The Humanion UK Online Daily: National International Universal News Learning and Society Newspaper
 

 

 

 

A Regine Humanics Foundation Publication: Support The Foundation
Philosophy Political Philosophy Political Economics Medicine Hearteogenics Jurisprudence The World Geo-Politics Regine Humanics Foundation
Contact Neurology Neuroniverse Beauroblubellogenics Ecology Life Elle Universana Astronomy The Sanctum Mayakardium
Biochemistry Molecular Biology Microbial World Society Culture Marine World Matter World Archaeology The Idearian Echoing Eternities
Genetics

Epigenomics

Biomedicojurisprudence Anthropology Sociology Geology Art Cosmovicology GREEN:K Hope
Editorial Page Biomedicoengineering The Viimaaginarium Psychology Nature and Solitude Africa Asia Australasia Poets' Letter
Music Humanics United Kingdom England Scotland Wales Northern Ireland Europe  Poetry
The Eyeonium The Humanion Team About The Humanion Palaeontology Radio Astronomy North America South America Elsinki Natural Health Social
The Arkive Humanion Books End Homelessness Cosmology Astrophysics The Elleesium VII London Poetry Festival 2018: October 14-17
 

 

 

 

 

 
 
||  Year Gamma: London: Thursday: April 19: 2018  ||

Theatre

||  Life Is A Colossus Complexus About Which Ought We With Humility And Resolution To Keep On Learning To Advance The Human Condition  ||

Kollarimaginics

||   The Humanion: Medicine: An Oath to Life: An Ode to Life ||

 

 

 

||  The Humanion Bank of Copyrightfree Works  ||

First Published: September 24: 2015
The Humanion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Political Philosophy Arkive Year Alpha and Year Beta

Without seeking to achieve gender equality means humanity would rather stay in the 'dark'
and deliberately avoid stepping onto the awe-inspiring beauty, joy and peace of the 'light';
the 'light, that the state of equality between genders brings about that can only be
imagined as the best possible state of humanity, of existence. Laura Boldrini at
her work: President of the Chamber of Deputies: Italy.
Image: Laura Boldrini's Website
The Humanion
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

End Homelessness The Humanion Campaign

Home is not where the heart is
Nor is it where things are kept
A home is what skins the soul
Without it a human is non-person
Incomplete suffers slowly dying
END Homelessness

 

 

|| September 19: 2017 || ά. Time, because it is, always being and vanishing in space, in human terms, we call it, time changes or rather, time goes. Where does it go? There, where the eternal-silent-space holds its sieve, ever-so-patiently and ever-so-dutifully, so that the time-dust, falls through and joins the eternal-silence of space. Time is like the word: after all human usages, where does it go? There, where it has always been, in 'non-existence', inside the 'eternal-silence' of the 'dictionary'. But here, we are to report, not silence, but speech because, the Fourth Annual Philosophy and Religion in Africana Traditions Conference 2017, what has become, affectionately, known as, PRAT Conference, is almost here. October is a just a fourteen-day-run up the hill and, a few more days and there it is: the Fourth PRAT Conference on October 27-28 in Emmaarner Rise or rather, good old New York.

When: Friday: October 27 at the Graduate Centre of the City University of New York: 365 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10016, Rooms 9204:9205 and Saturday: October 28: Mayday Community Space: 176 St. Nicholas Avenue, Brooklyn, NY 11237: info at maydayspace.org. Topics for consideration are 01: Social Activism. What are the Main Terrains of struggle: What are the Strategies People are Putting Into Place: What are the Programmes Being Developed, For Instance, 'The Vision for Black Lives 'Movement'; 02: Culture and Politic. Speakers Will Address the Inter-Relationships Between Art and Politics and How Cultural Issues From Art, Films, Novels are Related to Liberation Struggles. How Art and Films Depict the Struggle: How They Contribute to It: What are the Main Themes?

03: Reconstructing the Collective Memory From a Historical and Philosophical Viewpoint: Speakers on this issue will comment on what of the past history, theory, practice now seems most important from the viewpoint of the present struggle and the importance of reconnecting with the past to place the present in a context, to give strength to present struggles.

This Conference, which is free and open to the public is sponsored by The Centre for Place, Culture and Politics of the Graduate Centre of the City university of New York and HUMANITAS: The Africana Ethical and Cultural Society. For more information, please, contact Dr J. Everet Green at everet at verison.net: ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

||  Readmore   || || ‽: 190917  || ||    Up   ||

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our Manifesto Offered a Comprehensive Plan for a New Direction in Our Economy: Based Around Investment in the Economy and the Jobs of the Future and the Public Services That Sustain Them and a New Settlement with Business That Would Benefit You and the Whole country: Jeremy Corbyn MP at the British Chamber of Commerce

 

|| July 06: 2017 || ά. Mr Jeremy Corbyn MP, the Leader of the Labour Party, speaking at the British Chamber of Commerce, said, ''Thank you to the British Chamber of Commerce for inviting me to speak to you again today. This is an important conference, on a crucial subject, business and education, which goes to the heart of building that better economy, which we all know, is not only possible but necessary if our economy is to thrive. During the general election campaign I travelled to every part of Britain, campaigning for real change in Britain on the basis of a popular manifesto, that offered hope to millions of people and won support from every region and nation. Our manifesto offered a comprehensive plan for a new direction in our economy. Based around investment in the economy and the jobs of the future and the public services, that sustain them, and a new settlement with business, that would benefit you and the whole country. It is that programme of change, which won a huge increase in Labour’s support and means that we are now not just the official opposition but a government in waiting.

So we need to be engaged and in dialogue about the country’s future, far more closely than we have before. Britain has been living through a lost decade. A decade of lost growth, a decade of stagnant living standards, a decade when investment and productivity fell so far, that it takes a worker five days to produce what takes four days in Germany and France. Britain can’t afford another lost decade. We have investment levels that are described by the Governor of the Bank of England as 'markedly weak'. We have productivity that lags far behind our main competitors … and that fell further behind on yesterday’s official statistics. We have an explosion of low-paid, insecure jobs, the Bank of England’s Chief Economist has now said that 7% of the entire workforce could be on zero hours contracts within a decade. We’ve had a period of lost wage growth and falling real terms pay that the Institute of Fiscal Studies describes as 'completely unprecedented'.  We have unsecured household debt rising to record levels. And now we have economic growth, that has slowed to just 0.2% in the latest quarter, the worst in the G-Seven.

It’s against this backdrop that Labour set out our vision to change our society and invest in our economy. To build a strong, sustainable economy in which no region or nation of the UK is left behind, and where everyone shares in the wealth that we create together. At the heart of that vision is education. Education must be at the heart of the drive to raise productivity, increase our economic dynamism, and allow our businesses to compete on the world stage. Investing in our education system, will be central to halting the spread of low-paid, low-skilled, insecure work. By providing the skilled workforce that businesses need, if they are to create high-skilled, better-paid jobs. And there is a payback for government too. In creating a labour market where work pays, with higher revenues from income tax and national insurance, and lower payments in tax credits and housing benefit. Education allows individuals to realise their full potential, and participate fully in our economy and society. But if education is to bring those benefits, we need an education system that responds to the needs of our economy and which allows people to make a smooth transition from education to the workplace.

This is something that we, the next Labour government, business, and educators need to do together, in partnership. Working together on this is vital, and by being here today, I know you recognise that. And I know there are many great initiatives already happening. From the Young Chamber Initiative, for example, which allows schools and colleges to tap into the expertise of business, and prepare their students for the world of work. To the many excellent work experience programmes, and careers advice services, provided by our education institutions. But government also has a vital role to play. So let me set out what a Labour Government would do. There are no shortcuts if we are to create a high skilled, high wage and high productivity economy. We’re going to have to invest more. To upgrade our economy for the 21st century and that will mean businesses pay a bit more tax, to invest in education, while still maintaining low tax rates by historical and international comparisons. We know that early year’s education plays a crucial role in attainment, and cognitive development. That it’s in our schools that children become young adults, ready to face the world. That our universities are the birthplaces of the ideas and inventions that will define our economy and society in the 21st Century.

And that education now has to continue throughout people’s lives, to allow all of us to grow and develop, and meet the needs of a rapidly changing economy. That’s why our manifesto set out plans to build a National Education Service. Providing lifelong education and training, free at the point of use, for every single person in this country. Our National Education Service will be a key institution of fairness and prosperity for the 21st Century, just as the NHS transformed people’s prospects in the 20th century. We believe education is a public good. That business, large and small, prosper when education, skills and training are given laser-like attention by a committed government. And individuals benefit too, bringing them opportunities they wouldn’t possibly otherwise have.

Through our National Education Service we will extend 30 hours of free childcare to all two to four year olds. And, unlike the Conservative Government, we will put the funding in place … to make sure that we actually deliver on our promises. And by making the transition to a supply-side system and a graduate-led workforce, we will give every child access to high quality early years education, that research shows is crucial to educational attainment and social capabilities later in life. This won’t be achieved overnight; it will be part of a five year programme to develop higher quality and universal childcare for 2, 3 and 4 year olds.

We will properly fund our schools. We now have an utterly unacceptable situation, in which schools are forced to beg parents for donations just to cover costs, or even shorten the school day, just so that they can pay their staff. And we will scrap the public sector pay cap that, along with rising stress levels, is causing good teachers to leave the profession, leading to a recruitment and retention crisis. But equipping children for the world of work is not just about the necessary funding for schools. In the age of the fourth industrial revolution, employers deciding who to hire do not look for automatons, schooled in arcane forms of grammar, learning for tests, and reciting the names of past kings and queens by rote.

They’re looking for people with the soft skills that keep every business going, and the creativity that helps firms to innovate and grow. That’s why the next Labour Government will reverse the narrowing of the curriculum that has taken place under this Government. Including through a new Arts Pupil Premium to give every child access to the arts and we will put more trust in teachers’ professionalism and experience, by giving them more of a say in how children are taught. We will also consult on introducing teacher sabbaticals, and placements in industry, as a way to encourage interaction between education and business, and to introduce broad experiences into the classroom. I’ve often been impressed by teachers who have come to the profession later in life, having worked in other sectors, and their experience benefits their teaching.

As you may well have heard, we have promised to scrap university tuition fees, and reintroduce maintenance grants, for students from low income households. With graduates now due to leave university with £57,000 of debt that will last a lifetime, we risk deterring working class students, leaving talent wasted, and potential untapped. Our plans for a high-skill, high productivity economy, rely on a large graduate workforce, and that means no one should be discouraged from going to university because of debt. Our universities are among the best in the world. But while they are the birthplace of many world-changing ideas, it is all too common for those ideas to be taken up and commercialised by businesses based in other countries.

We want to work with you to bridge this gap between innovation and product building links between universities and business. To ensure that the benefits of Britain’s great research centres, are not halted at the walls of the ivory tower. It’s a similar story for the talent our great universities produce. Our world-leading universities are spread across the country, from St Andrews to Exeter. But the regional imbalances in our economy mean that disproportionate numbers of graduates seek to build their adult lives in London. This is a great loss to local economies in the rest of the country. That’s why Labour is committed to a National Investment Bank and a network of Regional Development Banks.

To ensure that every region and nation of the UK has a strong economy, using our £250 billion National Transformation Fund to boost and rebalance investment across the country. Creating economic opportunities for all. Technological change, from automation to decarbonisation, means that many jobs and industries will disappear or shrink in the coming years and decades. But I am not one of the doom-mongers, who believe that will inevitably herald an era of mass unemployment. At every stage of economic and industrial history, jobs, industries and skills have been lost, replaced and transformed. But whether that happens at huge social cost, as it did for example in the early days of the industrial revolution and the Luddites.

Or is embraced and benefits everybody depends on managing and planning for technological change. We can’t simply leave it to the market. We need public institutions, public investment and public enterprise to work with business to manage the social and economic effects of rapid technological change … so that it benefits the many not the few. We need to ensure that everyone, workers, government, and businesses, share in the benefits that new technology brings. As in every other technological revolution, disappearing jobs will be replaced by new, as yet unforeseen, forms of work. But there will be churn, as these new forms of work will often require a different set of skills to those they replace. That means we will need to invest in a step change in skills and training.

To upgrade the skills of the existing workforce, and make sure everyone is able to retrain at any point in life, to meet the changing needs of the economy. That’s why Labour has made a flagship commitment, to make all further education courses free at the point of use for everyone, at any stage of their lives. There has been quite a bit of focus on our policy to scrap university tuition fees. Which now appears to be under consideration by the government, or at least some members of it. But perhaps of even greater significance and certainly less discussion, is our policy to scrap fees for adult education courses in colleges, too. Vocational training has long been the poor relation in our education system. Successive governments have paid lip service to the desire to achieve parity of esteem between academic and technical education.

While leaving the deep-rooted historical snobbishness of Britain’s two-tier education system fully intact.  One thing I am passionate about, as the child and sibling of engineers, is the development of engineering and science skills. Which have to start earlier, before children get to secondary schools, and we all have a role in tackling the gender imbalance in STEM subjects. Labour will correct the historic neglect of the further education sector. By finally giving it the investment in teachers and facilities it deserves, giving college lecturers greater job security, making all courses free at the point of use, to ensure the sector continues to be a world-leading provider of adult and vocational education, meeting the skills needs of their local economies.

Right now we have a Government that often behaves as if all businesses want is lower wages. That thinks jobs should be measured by quantity rather than quality, and that reckons competitiveness is simply a matter of driving down costs. As I hope I’ve made clear, that is not Labour’s view or vision of our future. We want to use our myriad talents and resources to make Britain the most prosperous and dynamic economy in the world. A Labour government will invest in the future, both in our physical infrastructure and our workforce. Our Business team, led by Rebecca Long-Bailey, is developing plans to deliver a game-changing industrial strategy. That will rebalance our economy and drive up the quality of work across all sectors.

Our Education team, led by Angela Rayner, will be setting out more detailed proposals to invest in a National Education Service, to equip our workforce with the skills they need to do those jobs. I’ve set out the framework for what a Labour Government would do. But turning that vision into practice cannot be the job of government alone.  Making our plans a reality will require the collaboration of everybody here today, business, educators and politicians. That’s why I want to end with a final pledge: a Labour Government will trust in your experience, listen to your expertise and work with you, in partnership. To create an education system that delivers for our economy and an economy that works for the many, not the few. Thank you. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 070717 || Up ||

 

 

 

 

Three Little Pigs: Are You Afraid: The Conservative Party's Declaration of Rogue State and Pirate Government

This is civic and this is civilisation that are built on the best of humanity: that says we shall always be there, like the family does, for those, who need us to be there for them as they were there when we needed them to be there for us: for humanity began, leaving all the false arguments and pseudo debates and opinioneering and politicking aside,  from one set of parents at the dawn of humanity and therefore, humanity is a family and humans have now the human genome to prove it that we are a family and therefore, like no family ever, ever abandons its vulnerable or weak members nor any other of its members, humanity, so long it calls itself as such, cannot ever abandon those who need it most. This is civic, this is civilisation and this desire to be so, to be civic, to be civilised, to be human and to be humane is what makes it worth to call ourselves humans and humanity. If we do not have this, if we choose to loose this than what are we choosing to become? This is the question.

 

|| June 01: 2017 || ά. If there is no family there is no need for a state and a government; this is the form, on which, the shape of the state and government is constructed. Further to this, if there is no family, than there does not appear to be a necessity for a society either. Therefore, one can see that the existence of families create the society, in which, the families function, whereby the first structure out of families, is society from which, arises the necessity of forming a state because the society is too large and too complex a structure for families, who are not directly connected by any other ties other than to their own small network, with the majority of the families they find living, working and interacting within the larger society, to have an effective say as to how it runs and regulates itself. In effect, it is impossible for families to have any say or power over such a society unless and until they go about and create a state. A state, therefore, is the 'regulator', on behalf of families living and creating a society, by which they, the families, have proper, valid and lawful, mechanism to regulate, run, manage and conduct the maintenance, sustenance, nurturing, fostering, enhancing and advancing of such society, that seeks, works, creates and maintains a state of, what in medicine, is called, homeostasis, and in sociology, law and philosophy is viewed as peace. Families are not members of the state they support building but they do so from their determination to help create a society where their members will have a free, fair, safe and equitable life and this is why the state does not have families as members but individuals because families will only trust such a body enough to let their members go, join and work to strengthen such a body. Because, like families, this state and its government must exist for the well being of the members. These have no other purpose other than to ensure the well being of their members. In this, the Government and state are the same: their members are the people as individuals of the country.

Now once the state comes into existence it comes with all its components, including the very people, the combined together of the families but they are not members of the state as families nor are they members of the state as one whole as in society but that the members of that state are individuals, who become members of such state without 'an act' of choice but by simply being born into a society, into a family. Therefore, at least, in this membership of this state, families resemble themselves in the state for the primary route of membership of a family is for members to be born in them, though there is a social or legal way of membership, which is used to initiate a family as is true to a state to which there is a legal way of one becoming a member of such a state. However, the point is this that by virtue of the state, having its members as individual makes it almost like a 'sociological equivalent of a family' and like the family this structure cannot but exist for the benefit and welfare of its members for families exist simply for the health, well being and welfare of its members. And thus, the very purpose of the existence of this state is to simply enable, support and strengthen these families, through which, the state supports and fulfils it very purpose of existence, which is to support the health, well being and welfare of all its individual members.

Now, the state's most visible component is the segment, that exercises the executive power of that state: its government, which is, in democracies, organised in a separation of power principle so that it is divided into legislative, executive and judiciary: economics and finance being under the control of the first two where the third has an oversight to them should something to go wrong so that the judiciary could intervene through a case being brought before it by any member of the public or any organisation and put things right. And here, the government's purpose is simply to exist as an organ with three of its arms, is to do all it can to do a dual-sided job: to do all it can to support, enhance, empower and nurture the families, and thus, they themselves are able to do so to all their members so that the state is able to support the health, well being and welfare of all its individual members. This is the first side of the task of the government on behalf of the state and the second side is literally like the second side of the coin: to do all it can to seek to stop harms, so far as possible, to any of the members of the families and thus, of society, all individuals. Therefore, like the state, that resemble families, who and whose members  make the society, the very purpose of government is to do the very thing the state exists to do but it is such a huge entity that it cannot do that job with all its cumbersome body so that it creates a leaner segment, the government, to seek to execute that task and achieve the aims and fulfils its responsibilities, duties and obligations for these responsibilities, duties and obligations arise for the state from the very formation of that state, in which, all the members join the state with their 'support' of membership of that state, by which, they took on specific, civic responsibilities, duties and obligations to the maintenance of the state, i.e, to abide by its laws, to pay all lawful fees such can be said to be 'membership fees, charges and payments' or in other words, government taxes and pay for anything people buy or acquire from others. Thus, the members of the state, i.e all the individuals and the state have equivalent set of duties, responsibilities and obligations and neither party can abandon their side nor can one claim other fulfil theirs while they fail to do so themselves. Moreover, in such disputes, both parties, the state and the individual members, have lawful means to seek a resolution, through the use of the judiciary to which, both parties have equal subscription and equal faith.

And in this can be seen the 'social contract' in action, which sounds straight forward and simple but it is neither straight forward nor simple for if one looks at the words and the concepts they represent, duty, responsibility and obligation, one would find that they direct one towards a dual state: it is as if one is standing before a double mirror mirroring each other and both mirrors showing two different image-paths of that one concept: a legal path and a moral path. There are duties, responsibilities and obligations, that arise but are only legal. And there are duties, responsibilities and obligations, that arise but they are moral. Say, paying one's income tax or paying the fee for getting a passport issued by a state department or if one eats lunch at a cafe and paying for the meal, which are legal obligations. In society and whatever the state and government do have the 'value' of the legal images of duty, responsibility and obligation because they cannot enter into moral ones, that absolutely is beyond the competence and jurisdiction of all: state, government, society and not even families have entrance to these competence and jurisdiction of morality; this moral path is left to the individual members, the individual persons or the person. However, the very formation of this social contract is not possible unless there exists a state of mind, what is called, good faith or a state of morality. In this we are not using morality as personal morality but a state of positivity, that underpins civic society. Unless parties, facing to enter into a contract, which is lawful and lawfully valid and enforceable, are in good faith, in this what is meant is this that they, for all intended purposes, are committed to the terms and conditions of that contract and they intend to follow through on all that and thus, will meet all the legal duties, responsibilities and obligations, arising out of that contract.

And there is the moral basis of an all legal contract, including the social contract, under which, as state is conceived and constructed. What this tells us and shows us is this that everything, the state, the government, society and families do, are running on this social construct, built by social contract except none of that is possible if that 'good faith' state of mind is absent. In other words, this means that there can exist no rule of law nor any state or any government or any interaction of any social purpose unless this good faith state of mind or rather morality or a state of morality exists in a society. Therefore, it is a must presupposition that such a state must exist in order for these things to come to exist and function. And that is, the state of good faith or morality, should be seen as the void, on which the form of space of the legal or lawful is constructed, in which, the entire human interactions in all families and all society through all individuals take place, which can be seen as time. Therefore, in the void of morality or good faith, exist the space of all social constructs, in, by, with and through which, human interactions and interchanges take place as if  they are existing as time in that space of social constructs. Therefore, the good faith state or state of morality is the void on which legality or law is placed as the space so that the actions, activities, interactions and interchanges in society as time can exist and go on seeking to achieve, support and maintain homeostasis or peace. And here is the beauty of this that, though, none of these entities can enter into the arena of morality or the state of good faith, but they take advantage of this state because it exists, and using this very state, we find means to seek to work to try and form and advance civic society, which in their multiple, creates a sociological symphony, called, civilisation.

Now we shall get back to the state and government and look into the state as to why and how it is paramount that these entities act in good faith and in, with and by a 'moral' state. With both terms, good faith state or moral state, we mean under the law or by the law or legal as in the way that is prescribed, supported and intended by law or in other words, that the state and the government cannot but follow and act accordingly by the law and abide by both the letter and the spirit of the law at all times: time present: and time future: and time past must always be present in both for the duties, obligations and responsibilities arising out of the past must still be discharged in the present and will continue to be done so  in the future. Why is it so important? Because the very existence of the state and government arise out of the existence of the good faith state and morality, and therefore, unless the state and government fulfil their parts and respect and discharge all the duties, responsibilities and all the obligations, arising there in, they cannot expect their members to do so, because in this case, they can see and claim that these entities have breached all these. And if done so, the state and government harm themselves and lose 'credibility' and become seen as not being run in good faith and in and under the law. In short, that no one can trust anything these entities say they will do because they have been breaching in all their duties, responsibilities and obligations. And if that happens the state and government become mortally wounded and they can never recover from these. That is how states and governments end.

And here it is necessary that one looks into the family to understand the good faith or morality clearly. A family is a moral unit so far as morality goes for a family does not need to exist unless it is created to foster a unit where members, acquired by lawful and biological:genetical means, find shelter, protection, support and sustenance. The families cannot abandon or decide to 'leave off' the duties, responsibilities and obligations, they have undertaken when they initiated the families. And these duties, responsibilities and obligations, on the part of the families, are primarily moral and exist without any legal support or protection, though there may and does exist areas from legal on these that families would and do abide by. The point is this that families are and cannot but be moral in their very construction and purpose of existence. If one imagines a state collapsing, a government disintegrating, a society falling into a state devastation-demolition, a family still continues and will continue to fulfil its duties, responsibilities and obligations as long as there exist some of the members of the family to maintain its existence as such a family unit. The family looks at all its duties, obligations and responsibilities, in terms of... ''As long as we shall exist.''

And therefore, these families and the society they form cannot but be 'civic' in order to live in a good faith state of mind or a moral state, where everyone is taken to act in such a state: in good faith and in a moral way. If this is not the state families simply won't support the maintenance of any such society for that would act against families, and thus, families and their members will not and cannot support a state and government, that act against such good faith state or moral state for, then, they act against families and against their members and further, these entities then support to kill off civic society, that exists to support families and their members. And therefore, a state is formed on this base of good faith or of moral state and it must be run in such a good faith state and moral state otherwise the state and government fall victim of 'discrepancies', where what they say stand opposed to what they do. And this would be the end of any such state and government because then it will begin to be clear to all members of such society, in which, the state and government operate and the members will simply abandon it or rise to bring them to the end in order to reconstruct a new state. Good faith states can be demonstrated in all these entities in these examples.

Society: when a lost individual sees a house and goes and knocks on the door to seek help neither she:he nor the one answering the door, believes or can believe that either is seeking to harm the other. In fact, both expect that both exist in a state of good faith, where neither expects to be harmed by the other, further, they both positively believe and expect that should either was in need of help the other will come forward to offer it, should she:he be able to do so.

The Family: A family member going home hungry would expect that there would be food for her:him at home and that that food would not be something that would harm her:him. It does not, will not even cross her:his mind that, that food would harm her:him, because the sense that the family will deliberately seek to harm her:him through that food is absolutely absurd for the very existence of family is to support and protect the members.

State: When a state issues a passport to a citizen and she:he goes to a foreign country using this passport neither the the state nor the person concerned nor the state one is visiting nor any other agencies, that she:he might come in contact and whose members come to deal with that passport, believes or can do so that on returning, the issuing state will simply declare the passport invalid as in effectively, reneging from its duties, responsibilities and obligations to this citizen and send them out into the wilderness!

Government: When a court orders a government to pay a fine to a person or a body, the person or all the persons in a society, or the body or all the bodies in such a society, all the people concerned in the proceedings and all others outside in society, the court itself, the government and the state it represents, all of them, have the good faith that everyone will abide by what the court asks to be done. If the government does not pay that fine the government does not act in good faith and when it fails to do so it harms itself but it actually acts contrary to the reason as to why it exists. None of these entities can exist and function and work and achieve the very purpose that they exist to seek to do, if they do not follow and run themselves in good faith. A government simply will not survive if it appears to be a rogue body because it has consistently built up a records of deliberately failing to fulfil the duties, responsibilities and obligations for then no one will believe a word it said: to start with this means this government will fail to do any business with anyone because no one will believe it can be trusted to pay for the things it buys or any promise of payment it makes nor can this government raise any fund from the market for who is going to invest in a government bond or investment feature when everyone knows this government is a rogue one and it does not keep a word that it says it will because it has never done so. This is how it can be seen how absolute, how vital, how paramount this good faith is.

Now what has been set out it is possible for us to look into what the Conservative Party Manifesto, launched a couple of days ago, does to this: the Conservative Party has unveiled a political philosophical feature, that is neither political nor philosophical but rather, can be seen as declaring the end of state and government as well society as a civic sociological structure  because they propose these entities to exist to harm themselves, harm their standing and act against their very existential purpose and furthermore, they simply act as agencies, that are rogue because they must act against the letter and sprit of the law and act against good faith state and moral state. And, therefore, these entities must exist simply to harm those of its members, who are weak, vulnerable and unable to protect themselves. Why should it do so: so that the strong or the rich get stronger and richer without any difficulties stopping them or burdening them for the state and the government will move those difficulties and burdens away from their path. Why is it so? Let us take a look. If one takes a look at one generation, setting out at the beginning of their working lives. They work, they create and they run society, they support their community and they become the very means and hands and feet and eyes and ears and minds of the state and government and society for that matter. In turn, they all earn a living, out of which, they pay all their taxes or in other words, they fulfil all their duties, responsibilities and obligations to the 'state', government and society and they do so in good faith and in a state of morality, which means that they believe that the state and government and society, will always act in a state of good faith and of morality, and thus, will always fulfil their duties, obligations and responsibilities towards their members and in this case every member of this generation under our discussions.

Now during the life time of this generation more than one government will have come to power and run the business of government and they will have used all the 'revenues' raised through and from this generation and will have built many schools, colleges, universities, hospitals, roads and highways and networks of many other public services and constructs and spent a lot of the revenue simply to run the public and civic services and amenities. These governments will have made a lot of investments in the public infrastructures: if one takes a rough ratio of what amount of the revenue these governments will have spent and invested. Over a sixty year period, let us take a rough estimation, this ratio of spend:invest can be made as between 45-65:65:35.  This means that these governments will have 'used' almost half of all the money raised from this working generation in investing in things, structures and constructions of things, that will outlast their existence, such as airports, seaports, hospitals, schools, road networks, highways, even in space research and exploration, even in the physical maintenance and regeneration of the very Houses of Parliament buildings themselves or Royal Palaces. Yet, this generation will not continue to exist to benefit from these. And as an example, when this generation was working and paying taxes and the governments were spending and investing their taxes into building things, that will outlast their existence and will serve other generations other than them, they were using the same public provisions, structures, systems and mechanisms, that outlasted other generations, who had paid for these to have been built. therefore, in the larger scale of time, this arrangement is fair and equitable and it does not disadvantage any generation. For the schools, colleges and universities educated one generation were built by their previous generations and the ones they will have supported the building of will educate other generations, in which no generation is being treated unfairly by time. For there would be schools, colleges and universities for all generations if each succeeding generation continues to keep on adding to the existing stock as and when required.

Now, when this generation worked and fulfilled their duties, obligations and responsibilities, they did so in good faith and in a state of morality and in that they had the unshakeable faith, conviction and belief that the state and government had the same state and that despite the continuance and change these states of good faith and morality will continue to be maintained and will continue to exist so that they will continue to fulfil their duties, obligations and responsibilities. This means that these working people of this generation paid for all the things these entities asked them to do, and in turn, not only did these agencies were expected in that good faith that they would arrange a pension and the necessary provisions for them when they would be old and not working and when they might be unwell or become too frail and would need help to live on. For they have worked and supported the state and government, and thus, the entire society and all the generations, that are now doing the same except they all are still enjoying and will continue to do so long after this older generation has ceased to exist, the things that they have paid for and supported the building of. Therefore, it is baseless to suggest that whatever the state and government do for this older generation is a cost to the current generations: it is absolutely not for when this generation worked and paid their taxes, the government:s of their day were:was expected and they did so, to make provisions for the future of this working generation when the would reach old age. Therefore, the current younger generations have no reason to feel that the older people are burdening them.

Now, the Conservative Government has turned the state and government into rogue entities for what they are getting the state and the government to become is nothing but one that deliberately sets the state and government to go and not follow and discharge their duties, obligations and responsibilities and rather act like despots, thugs or rogues, who will not do what they are obliged to do. They will not conduct in good faith at all. They will not discharge their duties so that, they tell the very generation we are speaking of, that whatever they did in their working lives does not matter. You need help in social care you have to sell your home and pay for it yourself? Now, here is the double-rogue-act: these people have paid throughout their entire working lives, all the taxes and dues the governments and the state asked them to do and having done that, they earned a living, from which, they bought a home and paid for it and in doing so, they paid further taxes. And likewise, they may have built a little savings and on that they paid further taxes as well. Therefore, what is left to them as their 'own' is the absolute skeleton because the rest went to the governments and the state. Further, when they die, what is left of that 'skeletal owning',  that they had, would go to others, from which, a great deal of it, will once again, get to the government and the state. And in this, this rogue-sque jingoism the Conservative Party declares that the State and its Government 'Own' all the members of a State so that whatever is owned by them is owned by the State and it can simply take it all as and when it does want to take them back. This drives the largest assault-knife into the very heart of the State and converts it into a rogue-actor, except it becomes the Rogue, the Rogue-Power, which has infinite and absolute authority for it is 'the law unto itself', that tolerates no law nor any power of any law over it. And that is the end of society as a civic sociological structure and the beginning of the social jingoistic jungle, that this political party, this Conservative Party, stands to create. It is a literal jungle, where the rich hunt the rest of the jungle animals, who are not rich and there is nothing stopping them at anything because the Conservative Party stays at the helm of the state and government to ensure that the jungle thrives, feeding the rich making their killing. If this is not dreadfully scary, if this is not to absolutely terrifying, if this is not blood-chillingly barbaric and brutal, than the people of the UK must be the bravest people among the nations of this world.

And thus, when the Conservative Party proposed that these older people pay for social care out of their skeletal savings including their homes, what the government is doing is conducting the most disgraceful, most roguish and most disgusting of any and all forms of robbery. Because it is like the state and government have skinned off the chicken many a time and now that this poor thing has hardly anything left to be skinned off, they are putting in the last dagger. But what the Conservative Party is failing to see is this that this dagger is the one that they are seeking to attack the very state and very governance structures for once people see that the state and the governments are nothing but rogue entities no one will believe a word they say, and thus, this will serve these entities as death sentence; they simply won't be able to go on, for people simply won't listen to pirate, lecturing on good faith and morality. The act, that is determined to attack, dismantle, disfigure, devastate, destroy, demolish and terminate anything and everything that are 'civic' and 'civilised' is nothing but monstrous. In this case, this is monstrosity and  now this can be seen spelt out in chilling details in this Conservative Party Manifesto. Yes, they have dressed it up with all the rhetoric and spin and manipulative expressions, clichés, idioms and phrases but all they are seeking to hide is this monstrosity, that they are determined to unleash over the length and breadth of this country. The late Margaret Thatcher declared once that there was no such thing as society, in this Manifesto the Conservative Party has declared the further news: that they are determined that society must be killed off and replaced by a jingoistic jungle. In this, let the United Kingdom learn that, despite the Conservative Party's manipulations, spins, propaganda and presentational make ups and manoeuvrings there is no such thing as a better version of Margaret Thatcher but there is such a thing as the Conservative Party's determination to kill off civic society and replace it with a jingoistic jungle. This Manifesto spells out the cyanide by and with which to kill off what is a civic and civilised society. There is no better version of cyanide: it kills: The Conservative Party is that cyanide for killing of civic society and replace it with a rogue state and a rogue government and use both to establish the reign of terror of the rich over the majority, who are not rich.

What the Conservative Party is seeking to use in this is the so called inter-generational fairness: as if to suggest that this older generation's care is being paid for the the current generations, which is an absolute untruth, that has already been demonstrated so far in this piece. This generation has paid for everything throughout all their working lives and in that time the governments and the state were expected and they did so, make provisions for the pensions and other social care provisions for these older generations. If now, for many factors, unpredictable and beyond control of government:state, such as the financial crash, things get tough, it is not a problem caused by the older generation nor the younger ones and the state and government have valid means to seek to find solutions to this problem but they cannot just go and declare their rogue intention that they won't discharge their duties, obligations and responsibilities towards this older generation. Further, they go far more than that, they then go and seek to rob these very wronged people  again because now they claim the last thing these people have come to call their own, their saving:home for which they have paid all the taxes throughout their working lives and when they leave this earth, a great chunk of these assets will be claimed by the state and government through inheritance tax etc. Therefore, it has nothing to do with fairness but ending the very idea of fairness altogether for what is fair in a jungle, that has been created by killing off civic society?

And therefore, to conclude, this Conservative Party with all its new branding, with its new Manifesto is the ultimate proof of its jingoism or this monstrosity. It simply wants to establish a social jungle, where there are no laws and what it most terrifying is this that in this even the state and government will deliberately set out to not run themselves by and under the law, that they will not discharge their duties, responsibilities and obligations, and in fact, they will deliberately set out to not fulfil them and further that they will go out and attack and rob whomsoever they like simply because it  is a jungle, that has been created by killing the civic society off, where there is no law, and thus, where concepts such as good faith, morality and rule of law do not exists. In such jungle individuals and families are owned by the state and government, where individuals, families, communities and society whatever is left of it are choked away into submissions to the rule of the monstrous jungle. Whether the people of the UK would like to live in such a ruthless jungle, where there is no law and robbery and rogue and rough and brutality rule that is a matter for the people to decide on but they must do so in clear reason for these are not publicity and propaganda matters: these are profound matters, that will determine whether people live in society or whether they would choose to live in a jungle. This is the Conservative Party jungle, where they are threatening the three little pigs to blow their houses down: for what reasons: because they want to create a jungle proper, where their masters, the rich can hunt and make a killing for themselves without hindrance from the so called law or the rule of law and the little pigs have no recourse to seek protection for this jungle exists to serve the rich and the fit. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 020617 || Up ||

 

 

 

Editorial: Rage Rage Against the Dying of the Light: The Conservatives are the Builders Indeed: Builders of Destruction: Of Demolition: And of De-fabrication of the Very Fabrics of What United Kingdom is About

|| May 30: 2017 || ά. This Editorial was published on October 19, 2015: It seems very relevant to the current state of affairs in the UK and republished here, today, May 30, 2017:

Rage Rise Against the Slaughter of Wonders

'Rage, rage against the dying of the light',
Of reason of sense of British fair play
Of age old human dream of equality
Of what's British value for life's core

'Rage, rage against the dying of the light'
Rage and rise to bring this lunacy bare
Say it clear say it loud like thunder does
This is enough enough it is enough now

Rage roar rise against the junglification
Of our land where liberty sings humanity
British hands always do open care's map

Rage rise against the slaughter of wonders
Wonders of our isles always housing light
Rage rage rise against 'the dying of the light'

We must borrow from Dylan Thomas for what is happening in the UK is not really bearable to see: the country and the nations within these British isles and the people and communities living in them are deliberately, meticulously, with absolute determination, precision and dogged dogmatism are torn down to pieces bit by bit by this Conservative Government. But the Conservatives propaganda may have won them the election yet they do not seem to be slowing down much with their continuous media orchestration to their 'already established narrative'  and they are adding new things to it that they want to set out as established 'truth'.

As they continue on this path, ruinous and destructive to the very fabrics of society, community, family and social lives the Labour Party seems to be getting into a state of bickering since it appears a lot of Labour MPs think that they are sure that they ought to copy and follow the dangerous path of the Conservatives that they cannot even accept their own party mandate to their new leader and they gladly take every opportunity they find to mouth off their new Leader, without thinking how absolutely disheartening and off putting this is for the people who want them to unite and begin the work of standing strong against the dogmatism that the Conservatives have so far inflicted upon the Country and the working populace, as if they could just wipe history off; what kind of MPs are these Labour MPs? Who are their electorate? Are there not thousands and thousands of working families in their constituencies who have been suffering the devastation caused by the Conservatives? Are these people not going to suffer even more when they are going to receive the severest cuts to their child and tax credits? Are these communities not suffering because of the decay and destructions inflicted upon by the Conservative cuts to services to the young people, to the communities of many disadvantages, disabilities, illnesses?

Who are these Labour MPs representing? Their own party members elected this Leader against whom they have continued their bickering from the very start and, it appears that they simply won't accept their own Party's overwhelming mandate for this leader? In fact, they do not even seem to reflect the mandate of their own constituents. Why should they not accept the very mandate of their very own party members? Is this because they do not even accept the mandate of their own constituents who voted for them to stand up and fight for the rights of the working people and, because of this, they find it unacceptable to accept the verdict of the vast majority of the Labour Party when they voted to elect their new leader? These MPs should consult, seriously, their conscience and determine their political prerogative in this representative democracy where, at least, in principle, they are obliged to represent the views of their constituents. We do not think the single mothers, the working parents, the elderly and frail people, people with disabilities  and mental illnesses and communities suffering from the devastating impacts of cuts on vital benefits and services, the young people against whom the Conservatives have declared a war including the students are going agree with these Labour MPs, whom they have elected to represent them, who would not stand up and unite to put a really strong fight for the working people of these wonderful isles?

However, we are here speaking of the Conservatives. Finally, the Conservatives' 'charm-drive' of 'bombarding' people with absolute literary, shall we say, well,, we shall have to make up a new expression, cuckoo-spring-tale-telling which have recently started to be marketed by the Conservative Propaganda Machine:

That the Conservatives are the 'Builders'!

They have cut to the bones to all house building, of social housing and investment in these areas. Indeed, they are the builders! One must need builders to destroy buildings and other constructions such as the people who went and demolish the old blocks of gigantic eye sores of Glasgow recently. The people who demolish and destroy are builders, too. In this sense, the Conservatives are the 'builders' of destruction, demolition and de-fabrication of the very fabrics of what United Kingdom is about. Unlike the Conservatives, the builders and workers who demolished the infamous Glasgow blocks, are the backbone of society: the workers who want to build but their Government wants them to look and admire the skies and not build because they want to destroy but not the rich but the working and low income and poor and middle class families. So here are the 'builders' of the Conservatives.

There cannot be found a single economist who would disagree with this statement ( they may not like it ideologically) that it was a most serious and fundamental achievement of the last Labour Government in the history of the United Kingdom that it had introduced working and child tax credits because of the fact that since the introduction of the universal state benefits it was the most profound effort by a government to make a dent in the redistribution of wealth and, most importantly, it brought millions of people ( families, children, particularly) out of poverty for the first time. People who were forced to work for scandalous wages were given the right to receive a portion of the nation's wealth and live not in poverty even though they were working. Now, why do the Conservatives want to go backward? Because they are one nation? Because they are compassionate? Because they are fiscally responsible? Not for any of these because they are none of these things; no, they want to change it for their dogma. They do not want equality. No, they want their rich happy in their 'free market' ( because the rich of the market pay them enough money to run a propaganda machine in the largest of scale possible to buy with money so to get them elected). 

They are demolishing the entire fabrics of the country and the worst part is that the poor, the low paid, families with young children, the most vulnerable people with vary many types of disabilities, mental illnesses and so on, even the middle income families are paying the 'punitive' price for the 'crime' that they had nothing to do with. The financial sector, the banks and their conglomerates, the hedge funds, the investment portfolios and the rest were let loose by all the governments (nationally and internationally) of major economies including the UK so that they brought down the entire financial system to its knees. And what have the Conservatives done to change that? Nothing really that would bring a dent in the long term. It is not something a national government can deal with effectively alone on its own. In order to establish a real regulatory mechanism to bring all the world banking, investment and financial sectors under real scrutiny and regulatory management to ensure that they operate within the law and to ensure that no criminality including 'criminal' greed makes mockery out of the stability, health and prudence of the system for it is about people and people's lives. Yet, we are nowhere near that state internationally and no one is taking it seriously enough to do something about it, to try. Well, the Conservatives did not have to speak about that at all now since they have 'allocated' the responsibility to the 'Labour Government' that spent too much! ( And Labour appeared in such a muddle that they seemed to almost have accepted this 'allocated' blames and, they lost the election miserably for many reasons, one of which must be this that they were apologising for that 'mistake'! of the Labour Party Government and they wasted all their resources trying hard and failing miserably to appear like the Conservatives! People thought that if they were to have the Conservatives why should they go for the 'pseudo conservatives' in the form of the Labour Party?)

Now, why on earth banks collapse and disappear because the government spent 'too much'? That, the Conservative would not even hear of (because they have already 'allocated' the blame to the Labour Government). Why would people run on the bank if a government spent too much? Why did people run on the bank? Was it not that those banks got themselves sunk in the gutter of greed and recklessness and took the very people down with them whose money they were betting away, gambling? The Conservatives won't have that. And, no one would tell them, if the Labour Government spent too much so that it had run out of money, how come it was the Labour Government that bailed out all the major British Banks and, which stopped the run on the banks and stabilised the Market!

No one was telling them this nor is anyone doing it now so that the Conservatives want to balance the book and would bring gimmicks about fiscal responsibilities. When a Government has 500 million pounds to spend in submarine building but it must cut child and working tax credits, cut local authorities homelessness budgets and other vital services like the fire service, the ambulance service, the police to name but a few, what does it say about that government's 'fiscal responsibilities'? What kind of responsible government would let its fundamental, vital and absolutely necessary heavy and manufacturing industry get destroyed and decayed because of the cuts in services and areas of economic activities that support and sustain this industry? In another ten years' time the United Kingdom looks very much set to become a graveyard of heavy industry? What kind of a responsible government chose that as its priority? To take the country to the grave yard of the heavy industry that makes it great in the first place; what kind of responsible government is it?

There are other serious indications of this in the economy, particularly, the inflation, low productivity. Bank of England could do very little ( say, to help increase the productivity) unless the Government changes its dogmatic path. If the number of people buying and selling have less money to spend then the market would begin to shrink and that will have a ripple effects in all the businesses and their business transactions. Eventually, businesses would shrink and soon begin to get shut out all of which would effect the people working in the market who would begin to lose their jobs that would bring in many folds of people in the receiving end of that down turn of that market. You cut and carry on cutting what are you doing exactly? Taking money out of circulation: money that would go to buy materials to be used in building, recruiting people to deliver services and so on so that people will have jobs so that they have money so that they can buy or rent a home to live and spend in other things that the companies need to sell so that businesses have orders to supply and the suppliers would require trucks and vans and lorries, public transport systems, railways etc and workers to supply these supplies for which roads have to be maintained, bridges have to be maintained and new roads may need to be built in which new investment will need to be made which would generate further growth in relevant sectors. In short, one effects the other that forms a chain that carries on supporting growth and all grows. But you keep cutting and expect the economy to grow. This Conservative pseudo logic comes from books that no one has written but is made up by pure and simple dogmatism alone. And the Conservatives have taken the view that it does not matter what they are doing or going to do so long as they use the propaganda tools well , because they have the money, and make themselves sound 'something' that people might like but which they know they are not and, no one needs to look anywhere else for what they are but look at what they did in the past and what they are doing now.

It is simple: a man beats up a blind man on the street: anyone  would call him a brute.

If a chap goes and robs a mentally ill person or elderly, frail person everyone would accept that that chap is a low life.

If any one goes and steals a child's lunch anyone would call that person a horrible person.

If one goes and burns a house of a family they would be called criminal. 

But the Conservative Party has been and are doing similar things to people but they are spending millions in their propaganda so that they are asserting that they are not what they really are!

The Conservative 'builders' so far have 'built' or destroyed, demolished and 'de-fabricated', all the destruction may not appear as yet together but will continue to do so as time progresses, the following and are determined to continue doing it:

The housing, building and construction sectors
The Youth and Connexions Services
The Social Services
The Police
The Roads and Highways
The Environmental Services
Library Services
Maternity and Sure-Start Services:Outreach
Education Services
The Scandalous University Tuition Fees
The Services for the mentally ill, severely disabled people, home care and so on and so forth

That the Conservatives are Compassionate

The list could go on and on for they have cut ruthlessly, absolutely dogmatically and now they want the country to respond and dance to their cuckoo-spring-tale-telling.

This is not where this ends. The news that have just been spread out about the collapse of the steel industry is just the beginning: how many thousands of people are losing their jobs, how many hundreds of thousands of people in the chain are going to impacted by this and how this will devastate and destroy communities that grew out of and were supported and nurtured by these work places! But, the Government cannot be blamed. Blame the Chinese competition.

If a country does not build anything, houses, schools, hospitals, facilities for people who need them desperately (youth centres, pensioners centre, nurseries, hospitals, schools, roads, bridges, railways, sure start and family centres and so on and so forth) and instead they keep shutting hospitals and other public facilities then what kind of heavy and manufacturing industry is going to be able to survive in that country? A company, no matter how big it is, cannot simply  rely on export alone.

Who is using steel and iron and related products in the UK for the UK under the Conservatives do not want to build and have not been building but cutting and bringing all the 'building' to a stop? What is happening to all these industries behind the viewscape and headlines? This will continue to make headlines as more and more of this sector begin to suffer the consequences. This is the most severe of all costs that are forced upon the future of this country: that in order to build the UK would become an importer of all the things necessary to build again: steel, iron and so on and so forth. What kind of a UK that would make this great country? What kind of a responsible government take the country and make a skeleton out of it! This is the Conservative fiscal responsibility!

There is no report about this but it is common sense to think about the following:

The cuts that must have fallen in these areas will impact severely in the long term:

Environment and flood defences gone out of the window so that God knows how many of our rivers are in desperate need of help, dredging, maintenance, cleaning the water (in cases they are filled with toxicity that marine lives cannot live there), and the safeguarding and keeping all our shores clean and healthy for both humans and animals etc.

Bridges, we have thousands and thousands of them. How many of those bridges are going to become victims of this absolutely 'careless and dangerous cuts?

Public walks, paths, river paths and park lands and so on and so forth.

Roads and Highways and all other roads that are not getting much money in order for them to be worked on so to maintain them properly?

The infrastructure does not mean much to the Conservatives for they are the 'builders' of destructions so that they are destroying all.

Now, let us take a look at the cuckoo-spring-tale-telling of the Conservatives that they are the 'Compassionate Conservatives'. Now, let us look at our very old fashioned Collins Dictionary and see how it defines compassion: "a feeling of distress and pity for the suffering or misfortune of another, often including the desire to alleviate it.!

And what did the Conservatives think when they decided to cut child tax credits and working tax credits, reduce or stop other benefits to absolutely vulnerable people for whom the NHS doctors issued 'sick notes' yet they were forced to be 'assessed' by people who are not doctors or qualified professionals to do such 'assessments'? So that a lot of people whose benefits stopped 'died'. Is this fact that they 'died' not enough to assert that fact that compassion does not exist in Conservative dictionary? When they cut Education budget who does it hurt? When they cut house building who does it hurt? Who become homeless  and live, stay, suffer and die on the street as homeless? When families are uprooted from their communities, family and friends and sent to live in temporary accommodation miles and miles away and their children have no schools to go to, often in different cities where is the Conservative compassion than? When they forced an entire generation of young people to 'mortgage' their future lives in order to get educated did they think of compassion? These young graduates, what kind of life they would end up having other than a life of absolute servitude and poverty? When do the Conservatives think these young graduates would earn enough to be a able to rent/buy a place to start a family? Where was there compassion when they set about 'bedroom tax'; the very name makes people think 'ugliness', 'nastiness', 'meanness'! Where was their compassion? Where was their compassion when they cut local authority funding so that they cut funding to their local organisations that provide desperately needed services that no one else provides for particularly isolated, vulnerable, ill and elderly people and young people?

Where is compassion in that Party that went to attack and are attacking every families with children; they have attacked young people (against whom the Conservatives effectively declared war), they have attacked the students, they have attacked the mentally ill, they have attacked the people with disabilities, they have attacked the single mothers and they have attacked the people who are 'dying' at 'homes'? They are now trying to attack the junior doctors of the NHS, who are the backbone of the NHS for it is they who are at the sharp end at all times of delivering the NHS). Where is that compassion in the Conservatives Party? Just because they wear 'well-advised' blue suits and appear 'cuddly' does not make them compassionate. Compassion is not just a word; it is a deed, a state of one's soul. Compassion is a choice that one has  made in which one would exercise one's humanity. In the Conservative Party they cannot choose compassion for they have always chosen the Market which they think is a 'divine' entity that must be kept 'Free' and they believe it is their 'providential duty' to support, nurture and protect the interests of that market's 'shareholders': the rich for the rich are kind to them because their contributions to their election and party funds allow them to win elections.

Compassion, if the Conservatives want to see, they should read the letters the 84 Bishops had sent to their leader who did nothing to it. Compassion, if the Conservatives want to learn it they should look here:

A Greek family,  the whole of Greece has been suffering the worst since the crash:crunch in the European Union, found this tiny child's dead body on their shore. What did they do? There was nothing that they could do to bring that child back to life! They were shattered in their souls because they had compassion in their souls: they took the baby's dead body as the most sacred thing on earth  because they decided to 'adopt' that child, to humanise him. They adopted 'the child' so that he would have a family who would remember him as their own. They took the 'child', not the dead body of the child and, took 'him' with them so that they could organise a funeral and give him a proper, dignified, humane burial and this way the child lives in their family, with their family lives and become part of their 'humanity'. Compassion, always will find ways to do something when it empathises, feels that distress and pity and acquires a vital force in the determination of doing something, to alleviate that 'distress' to fellow humanity. 

How have the compassionate Conservatives behaved with the problems of the current crisis of humanitarian exodus of refugees? Compassionately! Well, we need to write to the Dictionary Publishers to rewrite the definition of compassion!

And, we have shown, in our recent piece, as to how the Conservatives pay their dividends to the rich: they stopped social housing forcing people to rent from private landlords, who are rich and supporters of the Conservative Party, who are making a killing off the Government's housing benefit expenditure. A Humanical Look at the United Kingdom 'Narrative' of the Conservatives.

And then the next cuckoo-spring-tale-telling is that they are a 'one nation' party? Who is that one nation? Is it not built with only the tiniest numbrs of the richest of the society? Are not the Conservatives about helping the rich for they have not introduced a single penny worth of 'tax' or 'cut' for the rich. Are the rich effected by any of the Cuts that the Conservatives have so far done? Did the Rich ever get housing benefits? Did they get working tax credits? Did they get child tax credits? Did the rich get disability benefits? Did the rich receive income support?

No, the Conservatives have found their compassion and exercised it over the lives of children in massive number of families who were living in desperate poverty who the child and working tax credits for the first time in history got out of poverty. Now they are cutting, it is now being reported, about £3,000 per family? What are these family going to do but suffer and see their children live in poverty, suffer malnutrition and then do badly in education and so on? This is Conservative compassion! This is Conservative one nation.

And if it is: is it not the ugliest thing one can think of? Is it not the nastiest things one can do? Is it not a shame, is it not a scandal, is it not absolutely, utterly and categorically an unacceptable thing that these day in age a country like the United Kingdom has a government that says: it is okay to get children and families in their massive number live in poverty, suffer from malnutrition, ill health as a result of it and consequently do badly in education, consequence of which would be to do badly in later life so that the vicious cycle goes on?

Conservatives' Advice to Child and Tax Credit Recipients to Work Harder and Improve Their Self Esteem

Then came other advice from the very same Conservative cuckoo-spring-tale-telling in which they advised the people who receive the working and child tax credits that they lacked self esteem and that should work harder! These Conservatives do have compassion! What are these people doing, these very people who work in low wages, full time or substantial hours? What do they do? They work, they shift boxes, they carry cartons and bottles and sacks and fill in the empty spaces at supermarkets, they clean the road, they serve at post office counters, GP Surgeries, they take the garbage, they clean and maintain the swage system,  they drive the lorries and vans and it goes on? They are the nursery workers, crèche workers, youth workers, mentors, classroom assistants, secretaries, admin workers, health workers, care workers, pharmacy assistants, dinner ladies, kitchen porters, cooks, waiters and waitresses, baristas, care assistants, cleaners, porters, reception workers, a host of professions engaged in delivering multi-layered NHS Services are such workers in receipt of these benefits and, the list could go on. Are these people not the very structure on which society stands on? How else the Conservatives want these people to work harder? They are working all the hours they could but they are getting low pay. Why don't the Conservatives go and say: okay, let us get this scandalous wage sorted? Why don't they initiate a living wage (without gimmick and tokenism) and then get the businesses to pay the living wage so that these people could live on their income alone and the Government does no longer have to subsidise the businesses making profits yet paying their workers scandalous wages? But, no, they won't do that because they are 'one nation': no, the Market is the 'god' (not God) for them. They do not want to temper with the market  nor are they going to hamper the business of the rich.

That the Conservatives are the Workers' Party

And the other Conservative cuckoo-spring-tale-telling is that they are workers' party! Just with what so far has been elaborated, this would make people laugh. But they are marketing it: that the Conservatives are the workers' party! This would put any propagandist to shame!

These are the very few groups of the working people who are most likely to receive working and child tax credits; there are probably hundreds of other groups of workers who would receive these two benefits:

Nursery workers, Crèche workers, Youth workers, Mentors, Classroom assistants, Secretaries, Admin workers, Health workers, Care workers, Pharmacy assistants, Sales assistants, Dinner ladies, Kitchen porters, Chefs (not the famous and on the television ones!), Cooks, Waiters, Waitresses, Baristas, Care assistants, Cleaners, Porters, Reception workers

You cut their life-line, you take the bread and butter out of the mouths of their children and throw them to poverty and you stand here and declare that the Conservatives are the workers' party? Go and tell these people that you are their party! And let us see whether you can establish this made up fact that

the Sun around which the Earth orbits is just a Conservative fabrication; it does not really exist?

If the Conservatives could establish this fabrication, that the Sun, the Star of our Solar System, around which the Earth orbits is just a Conservative fabrication and that it does not actually exist, than they can establish themselves as the Party of the Workers!

Now, this is enough. These cuts are destroying families, bringing enormously large chunk of the child-population back to poverty. And these acts of what the Conservatives have done so far, and worse still, what they are going to do in the very near future is testament to establish the following:

That the Conservatives are not and cannot be the so called One Nation,  but  they are for the Market and its 'shareholders' the rich

That the Conservatives are not the 'builders'  and cannot be the builders but the destroyer, demolisher and defabricationer of the very fabrics of the United Kingdom

 That the Conservatives are not Compassionate and cannot be so

That the Conservatives are not the workers' party and they can never be so

That their deeds and words are an absolute oxymoron in the history of politics since the Greek City state!

This is not acceptable. This is dangerously playing with the present and future of individuals, families, country and nation, society and communities of the United Kingdom. This is irrational. This is absolute dogmatism which is dangerous and it must stop.

People, all organisations working in vary many communities who are suffering from the consequences of these monstrous cuts and impositions of the Conservative cruelty, and, incidentally, their attacks on children, families and family life, on vulnerable and ill people, on people with disabilities could very well make a serious and challenging case to answer that these government actions and cuts may be unlawful because these all breach and infringe peoples' human rights according to the Humans Rights Act, all must take to the street. For the political parties including the Labour, which seems unable to do anything effective for it is getting good with infighting and kicking and biting each other: it is time that they learn fast to grow up and take their responsibility to establish themselves as effective opposition seriously; because until they are able to do that they are letting down the entire country, the Libdems, the Scottish parties,  the Wales and Northern Ireland's national parties  who oppose these cuts must unite in a 'broad coalition against these cuts' and come together in the street with the people. They must not let the Conservatives destroy what is 'great' about this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for another five years. They must come out in support of the bleeding populace of the working, low and middle income families and for saving vital services and provisions.

The state the United Kingdom is brought by the Conservatives is not acceptable. The country, its people, families, communities cannot take another five more years of this mad, lunatic cuts that have gone long enough. It must not be allowed to happen. It is time people organise themselves and take to the street to make their democratic right to declare their disapproval of something lawfully: all the trade unions, all the organisations, community groups, charities and political parties (if they have the courage to stand with the people) from across the length and breadth of United Kingdom and say: ENOUGH!

Yes, the Parliament is elected, we cannot change that until next election (and even than if we are lucky to have a party ready to stand for the people) but we can scream, we can rage and we can demonstrate.

These politicians are scared of ONE thing and ONE thing alone: their MPs are scared to death of losing their seats and faced by such a prospect they wake up  and tell their leader to change course or else!

And in this all parties of all parts of the United Kingdom, those who opposed the Conservative Party's so called austerity must come together not just in the Parliament but outside and stand with the people to say: just because we are in the Parliament does not mean we cannot oppose the very fundamentally flawed and irrational dogmatism of the Conservatives that is destroying people's lives, destroying our economy in the long run, destroying the very structures and systems of all our infrastructures and literally tearing families and communities apart.

This conservative dogmatism must end. There must be a coalition of organisations, people and parties to put a stop to this absolutely irrational, unnecessary, dogmatic and unacceptable state of affairs. No political party can carry on doing something if people stand together out onto the street in one voice. It is the people that makes a country and if that country's future is at the 'stake' in the form and name of children and young people thrown back into a life of poverty, if people with disabilities and mental illness are to pay for their disability and mental illness by this Conservative Government policies, if low paid workers, and families with children and single mothers and young people at colleges, university and in NEET, not in education employment or training, and all the working people of this country are to be punished by this Conservative government because they are absolutely committed to their dogmatism than it is the moral duty of everyone who believes this must stop to stand up and raise their voice in unison.

It is time to

'Rage, rage against the dying of the light',
Of reason of sense of British fair play
Of age old human dream of equality
Of what's British value for life's core

'Rage, rage against the dying of the light'
Rage and rise to bring this lunacy bare
Say it clear say it loud like thunder does
This is enough enough it is enough now

Rage roar rise against the junglification
Of our land where liberty sings humanity
British hands always do open care's map

Rage rise against the slaughter of wonders
Wonders of our isles always housing light
Rage rage rise against 'the dying of the light'

:Munayem Mayenin:

October 19, 2015:  Dylan Thomas: Rage, rage against the dying of the light: ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore || ‽: 290517 || Up ||

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Labour Party Manifesto: A Vision That Aspires and Inspires the Nation: To Aim for the Best: To Choose the Best: Work and Achieve the Best: And Live Work Create and Share the Best: Just: Fair: Equitable: This Manifesto is the Roadmap of a British Renaissance in Every Sense: Political Economic Social Cultural and Spiritual for Its Vision Sets Its High Mark at the Highest Best of This Nation and Invites the Nation Calls the Nation Inspires the Nation to Rise Towards That Dawn: To Claim the British Revolution Has Finally Come Home Today


The Labour Party has launched its Manifesto of the General Election 2017 at the University of Bradford. In twelve headlines, One: Creating an Economy That Works for All, Two: Negotiating UK EU-Exit, Three: Towards a National Education Service, Four: A Fair Deal at Work, Five: Social Security, Six: Secure Home for All, Seven: Healthcare for All, Eight: Safer Communities, Nine: Leading Richer Lives, Ten: Extending Democracy, Eleven: A More Equal Society and Twelve: A Global Britain, the Manifesto offers a vision of a country, that the Party is committed to and aspires to build and seeks to inspire the country towards, that clearly offers a radical political philosophical and economical agenda and boldly sets itself in absolute, clear and transparent contrast to what the Conservative Party with its record of last seven years stands for and offers.

The contrast cannot be more pronounced, more profound and more fundamental between the Labour Party's vision and the poverty of it from the Conservation Party and it is not a product of spin and propaganda, because it is a product of half a million of Labour Party members' faith, conviction and determination in a fair, just and equitable society, and this thirst, this desire, this dream is living in all the hearts and minds of the majority of the people of this country, all those, whose lives, works and living personal, family, social and cultural spheres the Conservative Party has been devastating over the last seven years. This is a truly a transformative agenda and sets out the programme  of actions to set the country's economy on the path of expansion, creativity, productivity and growth. These economic policies have the ability and power to simply not only to reconstruct the economy but also sets it free to rise, seek and achieve higher but does so for a purpose: for life, for society, for people, for the nation, for the country, for building a civic society. Has Britain ever come as close as this to seek and achieve a just, fair and equitable society until this Manifesto Launch? No, but now the country and the nation stand facing this choice.

This manifesto is a composition of ideas, built with bricks and mortars of the faith that nations can and do build a better state for themselves if they believe in their determination, in their resolve and in their human potential and power: to build a civic society, that lives by law and breathes fairness, acts just and creates and shares equitably. This will transform Britain politically because this vision includes a Constitutional Convention, that The Humanion has been writing about and that is of the utmost urgency that the UK recrafts its governance structures and updates itself for the new century. It will not just transform the economics but recreate it with a purpose and vigour, creativity and life because of the continuous and committed new investment of hundreds of billions of pounds through the National Investment Bank and the networks of regional banks. These are mechanisms, that keep working, supporting and sustaining continual change. that feeds and rejuvenates communities and strengthens society and social fabrics. 

But not just this, the living wage to almost six million working people and end of zero hour contract and the end of public sector pay cap means that the economy will simply be 'breathless' because of all that additional billions and billions of pounds into the consumers' power to save, spend and invest into the economic activities of the nations: money they save is money that the economy can make further investment from, money they spend the economy grows more with that, money they invest makes the economy stronger. Added to this are the funding that are going into education, social care and the NHS and how much that will enhance the economy? Added to this the investment going into the extra police and firefighters and other areas of of the job market. Added to this are the building of 500,000 homes. Not only will it end homelessness in five years for those who are currently wasting away at bed and breakfast and temporary accommodations, it will end rough sleeping as well and how much investment is going to be injected in the sector and how much life will this breathe into the housing building industry and the business outlets, that support and supply that house building sector?

Further to this, the renationalisation of national vital infrastructures will bring in a sense of national renewal and regeneration. This will be a new British Renaissance in every sense: political, economic, social, cultural and spiritual for this visions sets its high mark at the highest best of this nation and invites the nation, calls the nation, inspires the nation to rise towards that dawn: to rise for never has this country come as close to achieving a true revolution until this General Election. This Labour Party Manifesto offers the country and the nation this choice: between a vision, that aspires and inspires to aim for the best, choose the best, work and achieve the best and live, work, create and share the best: Just: Fair: Equitable, on the one hand and on the other, the absolute desperate poverty of any vision whatsoever but a record of a Party, the Conservative Party, existing for serving at the feet of the rich and curving and inflicting damage and wounds on the lives of the majority.

And this Manifesto sets its beating heart in its commitment to transforming the economy and build it into a green, sustainable and renewable-energy-fed economy and respect and follow the commitment the UK and the World made in the Paris Climate Change Accord. Further, it has committed to deal with the toxic air pollution, to a Clean Air Act and enhancing environmental protection. Along this same line the Manifesto committed itself to seek to negotiate a EU Exit that is the best for the UK and rejected the so called 'Hard Exit'.

And further, this Manifesto aligns itself well away from the war-mongering path on the world stage and clearly sets out its determination to work with, by and along the international partners and organisations, within the international law and the UN, seeking to achieve peace through civilised means and mechanism, valuing, respecting and strengthening international law, human rights, human lives and human dignity and civil liberties. In short, this Manifesto declares United Kingdom of Great Britain will seek to be great among the nations of humanity not by force, not by power, not by its bombs and army but it will do so, try to  be great, by its leadership in all areas of human endeavours, through and by great work, great deeds and great dreams, great science, great innovations, great strides in advancing great human dreams, great visions and great faiths in the best of its own as well as for and in the rest of humanity.

The choice between a jingoistic political philosophy and political economics of the Conservative Party to create a sociological jungle, killing civic society and dismantling civil structures and services, that serves the rich and makes the majority suffer in perpetual poverty, struggle and hardship  or a society, a civic society, based on a political philosophy and political economics, that believe and seek to work to build a society, based in equality, fairness and justice and will create such a civic society, that is just, fair and equitable.  And this manifesto sets out that vision and that programme of actions, that will deliver this civic society.  ω.

Read the Manifesto

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore || ‽: 290517 || Up ||

 

 

 

 

Labour is Under Attack Because We are Standing up to the Elites Who are Determined to Hijack Brexit to Pay Even Less Tax and Take Even More of the Wealth We All Create: Labour is Under Attack Because We are Standing up to the Corporate Interests Plundering Our NHS  £13 Billion of the NHS Budget is Already Privatised: Jeremy Corbyn MP


|| May 06: 2017 || ά. Mr Jeremy Corbyn MP, the Leader of the Labour Party, speaking at a rally in Leicester today, said, There’s no doubt that Thursday’s local election results were disappointing for our party. We had welcome victories in Manchester, Liverpool, Wales, Doncaster and elsewhere but too many fantastic councillors, who work tirelessly for their communities, lost their seats. We face a huge challenge in the next five weeks. But this General Election campaign is, also, a great opportunity. A chance to break free, to create a society in which people are no longer held back by a system that is rigged for the rich. A chance to rebuild Britain for the many not the few.

A Homeless Soul: This report does not actually, speak of these souls who are forced to live rough on the street. Image: University of Sheffield.

There is, also, a huge danger, that the Tories’ fear-mongering and spin machine will make some people settle for less than they should. Resign themselves to things the way they are, underestimating just how many more burdens the Tories could impose if their mission to rig the system for the rich isn’t halted. The stakes are high. We know from yesterday’s election results that the gap between us and the Tories is not as great as the pundits have been saying. But we still have many people to convince. We have four weeks to do that. Are we up to the challenge? Millions are still sceptical and undecided, not sure which way to turn. And who can blame them. Andy Burnham, who had a brilliant victory to become the new Mayor of Greater Manchester yesterday, spoke last week of how alienated people are from the political system.


He said we can’t just carry on doing what we are doing; the time has come to do something different. He’s right. Our Westminster system is broken and our economy is rigged. Both are run in the interests of the few. Things can and must be different. Labour is under attack because we are standing up to the elites who are determined to hijack Brexit to pay even less tax and take even more of the wealth we all create. Labour is under attack because we are standing up to the corporate interests plundering our NHS, £13 billion of the NHS budget is already privatised, how much more will be if the Tories get another five years?

That’s why Labour is under attack. We’re drawing a line. Three decades of privatisation, from energy and rail to health and social care, has made some people very rich but it has not delivered richer lives for the vast majority. In this election, we will be outlining a plan to transform Britain, an upgraded economy run for the many not the few. It will mean standing up to powerful vested interests. But we are ready for the challenge. The Conservatives only stand up when taking orders from their billionaire friends, who hoard our country’s wealth for themselves in tax havens. Theresa May thinks she can win the General Election by claiming she cares about working people. She talks about building a fair society. Does she think people will forget what the Tories have done to this country, how they’ve actually treated working people? This Tory leader sat alongside David Cameron in government for six years. She was in the cabinet room when they introduced the bedroom tax. So were the Liberal Democrats as part of Cameron’s coalition. What was fair about that?

End Homelessness The Humanion Campaign

And what was fair about racking up tuition fees? Or about taking benefits away from people with disabilities? Or about closing Sure Start Centres? Or starving schools of cash? Or opening up the NHS to be plundered by profiteers? And what was fair about giving big business and the richest in society tax giveaways worth tens of billions of pounds, while the rest of us were told to tighten our belts, to accept a big dose of austerity? The Tories are hoping everyone has short memories. But if that fails, they have another card they are playing. That this election is about Brexit and who can play at being toughest with Brussels. But Labour will not allow the Tories to put their party interests ahead of the real national interest. The interests of the British people.

This election isn’t about Brexit itself. That issue has been settled. The question now is what sort of Brexit do we want – and what sort of country do we want Britain to be after Brexit? And who can really be trusted to put working people first? Labour wants a jobs Brexit, a Brexit that safeguards the future of Britain’s vital industries, a Brexit that paves the way to a genuinely fairer society and to an upgraded economy. Labour’s plan to transform Britain will mean: investing in infrastructure and new industries, rebuilding our NHS and social care services, giving our children and young people a chance to fulfil their potential. We won’t be paying lip-service to working people.

We will introduce a comprehensive programme to strengthen rights at work, make sure new jobs are good jobs, and end the race to the bottom in pay, conditions and job security. Low pay and insecurity have spread like an epidemic under the Tories. Labour will invest in skills and jobs, and take action to enforce a floor under employment standards across the board, so that all jobs are decent jobs, so that all workers, the true wealth creators - can play their part in transforming Britain and benefit fully from it. Transformation means that, instead of a country run for the rich, Britain will be a country in which people are not held back, in which everyone is able to lead a richer life. And that’s why we are fighting to win this election. Fighting to win, not because I yearn for the trappings of Downing Street office but because I want a better Britain


A country for the many not the few. The local election results yesterday leave us in no doubt about the scale of our challenge. We know this is no small task - it is a challenge on a historic scale. But we, the whole Labour movement and the British people, can’t afford not to seize our moment. We have five weeks to win the General Election so we can fundamentally transform Britain for the many not the few. When we win, we form the NHS. When we win, we introduce the Equal Pay Act. When we win we establish a National Minimum Wage - one of my proudest days in politics.

When we win, the British people win. The nurse, the teacher, the small trader, the carer, the builder, the office worker win. Labour is offering a real choice, a real alternative to the rigged system that is holding us back and the Conservatives who are running our country down in every way. An alternative for the many not the few. And we need to be that real alternative because too many people in our country worry that voting won’t change anything, that all politicians are the same. We are not all the same but people are frustrated that the system remains rigged for the few, that the lives of the many don’t seem to be getting better. They vote, nothing changes. The economy is still rigged in favour of the rich and powerful.

We have to show that we are different, that we will transform Britain. That we are for the many not the few. When Labour wins there will be a reckoning for those who thought they could get away with asset stripping our industry, crashing our economy through their greed and ripping off workers and consumers. When did the Conservatives, Osborne, Cameron, May, Johnson, ever stand up to their financial backers and demand our money back? Never and they never will. Instead, they make our nurses, our carers, our soldiers, our disabled, our young people trying to get a home of their own, our elderly looking for dignity in retirement and those working hard to get on, foot the bill instead.

It makes me angry. It makes me really angry. And I know it makes the people of Britain angry too. So today, I say to tax cheats, the rip off bosses, the greedy bankers. Enough is enough. The people of Britain are taking our money back. We have always stood up for the many not the few. And I will always stand up for our beliefs. That can be lonely, I know. I campaigned against privatisation, tax cuts for the rich, letting the banks become all powerful and the Iraq war when many politicians were pushing them through or not standing up against them. We stood up for workers’ pay, better public services, a fairer society, a more equal economy and for peace and justice. Standing up for your beliefs in any circumstances, takes great determination. It can be frustrating. It takes its toll. It is far easier to compromise your beliefs and go along for the ride.

But strength is holding on to what you believe in. Standing up for the many against the few means a struggle against the odds. Looking out for the few is easy; winning for the many is hard. I have a message for Theresa May. If you feel the need to go on about what a great leader you are, then show it by debating with me in this election campaign. We are for the many, you’re for the few. But this is about so much more than Theresa May and me. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for you, the people, to decide what sort of country you want to live in. We are full of so much potential, which is being stifled and held back in favour of the few. Together, we can transform Britain.

And we must transform Britain because now it is rigged for the few. In this election, Labour is standing for decent jobs, investment for the future, shared wealth creation, security at work, affordable homes for all, a fully funded NHS and schools, training and skills, an end to rip-off privatisation, fair taxation and a fairer, more equal country. As we set out our detailed plans for Britain, the scale of the change we are offering will become clear. So let’s turn our country around. Let’s come together to transform Britain. Together, we can win for the many not the few. Make sure you are registered to vote.

Please, help others get registered to vote. Make sure you use your vote. Talk to your friends, family, neighbours and co-workers about this General Election. It is so important. This election could be a great and proud moment in our national story. Don’t wake up on June 09 to see celebrations from the tax cheats, the press barons, the greedy bankers, Philip Green, the Southern Rail directors and crooked bankers, that take our wealth, who have got away with it because the party they own, the Conservative Party, has won. We have five weeks to ruin their party. We have five weeks to have a chance to take our money back. We have five weeks to win so we can transform Britain for the many not the few. We must seize it. Thank you. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 070517 || Up  ||

 

 

 

 

 

The General Election 2017: Three: The Conservative Jingoistic Political Philosophy That Exists to Advance the Survival of the Richest-Fittest: There is Nothing Compassionate About It: No Wonder Mrs Theresa May Recites the Phrase Strong Leadership: What She Means is This That the Conservatives are About the Weakest Government That is Always at the Feet of the Richest

|| May 05: 2017 || ά. This is the third piece, of a series, that The Humanion will be publishing on The General Election 2017, throughout the coming weeks. The Conservative Party has sought always to advance a political jingoism, based on the dogma that they want to advance and establish an economy of the survival of the fittest or richest and that means that they have no other interest but this. To protect, to promote, support and advance the interest of the richest, of the fittest, of the mightiest as they see the richest as. This has created an economy, where the richest are the people, who are dictating the Government Agenda. A Conservative Government is nothing but a force, that has sold its soul to meekly and faithfully support its masters: the richest, the fittest, the mightiest. That is why, over the years of two Conservative led governments, they cut billions and billions of pounds off the disabled, off the single mothers, off the child benefits and housing benefits and working and child tax credits and that is why, despite chairing a catastrophic housing crises, they did not mind paying the private landlords billions in housing benefit payments while they will dismantle social housing. For why should a jingoistic party bother about the welfare of those, ‘least fitted to exist’, about whose welfare they have no desire to waste their energy because they exist to serve their masters: the richest?

The Conservative Government has created an economy, where the majority of the people have been cut out of the wealth of the nation and the inequality and the gap between the two ends of society is such that it is simply unsustainable. In addition to all this is this: A society that is run by a government, that exists as a jingoism force to advance the survival of the fittest and richest is a society of the jungle, where society has become a ‘social jungle’, in which everything but the society, but the community exists. Jingoism is the term we are using to mean a way of thinking, that believes in ‘physical might’ or simple physiological prowess, which should and must determine the quality and extent of survival and dominance. It, further, believes, those, who are not ‘capable’ or lack that ‘might’ to survive do not have any right to survive or exist nor any duty owed to them by society and the society simply would let them suffer and perish away for they, have no ‘right’ to exist because of their ‘fault’, that they are not the fittest. This jingoism is at the heart of Conservative political philosophy. A few of the things to consider in this jingoism: letting the health and social care fall apart simply to get to a point that it all can be privatised because this jingoism tells the Conservatives that this is the biggest expenditure for the the ones that they should not 'waste' money on. And if that money could be saved they can give that back to their masters so that they pay less tax. Further, this privatisation will open up a 'market' for the richest to make a 'killing' for themselves. This is what they are after.

Their cuts have been strangling the education sector as a whole and yet why are they doing it while they, first pursued the so called 'academies', then came free schools and finally, now, the push is for grammar schools? Why does the Conservative Government want grammar schools? How many people of this country can afford to send their children to these grammar schools? While the vast majority of the children and young people go to local authority-run schools, that face a 'continual war' run against them by the Conservative Government? It is coming from the same jingoism: starve a sector, that serves the ones, that they do not care about and take it to a point so that it can be privatised, which will open up a 'killing fied' for their masters, the richest. Therefore, the Conservative obsessiveness of being 'strong and powerful' have deep rooted source, from which, it arises: the jingoism, that exists to worship the fittest, the richest, the mightiest and they are determined to serve their masters not only by saving them money and protecting them from the state 'interference' but also by opening up new fields, areas and arenas for their masters to make more money.

When they say that they are a low tax party what they effectively mean is that they will do all so not ‘burden’ the richest-fittest with higher taxes. Instead, they would give them tax breaks and to cover the short fall they will cut welfare budgets, that offers a life line to millions and millions. The media, the pundits, the so called specialist voices, the spin doctors and the entire propaganda machine of the Conservative Party do not want this to be explored, discussed or debated. Instead, they run ruthless character assassinations, brutal personal attacks and use all the manipulative mechanisms, such as polls and this and that to make everything into a personality cult thing. And here the media culture has become such that they have created a cemented jacket, which they wear at all time, so that every new edition of a particular media outlet is a replication of yesterday, in which they had replicated the previous day’s editions.

This Conservative Party exists to continue to seek to keep in place this jungle of the jingoists, where they are owned by the rich and the richest and they want to keep everything in this state while the majority of the people of this country are made to pay the price of that jingoistic, dogmatic and absolutely ruthless, cruel, brutal, inhumane and uncivilised system of governance, that says society, government, state and everything else exist simply to ensure the fittest or the richest continue to swell while the majority waste away suffering and paying for this dinosaur-political-philosophy, that should have been buried in the depth of dark history’s archives. And yet, the Conservative Party has money because the richest and the fittest want them to keep guard for their interests so that they are able to use propaganda and simply offer untruths and manipulation-brewed statements and presentations on all fronts available to them, that are absolutely beyond belief: such as they are one nation party, they are for the working people, they are the party to fight everyday injustices, that they are compassionate and so on and so forth.

And they have large and powerful media to run their ‘crusade’ against any and all other political forces, that stand against the Conservative Party. Humanity, care, compassion, duty, responsibility, togetherness and common goals for common goods, civic, civic duties and responsibilities, these sort of things cannot feature on someone’s vocabulary if that someone stands up and says that she:he believes, stands for and works for the maintenance of the survival of the fittest or richest. Does this, this survival of the fittest or richest, not mean that the following groups of the poor, are not fit to exist or survive because they have set out their goal to let the weakest fall down and take all that they are given and continue to exist and suffer and pay the price of this jingoism: people, who are poor and they are the majority: people, who are disabled; people, who are elderly and frail; people, who are pensioners; people, who have young children; poor young people; people, who are suffering from many illnesses; women suffering from vary many ills including un-equal pay and many other discriminations; the working poor; the children and the young; the single mothers; and the rough-sleeping homeless; and the homeless, wasting away at bed and breakfast nightmares; and the homeless, who live under the sword of becoming homeless because they live in privately rented properties.

Add this , the others, the vast majority of the pensioners, who do not have a ‘rich pension’, the vast number of the elderly, frail and disabled elderly people, the entire segment of society of people with disabilities. Furthermore, the Conservative jingoistic political philosophy has been able to create a mythological sociological psyche -jacket of self-delusion so that they are able to make the poor believe that they are not poor. What is a teacher, say, a newly qualified teacher on a salary of just edging upward of about 20,000 thousand a year? Add to that, that teacher’s liabilities of the loan that she:he has taken in order to study. In most part of the country they cannot ever buy a house. So they rent: even if they rent a room, say, in London, they will spend the better part of their salary in rent. The money they are left with is the statement of a figure that says: British teachers are probably some of the poorest in the advanced economies. But if one speaks with these teachers, one might be surprised as to what they think about their state. They probably won’t describe themselves as poor. Now you go and count more: social workers, nurses, ancillary workers, office workers, secretaries, receptionists, journalists, not the ones, who have made themselves into a brand and are able to sell that brand at a high price, café workers, supermarket workers, cleaners, youth and play workers, dinner ladies, workers in arts and culture and media and the list goes on. What about all these people and professions: what are they? Are they not living in working poverty? But the Conservative Party is able to feed society with this myth that ‘the poor’ are everyone else and not you. And why are you not poor? ‘’ Because, we, the Conservative Party, are telling you so.’’

‘’The Mythology of How Rich the People of the UK Are: Out of 63,181,000, 2011 Census, 40%, That's About 25,272,800, of the Working Age Population Has Less Than £100 in Savings and More Than 01.7 Million People in the UK Do Not Even Have a Bank Account.’’ This is the latest report from a Parliamentary Committee. If 40% of the people of the UK do not even have a saving of £100 what are these people? What are their financial and economic standing? Are they not poor? Now, let us invite the readers, we do not have any statistics on this, say, we take the savings to a £1000. How many people, in terms of percentage of the population have this much saving? One can only ponder and realise how far, far, far apart the truth, the reality of the UK from the mythology, that the Conservative Party and its supporting media outlets and all its propaganda has been able to create, sustain and maintain and that helps it to win elections, where the poor are persuaded to vote as someone, who is hitting the water with a sword while being in the water so that the sword goes and injures the person using the sword. Therefore, when the Conservative Party forms the government they attack these very poor, who voted for them. This is the greatest irony of all times that the Conservative Party is probably the most successful political party in terms of how to manipulate the media and the entire apparatus of public communication and create a mythology and is able to sell it to the those, who should run million miles away from the Conservative Party.

But the Conservative media does not speak about this. Instead, you seek to read from the Conservative press and media outlets and you find that this country is rich and everyone is rich and there is nothing to worry about. Instead, join in the band wagon of why one must begin to rage with hatred about any other political party or their leaderships or their leaders while the fact is this that, despite what they seek to do, the parties in opposition, do not get to do anything from the point of view of exercising ‘power’. It is the Government in power that does do things that impacts and dictates people’s lives. And this Conservative Government, its leaderships, including its current leader, Mrs May, has been doing that but they are able to successfully blame everyone else and direct their assassination attempts to all the leaders and the opposition. This is absolutely mind boggling. And the country, over these last few years has been brought down to its gasping breaths by what the jingoism of the Conservative Party has been doing but the Conservative media outlets are speaking of a Conservative landslide in this election. This can only be described as the mass-mobilising-social-oblivion-created hypnotism, in which, you follow the mantra: you create a mythology and repeat it in every possible front and sphere and then repeat this every single day so that the social sphere begins to lose the sense of what is real and what is not and then it would be hard for society to differentiate between them and the mythology is accepted as the truth.

This jingoism of the Conservative Party can be seen in this fact that they cut and they have been cutting, because they believe in ‘austerity’, which means, the part of society, that must do so is, that has no right to survive, to exist or to expect any support from society, because they are not the fittest-richest but the weakest, because they want to ‘cut’ the size of the Government: why do they want to cut the size of the government:? Because the less there is the Government can and does do the better of the richest-fittest are and chances are, a great deal of the public services offer services to those, who are not the fittest. Therefore, their cuts are universal and it has been wounding almost all the services. And that means that the very fundamental architecture of governance in the United Kingdom, its local government governance ecology, has been devastated by the Conservative Government.

The jingoism does not want that to continue to be the ‘vehicle’ to offer ‘civic’ and public services to those, they do not care about. For the majority of the services, that the local authorities provide are not taken up by the richest-fittest. Thus, these jingoistic cuts have devastated this architecture of civic and public services. The Conservative media and other parts of the media, which think they are independent but they, too, are following the agenda, that has been set by the Conservative supporting media, are simply doing everything to direct the attention of the country and the people to pointless, irrelevant and poisonous propaganda. If anyone goes to any UK publication website one simply would find that these outlets do not live in the real world, where things have been falling apart and causing immense devastations and yet there is no sign on it in the media. There are voices, who are supposed to be journalists but all one gets are bundles of regurgitated opinions, baseless and evidence-less, and which are, simply utter personal prejudices, set and punctuated with the venom of persistent but baseless hatred against their targets. No one is speaking about the issues, the realities and everyone is going mad about the fixated personality cult, seeking to assert the false, venomous, abusive and hostile opinions as the truth.

‘’86% of the Savings the Treasury Has Made From Tax and Benefit Changes Have Fallen on Women: A Million Working Households Claiming Housing Benefit Because Their Wages Aren’t Enough to Pay the Rent. And There are Three Million Working Families, Who Simply Rely on Tax Credits to Make Ends Meet. This is Modern Britain.’’ Who has been doing this? The Conservative Government but they are not being discussed? No one is saying anything about the grotesque level of inequality and the impossible gap between the richest and the poorest but most fundamentally, the fact that the most of the wealth of this nation is owned by a tiny percentage of the richest. Well, the Conservative Jingoism stands for that but that jingoism has nothing to do with humanity, civility and civic and civilisation. When a society says that it exists to support the survival and dominance of the fittest and richest, it actually becomes worse than a jungle.

And the Conservative Jingoism exists to create, maintain and support such a jingoistic socio-political sphere and culture of a ‘social’ jungle, where society and community simply are killed off for a society is the essence of civilisation, that cannot call itself such, if it says: the mightiest, the richest are the fittest, who have the ‘divine’ right to exist and the rest, even if they are the majority, must pay for being weak, suffer and perish and they cannot expect any support or assistance for they have no right to exist because they are the weakest. This is the essence of the strong and powerful Conservative Party. No wonder their current leader is repeating this mantra of being strong and powerful. But the Conservative Jingoism is such that it is not the Conservative Party or the Government it leads, that is powerful but the mightiest, the richest, the fittest, who are while the Conservative Party and a Conservative Government are subservient to them, who pay for their propaganda so that they can manipulate people to see things in the way they are manipulated to do, that do not reflect the reality. The Conservative Party is such an entity that exists as the weakest Government because they exist to serve their mighty owners: the richest, the fittest and the mighty. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 060517 || Up ||

 

 

 

 

 

A Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland

Image: Ulster University

 

|| May 01: 2017: Ulster University News || ά. New research from Ulster University is set to open the debate and refocus attention on creating and implementing a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. A Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland is one of the outstanding issues from the Good Friday Belfast Agreement. Ulster University’s new 18-month long research project, which received over £20,000 funding from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, asks ‘Where Next for a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland?’

The results will form the development of a policy report containing a model Bill for consideration by key stakeholders, such as the Northern Ireland Office, the Irish Government, local political parties and a range of human rights organisations. Once the draft model Bill has been completed, it will be presented and disseminated at a series of seminars in Belfast, Dublin and London. Ulster University’s Dr Anne Smith will lead the project alongside Professor Colin Harvey from Queen’s University Belfast. Both are long-time contributors to the debate around a Bill of Rights and this project is a follow-on from previous work they have carried out.

Dr Anne Smith said, “Human rights have been central to the Northern Ireland peace process and the institutions and legal protections it established. In 2008 the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission set out its advice on a Bill of Rights and the following year the Northern Ireland Office responded to this advice by publishing its consultation document.

Unfortunately, since then there has been little further discussion on a Northern Ireland Bill of Rights between the political parties and governments. To safeguard against the weakening of human rights standards post Brexit and to reflect the current political mood of implementation rather than renegotiation, we believe that it is very important to revisit this issue now.

The Bill would take the form of Westminster legislation in accordance with the Good Friday:Belfast Agreement. This project, therefore, represents our attempt to give legislative expression to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s advice on a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland.”

Professor Colin Harvey, from the School of Law at Queen’s University Belfast, said, “The time is right to revisit and reflect on all the efforts to advance a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. It now seems plain that human rights will feature once again in the constitutional conversations about the future of this region and the future of these islands.

As in so many areas, we are fortunate not to be starting from a blank page. I am pleased to be working on this project with Dr Anne Smith as we seek to explore how the ambitions for a Bill of Rights might be realised in practice. A Bill of Rights, that respects our particular circumstances is one way to ensure that human rights remain central to our peace process.” ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  ||  ‽: 020517  ||  Up   ||

 

 

 

 

Building for Equality for People with Disabilities in the UK: The Government Must Lead the Charge: Women and Equality Committee: But Has the Government Taken Any Lead in This Area: Ask the People with Disabilities and They Will Tell You This: This Government Has Done Nothing But Ensuring That the Disabled People Know That They are Not Equal Citizens of This Country But a Burden to It: And Instead of Seeking to Strive to Achieve Equality This Government is Determined to Do All It Can to Take Away as Much as Possible the Vital Support That is Provided to Them: Equality Cannot Be Sought or Achieved Through Ad-Hoc Token Measures But with a Comprehensive and Holistic Systemic Thinking and Actions: The Humanion

|| April 26: 2017 || ά. The House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee has published its report, in which it says that the Government must act to lead the charge in improving access and inclusion in the built environment. This should include public procurement, fiscal initiatives and transparently modelling best practice and bringing the full range of work on improving access and inclusion in the built environment into a coherent and transparent strategy, with the Department for Communities and Local Government held responsible for making this happen. The report highlights the challenges disabled people face in accessing homes, buildings and public spaces. Many workplaces are inaccessible, there is very little choice of where to live and the public spaces, through which, people need to move can be prohibitively excluding.

The Committee argues that these factors constitute an unacceptable diminution of quality of life and equality. Disabling features of the built environment do not only pose problems for people with physical impairments but also for people, who have less visible disabilities, including mental health and neurological conditions or who are neuro diverse, such as people with autism. The report proposes a range of practical policy solutions. Above all, the Committee calls for improved engagement with disabled people to ensure that they have a meaningful input, both nationally and locally, to the creation of inclusive buildings and environments. The Equality Act 2010 requires reasonable adjustments to be made so that disabled people are not excluded from workplaces, public buildings and places, that serve the public.However, the Act is not having the kind of impact, that it was expected to have: the Government has left change to be achieved through a model of enforcement, that relies on litigation by private individuals.

In its Summary the Report says: All too often, disabled people find their lives needlessly restricted by features of the built environment. Many workplaces and service premises are inaccessible, there is very little choice of where to live and the public spaces, through which, people need to move, can be prohibitively excluding. Together, these factors constitute an unacceptable diminution of quality of life and equality.

This is an issue, that affects us all: not just because, even if not disabled ourselves, most people are related to, work with or are friends with someone who is, but because increases in average life expectancy will mean that, over time, an ever-greater proportion of the population will be living with disability.

Legislation is in place, which should, in theory, prevent inaccessible buildings and public spaces being created and enduring. The Equality Act 2010 requires employers and bodies providing services to anticipate the need for reasonable adjustments so as not to discriminate against disabled people; this is relevant not only to the occupiers of buildings but also to the planning and building control process.

However, the burden of ensuring that an accessible environment is achieved falls too heavily at present on individual disabled people, an approach that we consider to be neither morally nor practically sustainable. That burden needs to lie more obviously with the bodies who create, occupy and manage the environment.

The Government has in place a range of levers that can be used to achieve more accessible built environments: national planning policy and guidance states that local planning authorities should take inclusive design into account, and building regulations stipulate that reasonable provision should be made for people to gain access to and use buildings. The levers, also, encompass tools, such as Disabled Facilities Grants and they cross departmental boundaries. We believe that greater co-ordination and leadership is needed to make this framework effective and to make it clear that inclusive design is a statutory requirement, not just a ‘nice-to-do’.

Our first key conclusion is, therefore, that the Government must act to more visibly lead the charge in improving access and inclusion in the built environment, through public procurement, fiscal initiatives, transparently modelling best practice, and ultimately, showing strategic leadership by bringing together the full range of work on improving access and inclusion in the built environment into a coherent and transparent strategy. The Department for Communities and Local Government should be held responsible for making this happen.


Secondly, the Government should make it easier for local planning authorities to follow this lead through revision and clarification of national planning policy and guidance. Local Plans should not be found sound without evidence that they address access for disabled people in terms of housing, public spaces and the wider built environment; to support this, the Equality and Human Rights Commission should investigate the Planning Inspectorate’s compliance with the Equality Act. Planning consent should only be given where there is evidence that a proposal makes sufficient provision for accessibility.

More ambition is needed in the standards the Government sets for the homes that the country desperately needs. There is ample evidence, nationally, for the Government to require a reasonable level of accessibility for all new homes. Sadly, the ability to ‘visit’ a home is the current mandatory minimum and sometimes the standard is not effective at achieving even that.

In particular, the exemption for conversions means that substantial developments of dwellings can proceed without any provision for accessible housing at all; we recommend that this be changed. In order to adopt a higher standard, a local authority currently has to prove that there are enough disabled people already living in the area to warrant building homes that are or could be made, accessible. This is the wrong way around. Housing standards need to be future-proofed and to produce meaningful choice in housing, not just to respond to immediate local need. The Government should raise the mandatory minimum to Category two, the equivalent of the former Lifetime Homes standard.

Much more can be done to make the public realm and public buildings more accessible: through building accessible workplaces, and incentivising employers to improve existing ones; by updating the regulations for new buildings, which are currently based on a 16 year-old standard; and by amending the Licensing Act 2003 to make it clear that equal access is as important a consideration as, for example, having adequate measures to prevent noise nuisance. Greater provision of Changing Places toilets should be a specific priority: such facilities should be required in all large building developments that are open to the public.

Finally, we address one specific issue relating to inclusive streetscapes. Shared spaces schemes are a source of concern to many disabled people across the country, particularly features such as the removal of controlled crossings and kerbs and inconsistency in the design of schemes from place to place. We heard reports from many groups and individuals that their ability to move about freely in the public realm had been severely curtailed by the implementation of schemes which they considered to be unsafe.

In light of such evidence, we recommend that the Government urgently replace the 2011 guidance on shared spaces and ensure that the new guidance is clearly founded on an inclusive design approach. In the meantime, the Government should require local authorities to call a halt to new shared space schemes and to review existing schemes, in partnership with local disabled people.

In the course of our inquiry we heard from housebuilders, standard setters, inspectors, lawyers and local authorities, but no voices are more important than those of disabled people themselves. We have also made recommendations for improving engagement with disabled people to ensure that they have a meaningful input, at both national and local level, to the creation of inclusive buildings and environments.


Key Recommendations

Strategic leadership: The Government has a range of levers that can be used to achieve more accessible built environments, but is not using them well enough. Greater co-ordination and leadership is needed to make this framework effective, and to make it clear that inclusive design is a statutory requirement, not just a 'nice to do'.

Designing for equality: The Government should make it easier for local planning authorities to follow this lead through revision and clarification of national planning policy and guidance. Local plans should not be found sound without evidence that they address access for disabled people in terms of housing, public spaces and the wider built environment; to support this, the Equality and Human Rights Commission should investigate the Planning Inspectorate’s compliance with the Equality Act. Planning consent should only be given where there is evidence that a proposal makes sufficient provision for accessibility.

Housing: More ambition is needed in the standards the Government sets for the homes that the country desperately needs. Housing standards need to be future-proofed and to produce meaningful choice in housing, not just to respond to immediate local need. The Government should raise the mandatory minimum to Category two, the equivalent of the former Lifetime Homes standard, and apply it to all new homes, including the conversion of buildings such as warehouses or former mills into homes.

Public buildings and places: Much more can be done to make the public realm and public buildings more accessible: through building accessible workplaces, and incentivising employers to improve existing ones; by updating the regulations for new buildings and amending the Licensing Act 2003. Greater provision of Changing Places toilets should be a specific priority: such facilities should be required in all large building developments that are open to the public.

Shared Spaces: Shared spaces schemes are a source of concern to many disabled people across the country, particularly features such as the removal of controlled crossings and kerbs and inconsistency in the design of schemes from place to place. The report recommends that the Government halt the use is such schemes pending the urgent replacement of the 2011 guidance on shared spaces, ensure that the new guidance is developed with the involvement of disabled people – and that it is followed in practice.

The Committee Ms Chair Maria Miller MP, said: "Poor accessibility affects us all. Even if not disabled ourselves, most people are related to, work with or are friends with someone who is. Increases in life expectancy will mean that over time, an ever greater proportion of us will be living with disability, and our understanding of 'disability' has developed to recognise that those with mental health problems, autism or other less visible impairment types also face disabling barriers.

Yet the burden of ensuring that an accessible environment is achieved falls too heavily at present on individual disabled people – an approach which is neither morally nor practically sustainable. Instead, we need a proactive, concerted effort by 'mainstream' systems and structures – including national and local government and built environment professionals to take on the challenge of creating an inclusive environment.

The Government must be more ambitious. Our current environment was not created overnight and will not be mended overnight but those with the influence to do so have had over 20 years since the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 first set out the standards expected of them. Disabled people have the right to participate in all parts of life under the law; this is undermined if the built environment locks them out. Our report sets out a realistic but challenging agenda that, if adopted, can give this issue a priority and deliver the changes that we all need."

Baroness Deech, who chaired the House of Lords Committee on the Equality Act 2010 and Disability in 2016–17, said, "I welcome the recommendations made today by the Women and Equalities Committee. They support and reinforce those made by the Lords' report into the Equality Act 2010 and Disability.

Our aim in that report was to enable disabled people to enjoy life, to participate in society, work and travel on an equal basis, as is required by the law. The ability to access public and private buildings, city centres and other parts of the public realm, is central to this and I urge the government to take the proactive leadership that this report recommends.

This is not a minority issue. As the population lives longer more and more of us will find ourselves disabled by the barriers that remain in our built environment – whether through sight, hearing or mobility impairment or illness. If we are going to remain active into older age the government must respond to the wealth of evidence in both this report and the report of the Committee that I had the privilege of chairing, and ensure that all our buildings and public spaces – present and future – are accessible by everyone."

Lord Holmes of Richmond, who gave evidence to the Committee's inquiry, said, "I'm grateful that the Committee has recognised the importance of this issue and consulted so widely with stakeholders and disabled people as well as disability groups. The impact on people's lives when public spaces are not accessible is devastating. Inclusive design must be the golden thread that runs through all new buildings and works in the public realm.

I'm also delighted that the committee agree with my recommendation that a moratorium on shared space schemes is necessary. Local authorities require clarity in this space and the exclusion of people from their communities and potential waste of public money must end." ω.

Read the Report

    

How Able is the United Kingdom to Protect and Advance the Rights of People with Disabilities: Whilst at Face Value We Have Travelled Far: In Reality Disabled People are Being Left Behind in Society: Their Life Chances Remain Very Poor: And Public Attitudes Have Changed Very Little

|| April 07: 2017 || ά. The progress towards real equality for disabled people over the past twenty years is insufficient and 'littered with missed opportunities and failures'. That’s according to the Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission following the publication of Being disabled in Britain: A journey less equal, the most comprehensive analysis ever on how the rights of disabled people are protected in Great Britain. Mr David Isaac, Chair of the Commission, commenting on the damning new state of the nation report into life for disabled people, said, “Whilst at face value we have travelled far, in reality disabled people are being left behind in society, their life chances remain very poor and public attitudes have changed very little.

This evidence can no longer be ignored. Now is the time for a new national focus on the rights of the thirteen million disabled people who live in Britain. They must have the same rights, opportunities and respect as other citizens. We must put the rights of disabled people at the heart of our society. We cannot and must not, allow the next twenty years to be a repeat of the past.” The report, which covers six key areas of life, finds that disabled people in Britain are experiencing disadvantages in all of them and sets out vital areas for urgent improvement. Despite significant progress in the laws protecting disabled people’s rights, they are still not being treated as equal citizens and continue to be denied the opportunities and outcomes non-disabled people take for granted. Readmore

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 260417 || Up || 

 

 

 

 

The UK General Election: What Has Been Happening in the United Kingdom: While Everyone Has Been Busy About Exiting the European Union

End Homelessness The Humanion Campaign: It's a Choice: Once Made by a Society to End It, Homelessness Becomes Part of History

The country is hardly in a united state after the European Referendum for Scotland is opposed to the EU exit, so is Northern Ireland. England voted to get out so did Wales, except Welsh Parties want the UK Government to ensure that the consequent funding loss that Wales will face as the UK gets out of the EU is 'replaced' by the UK Government. But this editorial, is not about the UK's EU exit; rather, as the entire country, the government and the other parties and the media busy about nothing else but this issue, what has been happening to the country. The headline could be: While You Were Not Looking: This is What Has Been Happening to the UK. It seems as if the country does not a have government anymore nor other political parties either and the entire media seems to have forgotten that the country, the nation and all the issues that they face are still here and they need to be dealt with. This appears so because, not just the government but the entire political scene and the media are busy about the EU exit and the 'rest of the country' is left to the 'sky' to watch. It is as if one has a Royal Appoint in which one, obviously a staunch monarchist, is granted an Audience with HRM the Queen, that will happen in two years' time but this person has abandoned his entire life for this. He simply has left his 'post' and spends his entire 'resource' in nothing but the preparation of that distant Royal Appointment. This is what it seems and feels like happening to the UK at the moment.  One of the most serious of the consequences of this is, as stated in our original editorial after the EU Referendum: the entire state of the United Kingdom is faced with a reality that no one seems to care much about but it has put all nations within the UK on its own and they stand opposed to each other that puts the emphasis on differences and positions of antagonism and encourages parties to forget about the similarities and grounds for working together. This is not and cannot be a good thing for a nation to face, even if that 'nation' is comprised of many other nations. The Conservative Government does not have a clue as to how to support the UK go through a transitional phase of 'updating' itself so that a new constitutional arrangement is set up that is suitable to support the 'nation' that is an 'umbrella' of some 'nations' in the modern times. This issue does not enjoy much political urgency in any political leaning; yet this is one of the most urgent, most fundamental and most important task before the United Kingdom and the people of this country.  

One: The State of the Nation

The post referendum realities of the UK is a new reality in which intolerance, aggression, hatred, hostility and violence against all sorts of people and groups have increased to an unprecedented degree and level that the social sphere has been fast becoming a poisonous one. Minorities of all kinds are being subjected to increased and most ferocious attacks, violence, intimidation and abuse. It has become acceptable to show and express one's hatred, contempt, disregard and it is increasingly even being accepted, by the media so that when they are reporting they are reporting things as if there is no difference between, say, 'David Cameron' and the leader of, say, a nazi or fascist party because the media is showing or speaking and presenting both as if they are the same 'politicians'. Yet, the fact is this, that whatever else David Cameron may be, he is absolutely, definitely and most certainly, not like and does not stand for the filth that a leader of a Nazi party would be like or would stand for. But the media is portraying both as if to signify that well, this is the leader of 'A Party' or this is the leader of 'this Nazi party' without any distinction being shown between them. There seems to be no scrutiny, no challenging and no journalistic standard being followed. This has been worsening and minorities of all kinds, and minorities can be defined by many things but with faiths being the primary one, faiths other than 'Christian' are subjected to ferocious attacks and abuse. Hatred against the Jewish people or Anti-Semitism, and expressing that hatred not just in verbal way but with criminal intent and violence has increased to a tremendous level so has the same been directed to the Muslims community as if to show and establish that there is no difference between the violent, criminal and fascist groups claiming their cause to be Islam and the simple, ordinary follower of the faith of Islam. In short, 'the other' is now identified, made a target and all hatred using all and every means possible including violence are being used against this 'the other'. No one seems to register what this is doing and continue to do to social and cultural fabrics of society and how it devastates and inflicts wounds and drives communities apart. No one is showing much concern other than issuing a statement here and a brief there. This is what is the most terrifying thing that has come out of the Referendum. Hatred, towards 'foreigners' is an ugly expression that has found the most ugly route to express itself: intolerance, intimidation and violence. To this kind of hatred, it has special definitions of what 'foreigner is, what 'Christian' is and what 'white' is. Foreigners are all that are not 'Christians', 'Christians are not 'Non-White' and finally, 'white' means 'blue-blood-white', what Hitler meant by 'white' so that many peoples that appear like any other white are not seen as white and these obnoxious things are getting off the ground. This is why this is a terrifying development. Unless and until it is acknowledged and a society has taken a stand against these forces and taken up the political fight and by fighting defeat it politically, this will continue to grow stronger. And the causes and reasons, that are economical, political, social, cultural, institutional as well as historical, will help these forces to misguide people to serve their cause of hatred. And here, we use a piece we published before: The European Parliament: The Very People in This Grand Assembly of Peoples of Europe Have Been Directly Elected by the People of All EU Countries: The People From the Extreme and Far Right, the Extreme and Populist Nationalists, the Entire Range of Neo-Nazi, Fascist and Supremacist Groups and the Following of the Culture of Demagogues, Who Claim the European Union Undemocratic Must Be Taken on and Defeated: How: This is How These Forces Can Be Politically and Political Philosophically Absolutely Destroyed: ''|| February 01: 2017 || ά. By committing to the following: a: A Guaranteed Universal Income; B: A Guaranteed Home; C: A Guaranteed Education Up to College and Guaranteed Subsidised Route to Degree-Level Education; D: A Guaranteed Job; E: Guaranteed Access to Free for All Healthcare at the Point of Need and F: A Guaranteed Universal-Child-Income-Protection Where Every Child is Guaranteed Equal Financial Support from 0-16 and G: Guaranteed Social Care and H: Guaranteed Access to Equitable Pension:Provides a living income.'' And to make this an absolutely inevitable force that the all advanced economies will be 'forced' by their own people to adopt it, all is required is one country to do it. Imagine, all the major parties make this commitment and then win an election and say, the UK is the first country in the world to do this, it will simply turn the tide of Europe and all the major parties will begin to follow suit and the other advanced economies will have to follow suit. This is not socialism: it is a transitory phase of 'capitalism within the rule of law' whereby it is 'forced' to work and exist to serve 'the people', the nation and not the other way round. One visionary country, one visionary party or some visionary parties need to show vision and courage and then go about inspiring people to support them. For until this is done, nothing will resolve the desperate poverty, the devastating working poverty, desperate state of families and children suffering from poverty, inequality and all other forms and states of other ills that are generated through these, the humiliating various states of homelessness, the absolute disconnection, disenfranchisement, disempowerment and dehumanisation arising out of the current states of existence, of the majority of the people of a nation from the 'wealth' of a nation, the current states of lives of people are not only not going to improve but will continue to get worse and these nasty dark forces will continue to use the people's genuine grievances and use them to their own advantage. The only voice in Europe that is officially speaking of introducing a  Universal income is one of the candidates in the upcoming French election and he seems to be doing not bad at the moment. This is a good start... a candidate speaking of Universal Income becoming a national reality in France...It is just a start but political parties cannot sustain themselves the old way.....the new way is this way...all members of a nation must have verifiable connection, link, share and relationship with the 'wealth' of a nation to be an equal and effective part of that nation.

Two: The State of the National Health Service

To say, the NHS is facing a crisis would be such an understatement as if one is suggesting one Astronomical Unit is 10 cm! The government does not have time to deal with this and they keep issuing the same statement to repeat the same old things that they have been saying all these years. And then, they come out and say that these things that are happening are not 'acceptable' and yet what are they doing about it. Nothing. The NHS is being allowed to come 'crumbling down' so that it would be easier to simply 'privatise it'. There can be no other sense of a government, that is committed to a National Health Service, to leave the NHS to fend for itself and get destroyed by what it simply cannot deliver. Months after months, year after year, the situation in the NHS has been getting worse and the government does nothing. And soon, there would come a time, NHS won't be able to sustain itself for it is 'tearing down' the 'morale' of the 'professions' that sustain the NHS and people working in the NHS will begin to leave simply to 'save themselves' because they are human beings. And even in wars, soldiers are given 'breaks'. The NHS personnel are 'forced' to work as 'soldiers' do in a war for that is precisely what the NHS is fighting: it is fighting a War of Survival. But its 'soldiers' are not machines but very much human and they soon will simply 'abandon' their posts and run for their 'sanity'. A human cannot live and maintain sanity, living and fighting in a war, twenty four seven. It simply cannot do that. Further, this state would scare any future students to consider anything to do with Medicine in the UK thousands of miles off. And yet, the NHS is one of the best thing that the UK has done in the last half century and may be, it is one of best thing, the country and nation have ever achieved in the entire history of the land: to create such a treasure for the nation as the National Health Service. And this government does not have anything to offer to save and protect this NHS because they are busy with their EU exit and they think that no one is looking. And in that, they would rather use this 'opportunity' to get the NHS 'deliver' the the 'evidence' that they could use to privatise it. But believe this, no one can fail to notice when they are dying of pain and agony on the floor of an A and E for 13 hours without being dealt with or one holding a baby desperately ill, on the floor for such a long period. And, if any political party in England or the UK, think people of this country will not look and won't notice what is being done to the NHS, let them be warned: invite them to better think again.

Three: The State of Social Care

The NHS is facing this 'war' not simply because of its 'normal' work loads but the absolutely increased and unprecedented level of patients arriving at its doors, who either should not arrive there or if they did, should leave as soon as they are ready to do so from hospitals, simply because the severe and continuous cuts in the social care budgets that effected the entire country's local authorities, who have been struggling to find money and resources where they had none left. The Social Care is beyond repair because it has been destroyed to the point that it cannot be fixed with some pound and pennies. But until it is fixed the NHS simply cannot deal with the demands and pressures this puts on it, even if given money. And it is clear to common sense, an elderly patient would cost the NHS many fold more than she:he would do if staying at a care setting. And yet the government has no time nor energy to stand up and go about fixing the social care crisis. Social care is no longer a crisis: it is a rebuilding task: to rebuild the destroyed care service provisions all together. This government does not have anything to do that either. This government is not led by a Prime Minister who has grown, worked, learnt and developed a vision for the country for the time as and when she gets the opportunity to become the Prime Minister. Tony Blair did that. David Cameron did that. Jeremy Corbyn is doing that now. Paddy Ashdown did that, though he never became a Prime Minister. Charles Kennedy did that without getting near power. Margaret Thatchter did that. No, not Theresa May. She became the 'happens to be Prime Minister'. Therefore, this government is blank on 'vision'. It has none left because he who came to the Government with a vision is no longer with it. David Cameron has left and the Conservative Party has not gone through the process of letting another David or Margaret or Theresa to rise up and get chiselled out through the process as she:he develops such a vision in the course of years of learning, doing and thinking.   

Four: The State of Education

Education is the other service that has received continuous attacks of cuts. No one has been speaking about what has been happening to education, the realities of schools, colleges and universities, particularly, of inner city areas of the country and how desperate the situation is getting. But every one is getting lost in the fight of the EU exit that no one heard anyone mentioning education in a long time other than, here and there, this initiative or that initiative, which is further proof of the disarray and emptiness of this government. The professions involved in education and the local authorities are struggling hard to maintain what is there but nothing is the same for you keep on cutting and the buckets of resources keep bleeding themselves to empty. This will erupt in ways no government can  ignore. But it will cost the most in the way the younger generations are 'short-changed' by this government. Education investment is the most precious investment any nation can ever make. This government does not believe that. There is no evidence to support this notion that they believe education must always remain in the highest of all its priorities. Without making education the highest most priority and the highest most investment in education, the UK will cause the nation to have an outsider's place in the future world that will be based on absolutely nothing other than knowledge, skills, expertise in science, mathematics, engineering, technology and innovations.

Five: The State of Youth Service Provisions

Youth Service provisions of the country has literally been 'terminated'. The investment, the initiatives, the efforts, the resources that went into developing new youth service provisions in the country in the late 90 and early 2000 have been reversed to the point that youth services are now only skeletons and what does that do the youths, the youths that are written off. Particularly, the youths that got mixed in drugs and drug related crimes, drug related health problems, in gangs and in knife and gun crimes and unemployment and not in education, training or work? The list could go on and on and yet this is probably the most devastated of areas, a casualty of this government's dogmatic cuts. And yet, no one has a 'second' to speak of these issues so that the country is not 'seeing' the realities of all these: the gun crimes, the gang related violence and crimes, the knife crimes, the drug crimes, the drug related health issues, homelessness, teenage pregnancies, unemployment, unemployability, no prospect of ever getting a job and so on and so forth. These are the things that burst into flames in times as riots and violence. The Humanion invites politicians to wake up for the cuts and devastations and the 'termination' of the youth services are inflicting the gravest of dangers that a society has no power to stop when it has left it for too long for when it erupts it burns and destroys everything that costs, in every sense of the word, much, far too much more than it would have done should society have chosen to invest earlier to ensure the causes of such things do not arise.

Six: The State of the Family and Children's Services

Social services, services to work with families, such as services of the health visitors, midwives, district nurses, therapists of many kinds and other community professionals: all that was created in terms of family, early years, such as sure start, mostly disappeared and now all are 'empty and vacant' in the 'western front'. This government has cut away all the vital services and support networks for families and communities, particularly, in the poor areas of the country that these people, the families and communities who relied on that support and which made significant difference to the quality of their lives. Most of these services no longer exist and this government does not have time to think about this nor, it would appear, any other political party is speaking about these 'infected' wounds, that are left open when 'people' are left to fend for themselves. These are not things that make headlines in the media either. But these are the things that impact on real lives of real people in the real communities and there 'stirring' of discontents is shaping that is too wide, that is too deep and that no one is speaking about.

Seven: The State of Housing and Homelessness

Housing is in the most dire situation in modern history. Homelessness has been growing. There are three types of homelessness, in The Humanion's point of view: a: those who rent from private sector, b: those who are accepted as homeless by social landlords and placed in temporary accommodations and c: those who are literally homeless, sleeping rough on the street. Add the three categories of homeless people and they would form the largest section of the nation. And no political party has a strategy or thinking or anything resembling efforts to deal with this fundamental question: the majority of the people who are homeless, of this nation, how do they belong to the nation? How are they equal to those who have homes? How do they feel or can they feel part of this country, this United Kingdom when they do not even have a home? What kind of citizens are they? One that lives in a horrible rented property from where the landlord could get them out whenever it is convenient for them? One that lives or rather does not live but stays at a limbo, at a squalid bed and breakfast accommodation that is far away from one's own community and where one knows nothing or no one as if one is a plant that can be taken and put on the window sill? Or the souls sleeping rough on the street? No political party bothers about this fundamental issue. How does each and every single human being that makes this nation connect and belong and share the 'wealth' of the nation when the majority of that nation belongs to the three states of homelessness? And the current government does not have any care about these people. But they cut and they destroy social housing and drive families out who are a: renting from private sector: homeless; b: staying and wasting away in bed and breakfast accommodations: homeless and c: dying a devastating death sleeping rough: homeless. They cut and yet they pay billions of pounds more, each year to the housing benefit claimants who are in the private sector and the government does not mind that, presumably, because the landlords, according their figuring out, always would vote the Conservatives. Therefore, this government destroys social housing and inflicts pains and breaks families and drives them out of their own communities and from their family, friend and social networks into a world that they do not know and yet all this is simply to ensure those who are rich get benefited from it. Here's statement: '''Commenting on further detail on the content of the government’s white paper on housing, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Housing John Healey MP said, “The measures announced so far in Theresa May’s long-promised housing white paper are feeble beyond belief. After seven years of failure and a thousand housing announcements, the housing crisis is getting worse not better. There are 200,000 fewer home-owners, homelessness has doubled, and affordable house-building has slumped to a 24 year low.

Ministers should be setting out clear plans to deal with these problem but all Theresa May’s Ministers have delivered so far is hot air. The government should instead back Labour’s plan to fix the housing crisis, thousands more affordable homes to rent and buy, a charter of renters’ rights and action to end to rough sleeping homelessness. The government’s announcements on housing to date. The government’s record: i: The number of households who own their own home has fallen by 200,000, with the number of under-35 households owning a home down by 344,000. ii: There are over 900,000 more households renting from a private landlord than in 2010 including one in four families with dependent children but rents have risen faster than incomes.

iii: Despite 13 separate cuts to housing benefit, including the bedroom tax, the housing benefit bill is £04bn higher each year in cash terms. iv: There are 143,000 fewer council homes than in 2010, with only one home in every six sold under the right to buy replaced, despite promises of ‘one for one’ replacement. Measures in the recent housing and planning act are set to mean the loss of 23,503 council houses a year according to the housing charity Shelter.

v: According to the Government-commissioned Local Plan Expert Group it is now taking councils almost a year, 306 days, longer to adopt vital local plans for housing than in 2009. Among the main reasons are: 'a lack of political will and commitment', 'a lack of clarity on key issues', 'too many changes… of policy', and 'a lack of guidance, support and resources'. We’ve had constant chop and change but no improvement, despite six piece of planning legislation in six years under the Tories.'' And here is a little more, How White is This Government White Paper on Housing: 163,940 Houses Built in England in 2015-16 as Opposed to the 1,000,000 Million Promised: A Shortfall of 836,060: Now Add the Additional 01.8 Million New Households That are Projected to Grow by the End of This Parliament: And Now You Decide How Blank and Hollow This White Paper Should Look Like

What must happen is the political parties must answer this question, and not temper with the issue. How are they going to resolve the three types of homelessness we have mentioned so far to ensure that these people, every single individual in them, is entitled to share, feel and be part of and share the 'wealth' of the nation for they have no connection, they have no link, they have no relationship with that what is the nation for they even do not have a home. Effectively, they have been cut off from the nation for the nation lives on a land where its homes stand on that land in which the members of that nation live inside these houses and only than they feel connected to the land. Therefore, theses three classes of homeless people of the UK are made absolutely disenfranchised, disempowered, dehmanised and made effectively, non-citizens. Political parties must wake up and deal with these questions and create policies that will answer these questions. The old way of politics is dead and the new way has not yet been invented while these established political parties fail to invent new politics the nasty and dark forces are using this vacuum to their advantage to advance hatred and phobia of all kinds. We invite all major political parties to wake up and invent this new path of the new politics for otherwise nothing will change and the suffering of the multitude will continue to increase.

Eight: The State of States

Inequality, gender-equality, gender pay-gap, discrimination, anti-discriminatory practices, race equality and workers' rights as well as the state of education, particularly, higher education: in none of these areas the country has advanced. In fact, the trend is going backward. The Inequality has been increasing to the point where no one can fail to notice it and the impacts and with the ferocity with which they have started to tear the fabrics of society cannot be put under the carpet any longer. And the cuts in the other areas that have inflicted damages include the infrastructures, such as roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, waterways, lakes, parks and wetlands etc, park and recreational services, library and arts services, conservation services, all of which always enjoyed the least amount of 'urgency' or priority. All these are bleeding now, too.... The list could go on for much longer. While everyone was busy about exiting the EU these are the things that are devastating this land and no one, not this government, not other political parties nor the media seem to be interested about them.

Nine: The State of United Kingdom

The Humanion simply would like to just list them here for the readers who still care about what happens to the country and the direction it takes. For the state of the United Kingdom is anything but united where disharmony is growing because the capitalist system of economics has been run to fail the very people who it must serve. And we have a government that has neither the vision nor the will nor willingness to change its dogmatic position and run the government as 'the best concentrated power' to best serve the people. Instead, it uses all sort of catch-phrases and propaganda and evades its responsibilities and causes all the major problems itself that the country faces, simply by doing what it has been doing. And on top of all that, now it is consumed with the EU exit and everything is screaming for help and no help appears forth coming. And the political parties are dragged into the same state of exiting the EU but there is a United Kingdom where millions and millions of people, families and communities live and face life and all its problems and these problems require urgent attention but none of the issues or problems are getting attention they must have. This is time someone wake the political parties up and turn their faces towards the country and all the desperate, urgent and immediate problems, issues and difficulties it faces and say: Look! Can you see? What are you going to do about it?

This piece was, originally, written and published as Editorial on February 14: 2017. But since the UK has now faces a General Election, this is published here, again, today, April 19. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 190417 ||  Up || 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equality, Gender Equality, Liberty and Justice are Matters That Relate to Political Philosophy That Concerns the Entire Body of Humanity Made of Men and Women and Thus the Struggle to Seek to Achieve Them Must Be a Unison Struggle and Fight for the Entire Humanity Together and Not Just Women's Alone

Image: ILO

|| March 16: 2017: ILO News || ά. The importance of the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women in promoting gender equality and economic empowerment is growing fast. And its message of inclusive economies is resonating as a powerful way to break the cycle of poverty globally. In his opening address to the 61st Session of the Commission on the Status of Women:CSW, the UN Secretary-General António Guterres thanked the assembled delegates for raising their voices for women’s equality and dignity around the world. “Every day, you are on the frontlines for fairness, for a more just and decent world. I have seen the difference you make in every corner of our globe. You are an inspiration. As you champion equality, you make the world better for all.” stated the Secretary-General.

This year’s CSW is convened with the theme of 'Women's economic empowerment in the changing world of work'. The conference will convene several Ministerial level events on topics such as equal pay work of equal value, technology and innovation for women’s economic empowerment, effective policies in informal and non-standard work as full and productive employment and decent work for all. The Secretary-General closed his statement by announcing his decision to join the International Gender Champions, a global network that brings women and men decision-makers together to break down gender barriers, encouraging other senior leaders to do the same.

The Chair of the 61th Session of the Commission on the Status of Women, Brazilian Ambassador Antonio de Aguiar Patriota, called on participants to build on gains that had been made, including the 2016 road map for the gender-responsive implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

He said the session must provide guidance on eliminating work-related structural barriers and ensuring that women took full advantage of new opportunities. Men and boys must engage as gender advocates for transforming social norms, he said, which required challenging “rigid” notions of masculinity. In her opening statement, the Executive Director of UN Women, Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, said that although there had been some progress in women’s rights and empowerment we have also seen an erosion of gains. “There is under-representation of women in decision-making at all levels. They therefore have insufficient voice to drive the nature and extent of change needed.”

Ms. Mlambo-Ngcuka highlighted the difficulties that women continue to face and that are being left behind at a time when they are essential to the achievement of the sustainable development goals. She spoke of the plight of women refugees and migrants, those affected by gender-based violence, including workplace sexual harassment, the pay gap, the myriad difficulties of women working in the informal sector, as well as women’s role as care givers and domestic workers.

In closing she called on member States to accelerate the promise of the SDGs. “We must make, and can make, the world of work, work better for women, transforming economies and realizing rights.” Representing the Director-General of the ILO, Manuela Tomei, Director of the Conditions of Work and Equality Department said that  the quest for women’s economic empowerment will be lost or won in the world of work. It will be reflected in whether and how women gain entry in the labour market and the terms of their engagement in the world of work - whether in fields or factories, service centres, households or boardrooms.”

“Inclusive job creation, education and training also remain important objectives of the policy agenda. At the same time the role of collective voice and representation in advancing women’s empowerment is fundamental.” Ms. Tomei stated.

She announced the latest finding of the ILO-Gallup poll survey undertaken in 142 countries which revealed that most women and men around the globe prefer that women have paid jobs. However, the balance between work and family was consistently pointed to as one of the top challenges facing women in paid jobs.

At the conclusion of CSW on March 24, the Agreed Conclusions, based on the Secretary-General’s Report to the conference and enhanced by the inputs of member States, the UN system, civil society and other key groups, will be provide a call to action and roadmap for the achievement of the dual goals of women economic empowerment and gender equality. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 170317 || Up || 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is It Progress Somalia: It Absolutely Is: But Must You Keep at It and Keep on the Track Head Held High and Mind Fearless

|| March 15: 2017 || ά.  Without seeking to achieve gender equality means humanity would rather stay in the 'dark' and deliberately avoid stepping onto the awe-inspiring beauty, joy and peace of the 'light'; the 'light, that the state of equality between genders brings about that can only be imagined as the best possible state of humanity, of existence. Here, a member of the House of the People casts her vote during the election for the First and Second Deputy Speaker of the House of People of the Federal Parliament in Mogadishu, Somalia.

And is this progress? In terms of Somalia, it absolutely, is. Is this enough that only a handful of women are elected in these houses? Absolutely not, but the fact is that there was not even a house, let alone women taking part, in Somali. So it is a great progress but it is not anywhere near where it should be. And this is the same picture, varying a little all over the world but one can count the number of women in the highest political leadership of states of the world faster than the planets and satellites in the Solar System. But must we keep at it, keep at it until we reach there, at equality. ω.

Image: UN Photo:Omar Abdisalan

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore   || ‽: 160317 || Up || 

 

 

 

 

 

UN Commission on Status of Women Opens: Equality, Gender Equality, Liberty and Justice are Matters That Relate to Political Philosophy That Concerns the Entire Body of Humanity Made of Men and Women and Thus the Struggle to Seek to Achieve Them Must Be a Unison Struggle and Fight for the Entire Humanity Together and Not Just Women's Alone: The Humanion

Professor Amivi Kafui Tete-Benissan,left, teaches cell biology and biochemistry at the University of Lomé, in the capital of Togo.
Image: World Bank:Stephan Gladieu
 

|| March 13: 2017 || ά.  ''With men still dominating even in countries, that consider themselves progressive, the world needs more women leaders and more men standing up for gender equality.''  United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said today. “It is true, I am a man but we need all men to stand up for women's empowerment. Our world needs more women leaders. And our world needs more men standing up for gender equality.” Mr. Guterres told the Commission on Status of Women:CSW, which began its annual session this morning. He was among the UN's several senior leaders addressing CSW, the principal global intergovernmental body dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women.

Mr. Guterres noted that empowerment of women was about breaking structural barriers. With the nearly one billion women entering the global economy in the next decade, empowerment will unleash the potential of all these women and girls and they will lead the world to a new future. He also cited one study showing that women's equality can add $12 trillion to global growth over the next decade. Furthermore, he stressed, when women meaningfully participate in peace processes, the chance of sustainable peace goes up by 35 per cent over 15 years. He asked UN Member States to move beyond the current level, where women make up just 03 per cent of UN peacekeepers. “We are all better off when we open doors of opportunity for women and girls: in classrooms and boardrooms, in military ranks and at peace talks, in all aspects of productive life.” he said.

Promising that the UN and he personally will support efforts for gender equality, Mr. Guterres said, “Do not let us off the hook. Keep our feet to the fire.” He announced that he was joining the International Gender Champions, a global network that brings women and men decision-makers together to break down gender barriers, encouraging other senior leaders to do the same.

With its priority theme 'Women's economic empowerment in the changing world of work,' CSW's sixty-first session will run through March 24. In her address, UN Women Executive Director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka highlighted a slow progress in gender equality. “The much-needed positive developments are not happening fast enough, nor are they reaching tipping point in numbers of lives changed.” she said. “Let us agree to constructive impatience.”

She pointed out that more than half of all women workers around the world and up to 90 per cent in some countries, are informally employed, including care givers whose other life opportunities can be limited while they perform the unappreciated and valuable unpaid work of care at home. There are 190 million women in the informal sector in India alone, she noted.

Women are, also, clearly earning consistently less than men, a gap that women regard as 'daylight robbery.' Ms. Mlambo-Ngcuka said. There are numerous gaps exist, including in access to digital technologies. Investment in a pipeline of girls well educated in science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics subjects could increase the proportion of women in the digital industry workforce from the current 25 per cent and build skills matches for the 'new collar' jobs, she said.  “What you agree to do during this CSW could be an accelerator for the implementation and achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” she said.

In his remarks, General Assembly President Peter Thomson said that all of his grandchildren are girls. “As they grow toward adulthood, I cannot abide the thought that they will not enjoy full and equal rights with their male peers.” he said. Mr. Thomson said that he would turn to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to find faith and be assured that his granddaughters will not live in a world still lacking the basic human right of equality between men and women.

“The preamble of the Agenda, its introduction, its transformational vision, and its shared principles and commitments are all suffused with the logic of gender equality.” he said, noting that paragraph 20 declares that achievement of full human potential and of sustainable development is not possible, if half of humanity continues to be denied its full human rights and opportunities.

Sustainable Development Goal 5 specifically commits all to achieving gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, he added. The Committee is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

Most of the 27 concluding observations that CEDAW Committee adopted since July 2016, link specific SDGs and targets, to relevant articles of the Convention, she said. “Linking the Convention to the 2030 Agenda has great potential in advancing women's economic empowerment and enables the Committee to support States in implementing the SDGs.” she said.
ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 140317 ||  Up  || 



 

 

 

 

To Ensure Half of Australia Residing Among the Australian Women is Involved in What Australia Does and Seeks to Become Women Need to Get Involved in Politics and Change the Current Dreadfully Male Dominant Australian Politics: Politics Programme for Women Calls on Australian Women to Join the Programme's 2017 Cohort: Now, Will You Get up and Go for Equality is Not Going to Be Delivered on Your Plate by Miracles

Pictured above are Pathways to Politics fellows at the first session of the 2016 programme: Fourth row: Deborah Wu, Emma Henderson,
Emily Spiller, Shireen Morris, Kirsten Bright, Soraya Dean, Stephanie Amir, Libby Buckingham, Carla Drakeford. Third row: Adrian Collette,
Kirsten Chambers, Dr Sarah Mansfield, Katie Robertson, Sarah McNicol, Claire Febey, Susanne Newton, Dr Olivia Ball. Second row:
Alex Kennedy, Meredith Martin, Bridget Vallence, Brooke Coghlan, Cassandra Devine, Claire Marshall, Meg Brodie, Wesa Chau,
Virginia Holdenson, Chrysi Misioudi, Dr Maria Dudycz, Lillian Kline. Front row: Amy Mullins, Professor Carolyn Evans,
Professor Margaret Sheil, Professor Glyn Davis, Dame Quentin Bryce, Carol Schwartz, Professor Helen Sullivan.
Image: Pathways to Politics Programme
 

|| March 05: 2017: University of Melbourne Australia News || ά. After a successful 2016 pilot programme launched in Canberra by the Hon. Tanya Plibersek MP and The Hon. Julie Bishop MP, the Melbourne School of Government’s Pathways to Politics Programme for Women is calling for 2017 applicants. Designed to address the under-representation of women in Australian politics, this programme participants will hear from current and former MPs, along with local and international experts in media, polling, networking, campaigning and speechwriting.

Academic Co-ordinator and Political Scientist for the Melbourne School of Government, Dr Andrea Carson, says that female representation in Australian politics continues to fare badly. “While women’s representation in government has risen in other countries, in Australia it fails to hit 30 per cent. Some parties are worse than others.” Dr Carson says. “At a federal level, we are ranked 50th in the world, behind countries like Algeria, 37th, and Ethiopia, 17th. Representation in the lower houses of state parliaments are mixed, ranging from 44 per cent in Tasmania to as low as 25 per cent in Western Australia.”

The Programme is an initiative of the Women’s Leadership Institute Australia:WLIA, made possible by a generous donation to the University of Melbourne from the Trawalla Foundation, established by the Schwartz family. Ms Carol Schwartz AM, Founding Chair of WLIA, says that last year’s pilot programme was a great success with several women already embarking on political careers.

“The programme has given a cohort of incredible women from across the political spectrum the skills, support and networks they need to run for office. It’s critical to have men and women share power at the highest levels of leadership and decision-making, that’s why we initiated the Pathways to Politics Program for Women.” says Ms Schwartz.

Two of last year’s fellows, Susanne Newton and Stephanie Amir, were recently elected as councillors in the City of Darebin and two others, Olivia Ball and Sarah Mansfield, ran as candidates in the federal election and had significant swings towards them.

Olivia then went head-to-head against popular Lord Mayor of Melbourne, Robert Doyle and received the second-highest number of votes, beating more experienced politician Phil Cleary.

Based on Harvard University’s 'From Harvard Square to Oval Office', the non-partisan programme equips 25 women from diverse backgrounds with the skills, networks and confidence they need to seek elected office at a federal, state or local level. ω.

Whatever Your Field of Work and Wherever in the World You are, Please, Make a Choice to Do All You Can to Seek and Demand the End of Death Penalty For It is Your Business What is Done in Your Name. The Law That Makes Humans Take Part in Taking Human Lives and That Permits and Kills Human Lives is No Law. It is the Rule of the Jungle Where Law Does Not Exist. The Humanion

|| Readmore  || ‽: 060317 || Up || 

 

 

 

 

Between 1997 and 2010, Labour in Government Built Two Million Homes, Helped a Million More Families Become Home-Owners. The Tories Borrow to Pay for the Failure of Their Austerity. Labour Will Allow You to Borrow to Build the Council Homes Your Communities Need: Jeremy Corbyn MP


|| February 19: 2017 || ά. Speaking on Saturday, February 18, at Labour Party's Local Government Conference at Warwick University in Coventry, Jeremy Corbyn MP, Leader of the Labour Party, said, Thank you for that welcome and for that introduction Alice Perry. As someone who was a Labour councillor for several years it’s always a great pleasure to be among so many talented, innovative and hard-working local representatives standing up for their communities. And on behalf of the whole Labour party I want to say thank you for what you do in the most difficult circumstances. Because we meet at a time when there is now a state of emergency in our local services. That emergency is perhaps most acute in social care an absolute scandal that leaves 01.2 million elderly people without the care they need. By cutting billions of pounds from local government Downing Street has created a social care crisis which the Royal Society of Medicine just yesterday said was linked to 30,000 excess deaths in 2015; yes, 30,000.

People are dying because of the choices made by this governm