GCXZ

In Khartoum, I heard much later of a Sudanese father who had faced the dilemma of tahoor. Sophisticated and highly educated, he had practised as a surgeon in the US. While there, his wife gave birth to a daughter and when the baby was a few days old, he circumcised her himself in his own operating theatre.

When the family returned to Sudan, his English friends were horrified. How could a supposedly civilised man do such a thing – to his own daughter? He insisted that he was as much against tahoor as they were – but what would they have done in his place? He could have done nothing, but he knew that back in Sudan, the womenfolk would be waiting to pounce. True, he could have ordered them to leave his daughter alone. But although it is a male-dominated society, the old ladies would have taken no notice, insisting: "This is women's business."

Sooner or later, they would have taken the little girl out on to the sand where she would have been cut with no anaesthetic by an ignorant old woman using a germ-ridden razor and causing the maximum mutilation. Or he could do it himself, in sterile conditions, with an anaesthetic and the minimum damage to the child.

The hard choice that Sudanese father faced is echoed by MPs on the International Development Committee in their report today. The committee, chaired by Lib Dem Sir Malcolm Bruce, says 140 million girls and women worldwide have suffered from the "harrowing practice". The UK Government has launched a £35 million programme to help address the abuse internationally.

But there is a problem. For the report points out that in the UK itself, "at least 20,000 girls are at risk" of being cut while a further 66,000 live with the impact of such abuse on their health and wellbeing. Britain is a former colonial power, and as Sir Malcolm says: "The UK's international leadership is weakened by its failure to address violence within its own borders… Robust action should be taken to counter political correctness and address culturally sensitive practice such as female genital mutilation within the UK."

Indeed – but all too often robust action has been lacking. The cutting of girls has been illegal here since 1985, yet there has not been a single prosecution. Admittedly the difficulties are great. It's not just political correctness: how do you persuade a child of six or seven to testify against her family? Yet, as the MPs say, much more could be done if there were a Whitehall-wide plan to take tougher action.

The Home Office has "guidelines" for professional groups, and barriers to prosecutions are being reviewed. But what we need is a more concerted effort involving teachers, doctors and social workers. Why are not all girls medically examined to see if they have been cut, as happens in France? Why are midwives not obliged to report new mothers who have been cut, with a follow-up investigation by the authorities?

Britain may be a multicultural society, but there are some things that are simply unacceptable. If this report, coming as it does after a series of paedophile scandals, can galvanise government into more resolute action, then it must be warmly welcomed.