A sleeping nation

Philip Pullman (of His Dark Materials fame) wrote an opinion piece in the Times on Friday 27th February. Rather strangely that piece now appears to have vanished from the Times website, but a number of other website have quoted pieces of his comment on the internet to preserve it. A friend of mine managed to find a website with the full, unedited piece originally published in the Times.

Lest it be lost yet again, Here is the full text of Philip's article:

Philip Pullman

Are such things done on Albion’s shore?

The image of this nation that haunts me most powerfully is that of the sleeping giant Albion in William Blake’s prophetic books. Sleep, profound and inveterate slumber: that is the condition of Britain today.

We do not know what is happening to us. In the world outside, great events take place, great figures move and act, great matters unfold, and this nation of Albion murmurs and stirs while malevolent voices whisper in the darkness - the voices of the new laws that are silently strangling the old freedoms the nation still dreams it enjoys.

We are so fast asleep that we don’t know who we are any more. Are we English? Scottish? Welsh? British? More than one of them? One but not another? Are we a Christian nation - after all we have an Established Church - or are we something post-Christian? Are we a secular state? Are we a multifaith state? Are we anything we can all agree on and feel proud of?

The new laws whisper:

You don’t know who you are
You’re mistaken about yourself
We know better than you do what you consist of, what labels apply to you, which facts about you are important and which are worthless
We do not believe you can be trusted to know these things, so we shall know them for you
And if we take against you, we shall remove from your possession the only proof we shall allow to be recognised

The sleeping nation dreams it has the freedom to speak its mind. It fantasises about making tyrants cringe with the bluff bold vigour of its ancient right to express its opinions in the street. This is what the new laws say about that:

Expressing an opinion is a dangerous activity
Whatever your opinions are, we don’t want to hear them
So if you threaten us or our friends with your opinions we shall treat you like the rabble you are
And we do not want to hear you arguing about it
So hold your tongue and forget about protesting
What we want from you is acquiescence

The nation dreams it is a democratic state where the laws were made by freely elected representatives who were answerable to the people. It used to be such a nation once, it dreams, so it must be that nation still. It is a sweet dream.

You are not to be trusted with laws
So we shall put ourselves out of your reach
We shall put ourselves beyond your amendment or abolition
You do not need to argue about any changes we make, or to debate them, or to send your representatives to vote against them
You do not need to hold us to account
You think you will get what you want from an inquiry?
Who do you think you are?
What sort of fools do you think we are?

The nation’s dreams are troubled, sometimes; dim rumours reach our sleeping ears, rumours that all is not well in the administration of justice; but an ancient spell murmurs through our somnolence, and we remember that the courts are bound to seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and we turn over and sleep soundly again.

And the new laws whisper:

We do not want to hear you talking about truth
Truth is a friend of yours, not a friend of ours
We have a better friend called hearsay, who is a witness we can always rely on
We do not want to hear you talking about innocence
Innocent means guilty of things not yet done
We do not want to hear you talking about the right to silence
You need to be told what silence means: it means guilt
We do not want to hear you talking about justice
Justice is whatever we want to do to you
And nothing else

Are we conscious of being watched, as we sleep? Are we aware of an ever-open eye at the corner of every street, of a watching presence in the very keyboards we type our messages on? The new laws don’t mind if we are. They don’t think we care about it.

We want to watch you day and night
We think you are abject enough to feel safe when we watch you
We can see you have lost all sense of what is proper to a free people
We can see you have abandoned modesty
Some of our friends have seen to that
They have arranged for you to find modesty contemptible
In a thousand ways they have led you to think that whoever does not want to be watched must have something shameful to hide
We want you to feel that solitude is frightening and unnatural
We want you to feel that being watched is the natural state of things

One of the pleasant fantasies that consoles us in our sleep is that we are a sovereign nation, and safe within our borders. This is what the new laws say about that:

We know who our friends are
And when our friends want to have words with one of you
We shall make it easy for them to take you away to a country where you will learn that you have more fingernails than you need
It will be no use bleating that you know of no offence you have committed under British law
It is for us to know what your offence is
Angering our friends is an offence

It is inconceivable to me that a waking nation in the full consciousness of its freedom would have allowed its government to pass such laws as the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), the Crime and Disorder Act (1998), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000), the Terrorism Act (2000), the Criminal Justice and Police Act (2001), the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Extension Act (2002), the Criminal Justice Act (2003), the Extradition Act (2003), the Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003), the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act (2004), the Civil Contingencies Act (2004), the Prevention of Terrorism Act (2005), the Inquiries Act (2005), the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005), not to mention a host of pending legislation such as the Identity Cards Bill, the Coroners and Justice Bill, and the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

Inconceivable.

And those laws say:

Sleep, you stinking cowards
Sweating as you dream of rights and freedoms
Freedom is too hard for you
We shall decide what freedom is
Sleep, you vermin
Sleep, you scum.

Philip Pullman will deliver a keynote speech at the Convention on Modern Liberty at the Institute of Education in London tomorrow

Let the pregnant lady rant

I consider myself to have been very lucky in my pregnancy. We conceived very quickly, the first month of trying; I had no real morning sickness to speak of; I've had no problems with any of my routine tests; I've had no piles or constipation; very few stretch marks, and those I have I really don't mind; and I've gained very little weight. My only two physical complaints are lack of sleep since about 20 weeks; and fainting.

The sleep deprivation is exhausting and frustrating. But I'm living with it and only really complain to my loving husband who is always there when I'm tossing and turning.

The fainting... now that is scary. Each time it had happened I was lucky to be sat down and have warning that it was happening. I would get nauseas, then dizzy with an extreme thirst, followed by a dulling of the senses, primarily echoing hearing, like being under water. Then everything would go black for a few seconds and the world began to come back into focus. I would find myself sweating and shaking but otherwise fine within 30 seconds.

On each occasion I have had someone with me, although on the second occasion it was two Virgin Media engineers who were installing our cable TV and broadband! I felt it begin and quickly phoned my mum, asking her to get over quickly, which she did, shortly after I had blanked while sat at the dining table, the engineers oblivious. Although alarming each time it happened, I had mentioned it to my midwife and GP, had my blood pressure checked and that was fine, I showed no signs of anaemia in my blood tests at 28 weeks and was advised that it probably just a normal feature of pregnancy for me.

After it had happened four times I felt almost expert in it and it didn't worry me much before or after the fact, but that didn't stop it being frightening while it actually happened though.

The fifth time, the most recent, it was a bit different. The normal "rules" didn't apply. I had been stood queueing in the post office for about twenty minutes and despite the snow on the ground outside I had a sudden hot flush. I'd heard my pregnant friends laughing about their hot flushes and when offered a seat I declined it, saying I was fine. Andy and I then drove up to the Co-Op a mile up the road to pick up cat food and as we got out of the car I even expressed the fact that I felt very thirsty, but didn't think anything of it.

We dashed through the busy supermarket to pick up the food and I decided I had to have chocolate, so we went in search of it. While trying to choose between Co-Op own or Divine I suddenly felt the usual signs, nausea and dizziness and I reached for Andy and told him I needed to sit down. But we were in the middle of the shop, with no handy stool or staff member nearby and as I took a step to go in search of a seat I dropped to the floor. Andy had hold of me, so was able to guide me down and I wasn't harmed.

My senses returned and I was slightly surprised at being on the floor, Andy was rubbing my back and telling me to breathe. I was very frightened. I had never collapsed like that before, having always already been seated and I felt I was going to cry. I just wanted to get back to the car. People were looking, but no one came forward to show concern and I felt hurt at that.

Andy got me to my feet and reluctantly gave me the car key and let me go on my own while he paid. I was fine in moments, but still shaken by the experience.

When we got home I posted the events for my "bump buddies" to read, I got a fairly typical response: concern and well wishes. Apart from one poster, who instead chose to joke that she would faint at co-op prices too.

This joke stung me on two levels, firstly the utter lack of concern for my feelings; this experience was frightening and not something I consider to be a laughing matter; but also on a less personal level. A slight on one of my favourite shops, one of very, very few in the country deserving of respect.

So here begins my rant.

I can't honestly lay blame at the door of the average British consumer. Although some do turn a blind eye to things, most are blissfully ignorant and in a way I envy them. They don't look too closely at what they are buying, don't think too much about where their purchases come from and look mainly for the best bargain. And I don't blame them. We live in expensive and uncertain times, although the current financial crisis is a new development and most people already had firm shopping habits that have barely changed in the last six months.

No, I lay the blame at the door of the supermarkets and big brands for perpetuating the myth that food is cheap.

Every consumer has a budget and there is a supermarket in this country to suit every budget. People shop where they feel they can afford to and for the vast majority of people in the UK this means Tesco or ASDA. In these stores the average consumer shows firm brand loyalty, buying the same products week in, week out, the cheapest option, or the most well-known option. People blindly pick up a jar of Nescafe, a bottle Coca-Cola and their 2-for-1 supermarket own brand offers.

Consumers go on in the assumtion that this is what their shopping costs and they don't like it when prices increase and they really don't like it when faced with an alternative store that charges more. "It's a rip off!", "How do they justify those prices?!", "I'll stick with what I know, thanks."

They don't realise the real cost of luxuries and even the basics.

For as long as Andy and I have lived, and shopped together (about 8 years) we have always only bought fair trade varieties of certain products; coffee, tea, sugar, chocolate and bananas and whenever we see a major store selling a fair trade cotten garment we buy one, to show our support for their effort to introduce the concept to the British public. To us, these prices are normal, not high, they are realistic. I don't begrudge paying £1 for a big bar of chocolate when I know that no one is being exploited for my indulgence. Some products are luxuries, despite how commonplace they are in this part of the world. Products grown and shipped in from far flung places so that we can have them all year around; and sadly, most consumers don't realise that the prices they are used to paying come at the very great expense of the people who produce the goods, just so we can have our fix.

It isn't just luxuries though. The price of bread has doubled in the last ten years because there is a massive international wheat shortage. The price of rice has similarly sky rocketted in recent years also because of shortages. Bottled water comes at a high premium thanks to the exploitation of the sources by the big corporations. And we don't have to look to the majority world (Asia, South America and Africa) for exploitation of the producers by the supermarkets. We have a failing agricultural industry in this country, that is heavily subsidised in order to prop it up, because of the stupidly low prices that farmers are forced to sell at in order to compete.

The British meat and vegetables people buy, comfortable in the knowledge that they are eating the right things and within their budget too (!) are crippling a valuable industry here at home. If only the supermarkets would pay a fair price for these products and pass that cost, in part, on to the consumer so that everyone has realistic expectations of the cost of their groceries.

The rather disturbing truth is that the big supermarkets can actually afford to eat the real cost of these products, without passing a single penny on to the consumer. £1 in £7 pounds spent in the UK is spent in Tesco. The global financial crisis does not seem to have dented their record profits.

ASDA is owned by American giant Walmart. By shopping there you save £££, while the staff are afraid to take a single sick day or make the smallest whisper about the fact that they do not have a union without fear of dismissal. Never mind the conditions that the manufacturing of George clothing imposes upon the Chinese factory workers, many of whom are little children.

I can't claim to be a saint. We shop at Sainsbury's, a company that scored a mere 3.5 out of 20 on Ethiscore, compared to the highest scoring supermarket, Waitrose, who still only managed 8/20. We try, but aren't totally cruelty free in our house. I know our toothpaste is tested on animals; this is in part because of my extreme fussiness in the taste of toothpaste! But also as a compromise, the alternative is to mail order a cruelty free product. What would that do to our carbon footprint?! But we boycott the worst offenders; Unilever, Glaxo Smith Klyne and Johnson & Johnson, all of whom not only test on animals but also have appalling human rights violations to their names.

I won't even start on the activities of Nestle or Coca-Cola. My main rant on this ocassion is aimed at the irresponsibility of the supermarkets in misleading consumers as to the real cost of their shopping. Fair trade options across more product lines, such as meat and vegetables would be a good start, although at present this can't change as the governing bodies, FLO-CERT and FLO International will not certify anything produced in the EU on the rather misplaced assumtion that EU producers always get a fair price for their goods. But the supermarkets don't have to wait for this to change, there is nothing to stop them paying their suppliers a fair price anyway.

The truth is that the more people who buy these products, the more everyone benefits; producers, stores and consumers. The more the real cost of things is accepted, the better off we all are.