statistics, not factoring the 35 claims that had been rejected since the government launching the scheme in April last year.  

In response to the criticism Patel said: “I agree: the payments and the way in which payments have been made have been far too slow. I’m not apologising for that at all. I have outlined in my statement that it is right that we treat each individual with the respect and dignity they deserve. These are complicated cases.” She said more than £1m had now been offered in compensation.

The Government also previously said that they would pay up to £200 million in total in compensation yet the total pay-outs received by the Windrush victims collectively amounts to a total of £1.2 million. Meanwhile, the deportations still continue.

In February 2020, despite public outcry against the Windrush Scandal of 2018, 17 “criminals” were deported to Jamaica on charter flights under the UK Borders Act. It came as a shock given that there was an Appeal Court order not to deport 25 of the 50 people scheduled to be deported and it is also apparent that such deportations only ended in further tragedy as David Lammy writes in The Guardian, “at least 11 of them died on the streets of foreign countries where they were deported.” 

Needless to say, it is clear that neither the Home Office nor the Home Secretary’s priorities are concerned with “righting the wrongs” of Windrush. But we owe it to the Paulines, Nathaniels and Glorias out there, to ensure that the same bureaucracies that solicited their afflictions does not succeed today.

In this short piece Tavie Agama makes the case for the need to use African-Centered Psychology to understand and support African Diasporic and Continental peoples. Please read full post below.

BLAM UK is one of the few organisations in the UK ensuring the United Nations International Decade of African Descent is being celebrated and championed in the UK. The UK in 2014 failed to ratify the decade. One such important activity and aim of the decade is that it Urges States to ensure that textbooks and other educational materials reflect historical facts accurately as they relate to past tragedies and atrocities, in particular slavery, the slave trade, the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism, so as to avoid stereotypes and the distortion or falsification of these historical facts, which may lead to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, including the role of respective countries therein. 

On the 20th October 2020, The UK Equalities Minister made a statement to the effect of suggesting that racism is a debatable topic, not only is this a problematic stance, it suggests that racism and white supremacy are matters that do not exist in society. We refute any such claims from a Government that continues to produce and uphold policies that allow racial discrimination to thrive in all aspects of British society, including education. We know Black Caribbean students are 3x more likely to be excluded from school and Black students are routinely underpredicted in schools. Instead of the Minster to be creating and drafting potential policies to end these racist practices, she wants to censor the very notions that will help us in achieving a more fair, balanced and equitable society. 

The Minister’s stance is simply furthering the Government’s desire to effectively censor teachers ( a trend started by the Government’s recently drafted PSHE Guidance that is facing a legal challenge ).  By suggesting that it is illegal to present a fact as an actual fact, she is attempting to create a culture of politically motivated state-sanctioned censorship of anybody who is deemed to be “radical or left”.  It must be of note that a government minister (who is not a teacher and nor is she a judge) should not be allowed to state claims that are not in line with the UK’s international human rights obligations. The Minister’s stance is incompatible with the right to freedom of thought and also the UK’s obligation under the International Convention to End Racial Discrimination ( ICERD). Under ICERD Art.7- State Parties undertake to adopt immediate and effective measures, particularly in the fields of teaching, education, culture and information, with a view to combating prejudices which lead to racial discrimination and to promoting understanding, tolerance and friendship among nations and racial or ethnical groups, as well as to propagating the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and this Convention. The UK is obligated under international law to take immediate and effective measures in the field of teaching and one such effective measure is the teaching of Critical Race Theory.

If we look even closer to home at the UK’s Domestic laws on Equality and discrimination, we see the following under Equality Act 2010, s149 para 1 there is a  Public sector equality duty:

(1)A public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to—

(a)eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

(b)advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

(c)foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. 

The Minister’s stance again is not in line with the public sector equality duty that school must legally adhere too. It is important that Ministers, who do not have the function in society as Judges are not left to interpret the law and how it should be applied. We have a separation of powers in the UK and the minister must be reminded of this, as she takes the notion of asserting what is legal; even when this is not in line with UK’s international obligations and domestic law. 

In a year where we have revisited the historically and ongoing legacies of white supremacy, it is imperative that the UK government creates further guidance that supports its international human rights obligations.

We urge schools to resist this politically motivated sanction from the Government.  We ask them to further their pledge to eliminate racial discrimination and to adhere to the Equality Act 2010  Public Sector Duty–  and continue to rightfully teach narratives that assist in the fight to eliminate racial discrimination in all parts of society.

By Ife Thompson