present II and gentlemen ladies of the
house I standing here with eight minutes
in my hands and this venerable another
magnificent institution I was going to
assure you that I belonged to the Henry
the eighth school of public speaking
that has Henry the eighth said to his
wives I shall not keep you long but now
finding myself but now finding myself
the seventh Speaker out of eight in what
must already seem a rather long evening
to you I rather feel like Henry the
eighth's last wife I more or less know
what's expected of me but I'm not sure
how to do it any differently
he'll perhaps what I should do is really
try and pay attention to the arguments
that were advanced by the opposition
today we had for example two richard
ottaway suggesting they challenging the
very idea that it could be argued that
the economic situation of the colonies
was actually worsened by the experience
of British colonialism when I stand to
offer you the Indian example Sir Richard
India's share of the world economy when
Britain arrived on its shores was 23% by
the time the British left it was down to
below 4% by simply because India had
been governed for the benefit of Britain
in Britain's rise for 200 years was
financed by its depredations in India in
fact Britain's Industrial Revolution was
actually premise upon the
deindustrialization of India the
handloom Weaver's for example famed
across the world whose products were
exported around the world
Britain came right in there were
actually these Weaver's making fine
muslin lighters woven air it was said
and Britain came right in smashed their
thumbs broke their looms imposed tariffs
and duties on their cloth and products
and started of course taking the raw
materials from India and shipping back
manufactured cloth flooding the world's
markets with what became the products of
the dark and satanic Mills of Victorian
England that meant that the Weaver's in
India became beggars and India went from
being
a world-famous exporter of finished
cloth into an importer went from having
27% of world trade - to less than 2%
meanwhile colonialists like robert clive
bought their rotten boroughs in england
on the proceeds of their loot in india
while taking the Hindi word loot into
their dictionaries as well as their
habits and the British had the gall to
call him Clive of India as if he
belonged to the country when all he
really did was to ensure that much of
the country belong to him
by the end of the 19th century the fact
is that India was already Britain's
biggest cash cow the world's biggest
purchaser of British goods and exports
and the source of highly paid employment
for British civil servants we literally
paid for our own oppression and as has
been pointed out the wealthy Victorian
British families that made their money
out of out of the slave economy
one-fifth of the of the elites above the
wealthy class in Britain in the 19th
century old their money to transporting
3 million Africans across the waters and
in fact in 1833 when slavery was
abolished what happened was that a
compensation of 20 million pounds was
paid not as reparations to those who had
lost their lives or or who had suffered
have been oppressed by slavery but to
those who had lost their property I was
struck by the fact that your Wi-Fi
password at this Union commemorates the
name of mr. Gladstone the great liberal
hero what I'm sorry his family was one
of those who benefited from the Stanford
staying with India between 15 and 29
million Indians died of starvation in
British induced famines the most famous
example of course was the Great Bengal
famine during the Second World War when
four million people died because Winston
Churchill deliberately as a matter of
written militant policy proceeded to
divert essential supplies from civilians
in Bengal to steady tummies and
Europeans as reserves stockpiles he said
that the starvation of anyway underfoot
underfed Bengalis mattered much less
than that of sturdy Greeks this is
Churchill's actual quote and when
conscious stricken British officials
wrote to him pointing out that people
were dying because of this decision he
peevishly wrote in the margins of the
file
why hasn't Gandhi died yet so all
notions that the British were trying to
do their colonial Enterprise out of
enlightened despotism to try and bring
the benefits of colonialism and
civilization to the bin knighted heathen
I'm sorry
Churchill's conduct in 43 simply one
example of many that gave a lie to this
myth as others have said on the
proposition violence and racism were the
reality of the colonial experience and
no wonder there the Sun never set on the
British Empire because even God couldn't
trust the English in the dark
let's retake world world 1 as a very
concrete example since the first speaker
mr. Lee suggested these things couldn't
be quantified
well let me quantify World War one for
you again I'm sorry from an Indian
perspective others have spoken of other
countries one-sixth of all the British
forces that fought on the war were
Indian 54,000 Indians actually lost
their lives in that war 65,000 were
wounded another 4,000 remained missing
or in prison Indian taxpayers had to
cough up a hundred million pounds in
that times money India supplied 70
million rounds of ammunition 600
thousand rifles and machine guns 42
million garments were stitched and sent
out of India and 1.3 million Indian
personnel served in this war I know all
this because of course the the
commemoration of the centenary has just
taken place but not just that India had
to supply a hundred and seventy three
seventy three thousand animals three
hundred and seventy million tons of
supplies and in the end the total value
of everything that was taken out of
India India and India but was suffering
from recession at that time and poverty
and hunger was in today's money
8 billion pounds in one quantification
it's available second world war it was
even worse two and a half million
Indians in uniform I won't belabor the
point but of Britain's total war debt of
three billion pounds in 1945 money 1.25
billion was owed to India and never
actually aid somebody mentioned Scotland
well fact is that colonialism actually
cemented your union with Scotland
you know the Scots had actually tried to
send colonies out before 1707 they'd all
failed I'm sorry to say but then of
course came Union and India was
available and there you had a
disproportionate employment of Scots
I'm sorry mr. Mackenzie has to speak
after me engaged in this colonial
enterprise as soldiers as merchants as
agencies employees and the earnings from
India is what brought prosperity to
Scotland even Paul
Paul Scotland out of poverty now that
India is no longer there no wonder the
bonds are loosening now we've heard
other arguments on this side there's
been a mention of the railways well let
me tell you first of all as my colleague
the Jamaican High Commissioners pointed
out railways and roads were really built
to serve British interests and not those
are the local people but I might add
that many countries have built railways
and roads without having had to be
colonized in order to do so and they
they were designed to carry raw
materials from the hinterland into the
ports to be shipped to Britain and the
fact is that the Indian or Jamaican or
other colonial public their needs were
incidental transportation there was no
attempt made to match supply to demand
for mass transport none whatsoever
instead in fact the Indian Railways were
built with massive incentives offered by
Britain to British investors guaranteed
out of Indian taxes paid by Indians with
the result that you actually had one
mile of Indian Railway costing twice
what it costs to build the same mile in
Canada or Australia because there was so
much money being paid in extravagant
returns Britain made all the profits
control the technology supplied all the
equipment and absolutely all these
benefits came as private enterprise
British private enterprise at public
risk Indian public risk that was the the
railways as an accomplishment we're
hearing about aid I think it was it was
it was again Sir Richard autumn he
mentioned British aid to India let me
just point out the British aid to India
is about 0.4% of India's GDP the
government of India actually spends more
on fertilizer subsidies which might be
an appropriate metaphor for that
argument if I may point out as well
if I may point out as well that that as
my fellow speakers from the proposition
that pointed out there have been
incidents of racial violence of loot of
massacres of bloodshed of transportation
in India's case even in one of our last
Mughal Emperor yes maybe today's Britons
are not responsible for some of these
depredations but the same speakers
appointed with pride to their foreign
aid you're not responsible for the
people starving in Somalia but we give
them aid surely the principle of
reparations for what is for the wrongs
that have been done cannot be denied
it's been pointed out for example the
dehumanization of Africans and the
Caribbean the massive psychological
damage that has been done the
undermining of social traditions of
property rights of the authority
structures of these societies all in the
interests of a British colonialism and
the fact remains that many of today's
problems in these countries including
the persistence in some cases the
creation of racial and ethnic and
religious tensions were the direct
result of the colonial experience so
there is a moral debt that needs to be
paid someone challenged reparations
elsewhere well I'm sorry Germany doesn't
just give reparations to Israel it also
gave reparations to Poland perhaps some
of the speakers here are too young to
remember the dramatic picture of
Chancellor Willy Brandt on his knees in
the Warsaw Ghetto in 1970 and there are
other examples there is italy's
reparations to libya
there's Japan's to Korea even Britain
has paid reparations to the New Zealand
Maori z-- so it's not as if this is
something unprecedented run harder
that's going to somehow open some sort
of nasty Pandora's box
no wonder professor Lewis reminded us
that he's from Texas there's a wonderful
expression in Texas that summarizes the
arguments of the opposition all hat and
no cattle now
if I can just quickly look through the
other notes I was scribbling while they
were speaking there was reference to
democracy and rule of law let me say
with the greatest possible respect you
can it's a bit rich to oppress enslave
kill torture maim people for 200 years
and then celebrate the fact that their
democratic at the end of it
we were denied democracy so we had to
snatch it seized it from you with the
greatest of reluctance it was conceded
in india's case after 150 years of
British rule and that - with limited
franchise yes indeed of liberty and
equality in that same name the Athenian
democracy was only functioning because
of the slave Society on which it was
built
that's the nature of colonization all
right I don't think that needs needs
contradiction not for me at any rate but
if I may just if I may just point out I
think the argument made by a couple of
the speakers the first speaker mr. Lee
in particular conceded all the evil
atrocities of colonialism but
essentially suggested that reparations
won't really help they won't help the
right people they be used as a
propaganda tool
they'll embolden people like mr. Mugabe
it's always nice how in the old days you
know I'm sorry to say that the people of
the Caribbean used to frighten their
children into behaving and Steven by
saying Sir Francis Drake would come
after them that was a legacy now its
Mugabe will be their history this is the
the new sort of Sir Francis Drake of our
times the fact is the fact is very
simply sir that we are not talking about
reparations as a tool to empower anybody
they're a tool for you to atone for the
wrongs that have been done and I I am
quite prepared to accept the proposition
that you can't evaluate put a put a
monetary sum on the kinds of Horrors
people have suffered certainly no amount
of money can experience the loss of a
loved one as somebody pointed out there
you're not going to be able to figure
out an exact amount but the principle is
what matters the fact is that to speak
lightly of sacrifices on both sides as
analogy was used here a burglar comes
into a house ransacked the place stubs
his toe and you say well he there was a
sacrifice on both sides that I'm sorry
to say is not unacceptable is not an
acceptable argument
the truth is that we are not arguing
specifically that vast sums of money
need to be paid the proposition before
this house is the principle of owing
reparations not the fine points of how
much is owed - how much should be paid
the question is is there a debt does
Britain all reparations as far as I'm
concerned the ability to acknowledge a
wrong that has been done to simply say
sorry will go a far far far longer way
than some percentage of GDP in in inform
in the form of aid what is required it
seems to me is accepting the principle
that reparations are owed personally I'd
be quite happy if it was one pound a
year for the next 200 years after the
last 200 years of Britain and India
thank you very much madam president
[Applause]
welcome back now earlier Rajdeep
Sardesai consulting editor of the TV
today network spoke to Congress leader
Shashi Tharoor on our primetime show
news today at 9:00 on his speech at the
Oxford Union that has now gone viral
Congress MP from Thiruvananthapuram
former Minister of State for external
affairs shiteru appreciate your joining
us I see the rule water wonderful
tour-de-force speech at the Oxford Union
pity that you can't make it here in
poverty pity that you can't make it here
in government in fact in fact we are
running it starts another subtlety in
fact we are running a story today
suggesting that you've been pulled up
because you questioned the Congress's
strategy of not debating issues inside
Parliament and Sonia Gandhi is upset
with you that you are leaking this
outside to the media well I I think all
of you are quite aware that I don't leak
if I have anything to say I say it
openly and I don't talk about what's
being discussed behind closed doors so
can we move on to another subject okay
so Sonia Gandhi didn't pull you all up
right is that what you are saying I'm
saying that I don't comment on anything
that happens behind closed doors okay
Shashi they're arriving your smile
reveals a lot but let's focus on the
Oxford Union speech for a moment 15
minutes and really a devastating speech
to silence
caleon you know the the colonialists the
the the British Empire completely
silenced by your speech there at the
Oxford Union you got loud applause every
time you questioned the issue of a moral
debt that Britain needs to pay for 200
years of of ruling India was how long
did it take you to put this speech
together well I mean these are things
that frankly I've read and studied for
some time I am an undergraduate honors
degree holder in history and I've also
personally passionate about the subject
but when this topic was offered by the
Oxford Union I did do a little bit of
research and revising particularly when
it came to some of the numbers on the
first world war that's fairly recent
research made possible by all the amount
of stuff that's out there now during
this in theory of the first world war
yeah it took me a little while to put it
all together but the basic diagnosis as
it were of the problem is one I've
shared since my undergraduate days what
were you surprised with the kind of
applause you were getting every time you
were questioning the manner in which the
British Raj ruled India as you sort of
came up with critique after critique and
virtually demolished British icons
including Sir Winston Churchill the fact
was you were there was thunder us
applause were you surprised with that at
the Oxford Union to some degree I mean I
must say I enjoy persuading audiences to
react positively and I do try and win
them over as much as I can including
through through humor so to that degree
it was gratifying and I'm not sure I can
say I was totally surprised but what I
must say did surprise me was how the the
people on the other side who included
the chairman of the British
parliamentary committee on Foreign
Affairs Roger Ottaway and a couple of
very eminent historians who had received
the highest decorations possible in the
UK how they reacted not only at the time
but subsequently they have all been in
touch to say very kind things so I must
say it is a tribute to the British sense
of of a fair play I suppose that they
actually acknowledged a good argument
when it was made and respected it and I
am surprised and impressed my life at
one level though are you disappointed
that maybe you would find it much more
difficult to make a similar speech let's
say in this country if you were to - -
in somewhere maybe you know passes a
similar scathing indictment of of India
in some way in this country of the way
in which we treat our poor for a for
example if you were to do a similar
debate in India do you believe it's
possible to do it and would you get the
same kind of response the same kind of
viral applause that your speech is
getting in from Oxford well rowdy but
the trick is in the words similar this
was a cause which obviously most Indians
identify with when you scratch us and
you'll find the nationalist we all are
and to that degree therefore what I said
struck a chord with Indians
whereas
anything that is a critique of our own
country will immediately polarize
opinion I had the privilege in
Parliament to making an equally
passionate speech on the juvenile
justice bill which obviously has not
even had a fraction of the hits that
this particular one has had but where I
tried to make an eloquent argument about
justice in our country so I've tried it
at least the forum is there in
Parliament but obviously the the the
reaction and the audience is not the
same in a sense you're saying you tapped
into nationalism I find that interesting
because over the last few years we've
had a very polarized debate in this
country as to who is nationalist and
who's anti national do you believe in a
sense you were sending out a message
perhaps to your critics perhaps who see
us we see you as a lawyer
Sonia congressman and therefore QED
anti-national pseudo secular and someone
who doesn't wave the Indian tricolour in
the manner that you should well I mean
that's exactly the problem is that one
particular political tendency in our
country appears to have been persuaded
itself that it has kind of cornered the
market on Indian nationalism which is
simply not true I mean first of all much
of the early diagnosis of colonial ills
came from members of Indian National
Congress in fact going back to our seed
up in the 19th century and of course
most remarkably Gandhiji and narrow
narrows discovery of India is a
pertinent analysis of not just what
India's all about what the British had
done to it and the lot of Indian
nationalism was articulated first by
people within the Congress party I serve
as an accomplice watching something that
was another Congress party though may I
say that a very different audience money
to the Congress party of today we do
apologies look now there is a linear
descent to the Congress party of today
obviously the traditions we hark back to
are the same ones and the fundamental
political diagnosis is not different
I've had one piece of particular
gratifications I've been congratulated
by politicians from all sides of the
house both BJP and Congress have either
written to me or come up to me to say
how happy they were with the speech and
that has been particularly gratifying
and I think you'll find that even on
Vidia which is such a polarized forum
some of the people who attack me the
rest of the time have paused in their
attacks to applaud what I had to say
here
so clearly the national cause is one on
which I think we all tend to unite and
that may explain why it's why it's got
the kind of traction it has that's a
huge achievement to win over your
critics on Twitter and social media but
a final word who actually won the debate
did y'all actually did did you who ender
and and the Jamaican High Commissioner
and all on your side win the debate or
did the Colonials win the debate in the
end now we wanted overwhelmingly Rousey
be wanted by something like 189 votes to
56 and they sort of shrank dinner that
followers was actually delayed because
they booked in lobbies that if they go
to march through a particular door and
there were too many people marching
through the yes door so they had to hold
up events afterwards because there's so
many wanted to support us it really went
very well and what's interesting is it
was a very overwhelmingly British
audience obviously as it would be at
Oxford with some smattering of
foreigners and and and and and very few
Indian so clearly the overall reaction
of the audience in Oxford was very much
along the lines of what we've
subsequently seen on social media where
an overwhelmingly Indian audience I
think has been applauding it and now
you're you're back in India with all the
disruptions in Parliament and no
opportunity for you to give a speech mr.
Joshi the rule with do apologies that's
exactly what tells us you've got to go
to Oxford well you know the PT 3 taught
us for 10 years
the BJP taught us for 10 years that you
should disrupt Parliament and appear in
the television studios and that seems to
be what we're doing right now isn't it
Ronnie
I see so it's tit for tat in a way I'm
not asking you though about the anymore
about the Sonia Gandhi controversy you
seem to be unwilling to tell us whether
she's pulled you up or not but you seem
to be smiling and reason despite your
videos gone viral thanks very much
Shashi Tarun for for the wonderful
speech that you gave at the Oxford Union
thank you very much Thank You Rosie