Dear Claire,
As promised, I’m going to go further into the issues that are raised by the Tory’s plan to withdraw from the European Convention of Human Rights and repeal the UK’s Human Rights Act.
A lot of today’s material comes from the
excellent blog Kitty S Jones. There’s too much to publish on one day, so I’m
going to split this into two days’ worth. Having read through the article,
looking to condense and summarise various bits of it, I couldn’t find a single
thing I wanted to leave out, so I’m going to put it here verbatim. I've left the links from the original blog in this text, so people may read more behind the facts.
“We
ought to be very concerned about the government’s declaration that they intend
to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights, (ECHR) and
to repeal our own Human Rights Act, (HRA). One has to wonder what Cameron’s
discomfort with the HRA is. The Act, after all, goes towards protecting
the vulnerable from neglect of duty and abuse of power. The rights
protected by the HRA are drawn from the 1950 European convention on human
rights, which was a way of ensuring that we never again witness the full
horrors of the second world war, and overwhelmingly, one of the greatest
stains on the conscience of humanity – the Holocaust.
“Human
Rights establish a simple set of minimum standards of decency for humankind to
hold onto for the future. The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms was drafted as a lasting legacy of the struggle against fascism and
totalitarianism.
“What
kind of government would want those basic protections for citizens overturned?
“One
that doesn’t value or wish to uphold the universal protection of its citizens. From
the State.
“Last
month, a new report, Dignity and Opportunity for All: Securing the Rights of
Disabled People in the Austerity Era – Jane Young is the lead author – exposed the
Coalition’s failure to meet its international human rights obligations under
both the UN convention on the rights of people with disabilities (UNCRPD)
and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR).
“The
report – also published by the Just Fair Coalition, a consortium of 80 national charities
including Amnesty International, Save the Children, and Oxfam, says the UK is
in clear breach of its legal obligations. Support structures for many disabled people have
disappeared or are under threat as local authorities cut social care
budgets, whilst cuts to benefits will leave many disabled people
without crucial help for daily living.
“Jane
Campbell, a cross-bench peer who is disabled said: “It is both extremely
worrying and deeply sad that the UK – for so long regarded as an international
leader in protecting and promoting disabled people’s rights – now risks
sleepwalking towards the status of a systematic violator of these same rights.”
“The
UK Government seems to be the first to face such a high-level international
inquiry, initiated by the United Nations Committee because of “grave or
systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people. That ought to be a
source of shame for the Coalition, especially considering that this country was
once considered a beacon of human rights, we are (supposedly) a first-world
liberal democracy, and a very wealthy nation, yet our government behave like
tyrants towards
the most vulnerable citizens of the UK. As disability specialist, campaigner and
first class human rights activist Samuel Miller says: “Britain is [now] a retrograde society
and a flagrant violator of human rights—especially the rights of the sick and
disabled”.
“It’s
because of the sterling work of people such as Mr Miller that the UN are aware
of our dire situation, here in the UK.
“This
is a government who refuse
to undertake a cumulative impact assessment of their “reforms” and also continue to dismiss any evidence provided that challenges their own glib and
deceitful account as “anecdotal”. There’s more than one issue here, though it’s
plain that the government have no intention of addressing any of the terrible
consequences of their draconian policies, and use denial and stigmatising
others to deflect attention from their intents. I am reminded of Techniques of Neutralisation – a well known collection of tactics used to
justify prejudiced views and discriminatory actions.
"Another
related and important issue is that people’s qualitative experiences should
matter to any decent government, but the Coalition is far more concerned with
its persistent attempts at INVALIDATING those experiences, (such attempts
to invalidate and exclude the narrative of experiences of previously and
presently marginalised people is a hallmark of the oppressive, supremacist
condescension of historically powerful and privileged groups) – denying their
victims a voice and remedy. We know that this is not a democratic government
that serves its citizens and reflects their needs.
Thanks
to the sterling work of Dr Simon J Duffy, from the Centre for Welfare Reform,
amongst others, we know that the austerity measures in the UK have disproportionately affected those people with disabilities and their carers. Dr Duffy’s work on the
impact of the austerity cuts shows us that:
·
People
in poverty are targeted 5 times more
than most citizens
·
Disabled
people are targeted 9 times more
than most citizens
·
People
needing social care are targeted 19
times more than most citizens
Yet, this government claims a cumulative impact assessment is “too difficult and costly”, I suggest that they use their considerable publicly donated, tax-collected wealth to fund the work of the Centre for Welfare Reform, who managed to undertake this work without hitting the obstacles the government claims it has. This said, perhaps the findings are the real obstacle that the government are concerned about. Because those findings are damning, and tell us that the welfare “reforms” are NOT “fair” as claimed, and are causing harm, distress, hardships and sometimes, death. The grossly punitive, draconian “reforms” need to be repealed.
Part
two will be tomorrow. Bit of a shocker isn’t it?
Best
wishes,
Polly
No comments:
Post a Comment