Being first in something, is not always the best. The UK government appears to have become the first country to face a high-level inquiry by a United Nations committee, as a result of “grave or systemic violations” of the rights of disabled people.
The committee has the power to launch an inquiry if it receives “reliable information” that such violations have been committed by a country signed up to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and its optional protocol.
No he doesn't, grow up stop and posting such unfounded and unsubstantiated piffle.
Actually most of the things IDS says and does very helpfully illustrate his personality.
He has proven himself to be very nasty, narcissistic and devious.
I can see precisely what Tassium is saying and can see how somebody like IDS could end up as an authoritarian dictator in a different situation.
He has an actual military background as well IIRC, which just cements the point. It's a mix of traits which should be a big red flag and it's almost stunning that this person is in charge of social welfare reform.
The government say it's "politically motivated". This is the United Nations they are talking about...
The sad truth is, most of the government's changes were politically motivated and nothing else. They were all done around ideology at an expense to everything else.
Once again we see the accuser being the very thing they are accusing others of.
How long before the Tories call for a referendum on UN membership? I'd wager Grant Shaops is oenni g the letter to the UN Secretary General as we speak.
You know how grim things are if the UN has to intervene and become the voice for the disabled in a supposed 21st century first world country.
How does this country compare to most other countries? And people still insist it's not politically motivated.
Doesn't matter about other countries, it's what is done in this country that is the issue. If similar happens elsewhere, they can instigate the same procedure.
I have always said that, sadly, cuts had to be made in every area of spending and this meant that a large number of genuine disabled claimants would be hit. However, I do believe that some of the policies are very unfair and some of the rhetoric from ministers has been disgraceful, as all the evidence shows that the vast majority of claimants are genuine.
I see no issue in the UN investigating whether we are complying with our duties under the UNCRPD as we ratified it (and its optional protocol). I will not pre-judge their conclusions as some unfair policies does not necessarily equate to the UK breaching its obligations under the UNCRPD, but it will be interesting to hear what they say (assuming that this investigation is definitely happening) not just on the effects of government policies but on the chaos that the government (and its corporate welfare friends) have caused in the ESA and PIP assessment systems with their staggering incompetence and arrogance.
The ranting Tories in the Mail article make me laugh and it is no surprise to see Philip Davies getting his facts wrong. The £50bn figure includes both disability and sickness spending and that (as a percentage of GDP) does not put us in the top 6 in the OECD's latest figures. It should also be remembered that those OECD figures are 5 years old so we don't know the current position, with cuts for working age disabled people coming from many potential angles, not just re benefits but also re social care. The continuing refusal of the government to do a cumulative impact assessment is very telling.
Given that it is working age disabled people that are facing the very severe cuts I think it is now important to differentiate spending between those of working age and pensioners so that we can see the true effect of the cuts.
20,000 kids die daily from disease and malnutrition and the UN is stressed cos Britain's welfare state isn't generous enough when it's in fact far more generous than that in 90 per cent of the world.
Time these bureaucrats got their priorities sorted out!
20,000 kids die daily from disease and malnutrition and the UN is stressed cos Britain's welfare state isn't generous enough when it's in fact far more generous than that in 90 per cent of the world.
Time these bureaucrats got their priorities sorted out!
Exactly! If the UK's overly generous welfare state is deemed not to be generous enough, then the rest of the world will have to raise their benefits. Which will be a good thing as people will then move to other countries for benefits and remove that burden from the UK:D
but on the chaos that the government (and its corporate welfare friends) have caused in the ESA and PIP assessment systems with their staggering incompetence and arrogance.
The ranting Tories in the Mail article make me laugh.
Laugh all you like. It was Labour who brought in medicals for claimants and gave the contract to ATOS. This government agreed with Labour and have carried on their work.
Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government. How do you think this government managed to get the changes through parliament so easily?
This government carried on their welfare changes work, but also closed all the easy visa routes Labour invented for those immigrants that aren't skilled at anything much.
It's too easy to say it's politically motivated but for sure something has triggered this inquiry and the other comments from the UN. It's possible that's it's just part of an ongoing process, but personally I find that hard to believe, if only for the reason that confidential information is being aired so publicly. It would be interesting to find out exactly what's behind this; I hope some enterprising journalist starts digging.
This is a very strange position by the UN. They need to explain themselves.
There's a lot of disbelief from all quarters about this, when considering the UK pretty much leads the world in disability benefit and care.
With all that's going on in the world, they run the risk of making themselves look quite foolish here. I wonder what's really bugging them about the UK?
No he doesn't, grow up stop and posting such unfounded and unsubstantiated piffle.
A man who seems to believe that God told him to do it, is not very well balanced. He ignores facts, even when his own department tell him not to lie, the government's own statistic watchdog has told him off for lying and he can't answer simple questions about "how many....." It's not looking good for his mental health.
Actually most of the things IDS says and does very helpfully illustrate his personality.
He has proven himself to be very nasty, narcissistic and devious.
I can see precisely what Tassium is saying and can see how somebody like IDS could end up as an authoritarian dictator in a different situation.
He has an actual military background as well IIRC, which just cements the point. It's a mix of traits which should be a big red flag and it's almost stunning that this person is in charge of social welfare reform.
If not for Michael Howard, it could have been a lot worse.
Laugh all you like. It was Labour who brought in medicals for claimants and gave the contract to ATOS. This government agreed with Labour and have carried on their work.
Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government. How do you think this government managed to get the changes through parliament so easily?
This government carried on their welfare changes work, but also closed all the easy visa routes Labour invented for those immigrants that aren't skilled at anything much.
Labour may have started bringing ATOS in but the Tories extended the contract. PIP is a Tory led benefit. Don't blame Labour for everything. The Tories are in power and are to blame.
Laugh all you like. It was Labour who brought in medicals for claimants and gave the contract to ATOS. This government agreed with Labour and have carried on their work.
Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government. How do you think this government managed to get the changes through parliament so easily?
This government carried on their welfare changes work, but also closed all the easy visa routes Labour invented for those immigrants that aren't skilled at anything much.
But it was the Tories who changed the criteria and lowered the bar for the qualification and experience of those doing the assessments.
Labour who haven't been in power for 4.5years...
So now the UN are lefty-loonies, in the union pocket, out-to-get the sensible Conservative party because they just HATE them and their Conservative ways!
Incidentally this will really harm the LibDems, even more than they already are harmed I mean.
Comments
I have to say that IDS does come across like one of those crazed dictators sometimes. He has the same personality traits.
No he doesn't, grow up stop and posting such unfounded and unsubstantiated piffle.
Duncan Smith has no redeeming features at all.
The committee has the power to launch an inquiry if it receives “reliable information” that such violations have been committed by a country signed up to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and its optional protocol.
Actually most of the things IDS says and does very helpfully illustrate his personality.
He has proven himself to be very nasty, narcissistic and devious.
I can see precisely what Tassium is saying and can see how somebody like IDS could end up as an authoritarian dictator in a different situation.
He has an actual military background as well IIRC, which just cements the point. It's a mix of traits which should be a big red flag and it's almost stunning that this person is in charge of social welfare reform.
The sad truth is, most of the government's changes were politically motivated and nothing else. They were all done around ideology at an expense to everything else.
Once again we see the accuser being the very thing they are accusing others of.
You know how grim things are if the UN has to intervene and become the voice for the disabled in a supposed 21st century first world country.
Doesn't matter about other countries, it's what is done in this country that is the issue. If similar happens elsewhere, they can instigate the same procedure.
It's not a game of snap...
I see no issue in the UN investigating whether we are complying with our duties under the UNCRPD as we ratified it (and its optional protocol). I will not pre-judge their conclusions as some unfair policies does not necessarily equate to the UK breaching its obligations under the UNCRPD, but it will be interesting to hear what they say (assuming that this investigation is definitely happening) not just on the effects of government policies but on the chaos that the government (and its corporate welfare friends) have caused in the ESA and PIP assessment systems with their staggering incompetence and arrogance.
The ranting Tories in the Mail article make me laugh and it is no surprise to see Philip Davies getting his facts wrong. The £50bn figure includes both disability and sickness spending and that (as a percentage of GDP) does not put us in the top 6 in the OECD's latest figures. It should also be remembered that those OECD figures are 5 years old so we don't know the current position, with cuts for working age disabled people coming from many potential angles, not just re benefits but also re social care. The continuing refusal of the government to do a cumulative impact assessment is very telling.
Given that it is working age disabled people that are facing the very severe cuts I think it is now important to differentiate spending between those of working age and pensioners so that we can see the true effect of the cuts.
20,000 kids die daily from disease and malnutrition and the UN is stressed cos Britain's welfare state isn't generous enough when it's in fact far more generous than that in 90 per cent of the world.
Time these bureaucrats got their priorities sorted out!
Exactly! If the UK's overly generous welfare state is deemed not to be generous enough, then the rest of the world will have to raise their benefits. Which will be a good thing as people will then move to other countries for benefits and remove that burden from the UK:D
Laugh all you like. It was Labour who brought in medicals for claimants and gave the contract to ATOS. This government agreed with Labour and have carried on their work.
Most of the welfare changes have been thought of by Labour when they were in government. How do you think this government managed to get the changes through parliament so easily?
This government carried on their welfare changes work, but also closed all the easy visa routes Labour invented for those immigrants that aren't skilled at anything much.
There's a lot of disbelief from all quarters about this, when considering the UK pretty much leads the world in disability benefit and care.
With all that's going on in the world, they run the risk of making themselves look quite foolish here. I wonder what's really bugging them about the UK?
A man who seems to believe that God told him to do it, is not very well balanced. He ignores facts, even when his own department tell him not to lie, the government's own statistic watchdog has told him off for lying and he can't answer simple questions about "how many....." It's not looking good for his mental health.
If not for Michael Howard, it could have been a lot worse.
How many of those other countries have signed up to the convention.
But it was the Tories who changed the criteria and lowered the bar for the qualification and experience of those doing the assessments.
Labour who haven't been in power for 4.5years...
So now the UN are lefty-loonies, in the union pocket, out-to-get the sensible Conservative party because they just HATE them and their Conservative ways!
Incidentally this will really harm the LibDems, even more than they already are harmed I mean.
It's not the creator of a system/law that is responsible, it's how that system is used (or abused)
Pity the UN didn't spend more time on the genocide of people in Iraq.
So, that's an end to it is all Thatcher's fault then.