Liz Truss' equalities speech removed from government site over Foucault reference
- Credit: BBC
Sections of Liz Truss' speech on inequality and discrimination in Britain has been removed from the government's website.
Critics have labelled the speech "bonkers" after the Tory minister claimed pupils at her school were unable to read or write because too much had been taken up learning about racism and sexism.
Truss went to school in Leeds under Margaret Thatcher's government.
After appearing in full yesterday on gov.uk, by Friday lunchtime large swathes of the speech had been cut and replaced with a note saying that "political content" had been redacted.
One redacted passage referred to a rant about French philosopher Michel Foucault. It read: "While we were taught about racism and sexism, there was too little time spent making sure everyone could read and write.
You may also want to watch:
"These ideas have their roots in postmodernist philosophy - pioneered by Foucault - that puts societal power structures and labels ahead of individuals and their endeavours.
"In this school of thought, there is no space for evidence, as there is no objective view - truth and morality are all relative.
- 1 Brexit regret: Meet the Leave voters who wish they hadn't voted Leave
- 2 Labour leader defends NHS after being kicked out of pub in Bath
- 3 Opposition parties push for probe into Boris Johnson's conduct following viral video
- 4 ‘I should not have listened to Cameron’ – Former European Commission president
- 5 Scottish Tory leader accused of 'nonsense' excuse for Boris Johnson avoiding Scotland
- 6 A chapter is over for Britain, for good or ill
- 7 Welsh government refused permission for legal challenge over post-Brexit bill
- 8 New research reveals half of Brexit supporters were not 'left behind' red-wall voters
- 9 Russell Kane: Why working class people like Boris Johnson
- 10 Annalena Baerbock: Can the Queen of Green seize the Bundestag?
"Rather than promote policies that would have been a game-changer for the disenfranchised like better education and business opportunities, there was a preference for symbolic gestures."
Officials have said the elements attacking Foucault and the "failed ideas of the Left" had been uploaded by accident.
Government resources are not allowed to be used for political campaigning.
A spokesperson for the Government Equalities Office told The Independent: "We are aware of the issue and have now updated gov.uk."
Liberal Democrat deputy leader and education spokesperson Daisy Cooper said: "Liz Truss's speech was utterly bonkers.
"To suggest that schools had to cut back on reading and writing in the 80s to teach children about the deep inequalities in our society is both absurd and deeply irresponsible."
Labour shadow cabinet DWP secretary Jonathan Reynolds commented: "I also went to a (not great) comprehensive school in the 1980s and the idea people were getting taught about racism rather than to read and write is absurd. Unless there was something very specific going on in Leeds I doubt this stands up at all."
Kamram Abbasi, who attended a comprehensive in Yorkshire during the 1980s, wrote on Twitter: "I don't recognise this nonsensical depiction. I never heard a word uttered about racism or sexism even though many of us experienced daily abuse and discrimination."
Another said: "Liz Truss is 45 years old. She lived under Tory governments from age 4 to 22. By the time she was at secondary school, they were imposing a National Curriculum. But, y'know, Michel Foucault got her anyway, the b*****d."
Another posted: "A woman who went to Oxford from a Leeds Comprehensive wonders why Leeds Comprehensives didn't teach pupils to read and write. Run that past me again, Liz."
Become a Supporter
The New European is proud of its journalism and we hope you are proud of it too. We believe our voice is important - both in representing the pro-EU perspective and also to help rebalance the right wing extremes of much of the UK national press. If you value what we are doing, you can help us by making a contribution to the cost of our journalism.