Kathryn Stone OBE,
Commissioner for Parliamentary Standards
House of Commons
Communication by Email
“General Debate on the persecution of Muslims, Christians and other minority groups in India, 12th January 2021, Fiona Bruce, Stephen Timms and others.
I write as a British citizen and would like to bring to your attention the above event presented as a “General Debate”, about which myself and my family have great concerns.
Firstly, a debate has a motion which is presented in a forum in which opposing sides of the issue have an opportunity to present evidence and facts which have been presented to them either by their constituents or other independent reliable credible sources. When the Chamber has had a fair and thorough exploration of all aspects of the motion, a vote is taken upon the motion and a consensus and policy direction determined. In this manner all voices are heard and the focus is firmly on the well being of all British Citizens, with due regard to the Human Rights and Equalities Legislation, domestic and International. This “debate” does appear to be already prejudiced and architected without due concern for diversity of opinion and background.
I have observed that of late, both Chambers have on occasion become little more than platforms for vested interests to leverage Parliamentary privilege for the thinly veiled persecution and incitement of hatred of British minority communities and other Democratic nations, disproportionately Israel and recently, India.
The Hindu community suffered 800 years of very well documented Islamist violence (with many historical sources being themselves Islamic scholars), followed by almost 300 years of English, Scottish and Irish Christianist colonial violence and horrific human rights abuses, again well documented. It’s only recently that the indigenous population of India has begun the journey of recovery, to stand up from being on its knees, emotionally, economically and indeed civilisationally.
India’s neck has been under the knee of Christian evangelical barbarity for almost 300 years, 300 years of almost 80 million George Floyds.
The Anglican occupiers of India dismembered the ancestrally Hindu nation “transforming” the North Western limb into “Pakistan” where the Hindu population has been decimated from 23% to 3% with unceasing reports of daily atrocities. The same Anglican occupiers transformed the eastern borders into East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) where academic surveys and reports presented to the US Congress established that there is a missing demographic, a vanished population of 49 million Hindus.
If we add the loss of Hindu lives, directly attributable to the decisions of British Anglicans we arrive at a figure of almost 150 million Hindu souls lost, without taking into account the loss of life during and following the two World Wars where the contribution of Hindus and Indians was pivotal, and where an unacknowledged debt still exists.
Bearing this inconvenient Anglican-Hindu history in mind, the “debate” is inflammatory on a breathtakingly ignorant scale. The debate seems to be little more than an exercise in Hinduodium, an incitement to hatred of Hindus, and I would like to assert that this debate is a gross abuse of Parliamentary Standards. Its 2021 and our British society is facing heightened mental, and emotional challenges – it is vital that our taxpayer funded public servants must be held to a higher standard. I feel strongly that old fashioned “missionary proselytization by vilification of the heathen” is not the purpose for which our allegedly secular Parliamentary platforms are to be made available. Parliamentary privilege is diminished in this manner, such abuse must not be permitted.
I and many more Hindus, British and international, will be watching the debate, keen to audit the data and evidence, as well as to establish the validity of the no doubt large numbers of constituents who in times of COVID, multiple Sexual Abuse enquiries and an unprecedented economic downturn, have pressed their Members of Parliament to speak out against India and Hindus.
I would be grateful if you could note this as a formal complaint that these MP’s are in breach of the Parliamentary Standards and the Code of Conduct and hope that this issue receives your earliest attention.
I forward to hearing from you with regard to this “debate” and your thoughts on the actions, statements and behaviour of these Members of Parliament.
Stephen Timms MP