|
|
Parliament's refusal to hold EU referendum subject to Judicial Review!
|
____________________
The Tory multi millionaire, Stuart Wheeler, has had his application upheld in the High Court for a Judicial Review of Parliament's refusal to hold a referendum on the question of the UK's adoption of the Lisbon Treaty.
 Mr Wheeler said voters had a
"legitimate expectation" of a vote
In their respective manifestos for the 2005 General Election, all three major parties promised a referendum on the issue. Many of us believe that the failure of the Labour Government, aided and abetted by Liberal Democrat MPs, to conduct such a referendum is a major breach of faith between political parties and the electorate.
As can be expected, Government spokesmen are obfuscating this matter with irrelevant statements. For example, Philip Sales QC for the office of the prime minister, said the claim was "misconceived" as a ratification of an international treaty was not open to challenge in the High Court and would breach Parliamentary privilege. This, of course, is entirely beside the point which is that Parliament has not consulted voters before exercising its power of "ratification"!
Why should voters expect better from a QC? After all, we were governed for over ten years by a barrister whose relationship with the truth was too often very tenuous to say the least!
The Judicial Review will not concern itself with the legality of Parliament's power to ratify, but about the manner in which it has chosen to do it! In a time of increasing voter abstentions and consequent crocodile tears from MPs professing concern about widespread lack of engagement by voters, it ill behoves Parliamentarians to prevent voters from recording collective opinions on their proposed actions, especially when this has been promised! The only conclusion to be drawn is that they simply do not want to hear what voters have to say about a particular issue before pressing ahead to inflict decisions on Great Britain's citizens.
Parliament has behaved shamefully, dishonourably, undemocratically and unacceptably! In a more volatile country, considerable civil unrest would have ensued at this arrogant, cavalier and insoucient treatment by Parliament of its electors.
Those presiding in Westminster should never forget that the best government is accompanied by the widespread consent of those governed. In this case, the reverse applies, unfortunately. Hopefully, Mr Wheeler by use of our independent court system will throw much needed light on this shabby event. So much for the monolithic and undemocratic EU and all that is associated with it!
|
|
|
|
English Democrats in for the long haul!
|
__________________________________
English party plays the long game The English Democrats are hoping for a win on the London Assembly to send a message that "the time for ignoring English interests" is over. 
English Democrats held a St George's Day
protest in Parliament Square Chairman Robin Tilbrook said, despite the surprise exit of mayoral candidate Matt O'Connor last week, the party was getting good feedback from voters. The party is standing a full slate of candidates in London and about 50 across the rest of England. It hopes to take a step towards being a "fully effective" national party. The party has 23 candidates standing in London, including all the constituency seats but it is the London-wide list, elected by a form of proportional representation, that offers its best shot at winning a seat. 'Awfully sad' The English Democrats chose a mayoral candidate, Matt O'Connor, only to have him pull out last week - saying he had fallen out with the leadership over campaign funding and tactics. But Mr Tilbrook said the party had only stood a candidate because it guaranteed a level of media coverage it would not otherwise have achieved.
"I think it's awfully sad for us and our candidates and all the effort that's been put into this," said Mr Tilbrook. "It's also sad, let's face it, for all the people on the postal ballots who may have already voted for him. It's also sad for him because I think he's made a fool of himself really." Despite that, Mr Tilbrook said the party had received "a lot of positive feedback" during its campaign - which has included canvassing high streets across London, leafleting and a St George's Day demonstration in Parliament Square, complete with "cavalcade" of scores of black cabs. "The campaign goes on. As far as we are concerned the London campaign was only part of the general effort. "It's not an end in itself. It's a step in the direction of building the English Democrats into a fully effective national party and giving voice to English national identity issues." And, while the party's call for an English Parliament may not be, strictly speaking, an issue for the London Assembly - that has not stopped people asking for leaflets. "The position of London Assembly member is basically either a yes man - which would be the case for the main parties - or it's a campaigning position and obviously getting an English Democrat elected as London Assembly member, would be a great launch pad in terms of campaigning about English issues," said Mr Tilbrook. For him it has been an opportunity to get the relatively new party's message across. The English Democrats, established in 2002, which aim to field 106 candidates in parliamentary seats in the next general election. English party plays the long game ________________________________
|
|
|
|
Heffer and Dale on England
|
|
|
|
|
|
London Mayoral Election 2008 - EDP Press Release
|
_____________________________________________________________
Matt O'Connor's shock resignation as London Mayoral Candidate Robin Tilbrook, the Chairman of the English Democrats said:- "I am obviously very disappointed that Matt O'Connor has issued this statement but I have to admit, not entirely surprised. What I now say is in sorrow, because Matt has done the cause some good but, contrary to what he now claims, Matt approached the English Democrats Party to be our mayoral candidate. In January he came to our National Council meeting in Leicester to urge us to select him and promised to "give the campaign 110%"! During several discussions, he was made fully aware of the problems confronting a candidate for a smaller political party which is challenging the Establishment Parties - not least the problem of raising sufficient funds to fight an election campaign especially given the lack of coverage of non Establishment candidates. Within the bounds of our limited manpower and financial resources, Matt has been given 100% support by the English Democrats and our members who have campaigned for him, and England's cause, day in day out for many weeks and who have paid for everything that has been done. At no time has any funds been received from Matt. Unfortunately - and this is not a subject I would have wanted to air publicly had it not been for the statement released by Matt O'Connor this morning seeking to blame us - it became apparent that there were problems with Matt's candidacy arising from his own personal problems, not least following his disappearance from the campaign for several days, to the extent that I advised him to seek professional counselling regarding alcohol abuse, which he did. Matt did not disclose this problem to us when he urged us to select him as our candidate. Despite this counselling, Matt again went missing last Saturday; - neither his office nor his partner seemed to know of his whereabouts and he could not be contacted at home. Indeed the Party prepared a statement last night raising concerns at his disappearance, as we were becoming genuinely worried for his safety. Now, he has stated that he has resigned, although he cannot, of course, at this late stage, remove his name from the ballot paper. This is all a great pity for Matt personally - he obviously has personal issues that he needs to address - but it also a pity for English Democrats' candidates standing for the London Assembly - of which we have a full slate. Their campaign is running well and we have great hopes of getting a candidate elected, particularly on the party list, to campaign against the Establishment's discrimination against London and England. The campaign for fair spending for London, an end to the Tartan Taxes, and real democracy and freedom of speech, will go on. So I urge the people of London to give their vote, particularly their list vote, to the English Democrats. England's cause is far bigger and more important than any one individual!"
Robin Tilbrook Chairman English Democrats Party Quires Green, Willingale, Ongar, Essex, CM5 0QP Tel: 01277 896000 Fax: 01277 896050 Mobile : 07778 553395
_________________________________________
|
|
|
|
The English Claim of Right
|
__________________________________________
"We do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the English people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs.We call for the holding of a national English Constitutional Convention to determine the way forward for a revised constitutional settlement for England.We declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations the interests of the English people shall be paramount.We further declare and pledge that our actions and deliberations shall be directed to the following ends:To assert the right of the English people to live in a sovereign nation state of England, free of foreign control;To agree a scheme for a Parliament for England;To mobilise English opinion and ensure the approval of the English people for that scheme;To assert the right of the English people to secure the implementation of that scheme."
Click here to sign up:
|
|
|
|
A Happy St George's Day to all!
|
 __________________________________
As proud English people, we wish all in England a happy St George's Day
on a day which also marks both the birth and death of William Shakespeare one of many illustrious figures in English history.
SHAKESPEARE'S BIRTHDAY CELEBRATIONS ___________________
|
|
|
|
Campaign for an English Parliament ~ announcement
|
________________
|
|
|
|
As I see it
|
____________________________________
As I see it, Messrs Brown and Darling have knowingly set out to increase the tax burden on those with low incomes. Their abolition of the 10% tax rate in 2008-09 will result in an additional £232.00 tax liability for each taxpayer by the application of the new 20% Standard Rate of tax to the amount of income previously taxed at 10% (ie £2,320 @ 10%).
In radio interviews, Government spokesmen maintain that it is necessary to abolish the lower tax band as part of the policy to 'simplify tax'. To hear these 'experts', one might be forgiven for concluding that Income Tax legislation would be immensely complicated were they to try to remove the impact of this measure.
Not a bit of it! All that is necessary is to increase Personal Allowances by £1,160 to remove the burden created by abolishing the 10% tax rate.
Now ask yourself: Is it by accident or design that HM Government has chosen to increase this tax on those with low incomes? Is it due to incompetence or ill-will? I leave it for you to decide.
Come to think of it, why is anyone with an income of £15,000pa or less paying any Income Tax at all?
________________________
|
|
|
|
Matt O'Connor ~ "London calling"
|
|
__________________________ The London Mayoral election is noticeable for the concentration of the BBC and other broadcasters mainly on the Labour and Conservative parties' candidates, followed by lesser coverage of the Lib Dems' candidate. Disgracefully, coverage of the other candidates has been minimal, and voters have been effectively denied information whereby they might choose to vote for one or more of the others! In a small attempt to redress the balance, this news blog ~ which is independent of the English Democrats Party ~ is including a link to that party's GLA Election broadcast. After all, this election is taking place in England's (and Great Britain's) capital city with an electorate which is not only greater than the number of voters in the whole of Scotland, but approximately equal to the whole of Scotland's population! The BBC, independent TV and national newspapers should be ashamed of the selective and biassed way in which the election of London's mayor is being covered. London's voters and England's democracy is being shortchanged yet again! |
|
|
|
CEP calls for suspension of a Commons Select Committee Inquiry
|
__________________________________
Press Release: Friday, 11 Apr 2008 08:36The Campaign for an English Parliament has asked Mr Alan Beith MP Chairman of the Inquiry being held by the Justice Select Committee into 'Devolution a Decade on' to suspend its work until the complaint against him of prejudicing its outcome has been investigated.
The Parliamentary Inquiry is 'into the impact of devolution at the UK level and its consequences for the United Kingdom constitution'. Since the Autumn of 2007 the Committee has been taking evidence from many constitution experts, university academics, think-tanks and pressure groups such as the Constitution Unit and the Campaign for an English Parliament, local councillors, and Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
One of the Inquiry's major concerns is into the impact of the 1998 devolution legislation.upon England which was the only one of the four nations of the UK which did not get any devolution, and into the widespread resentment emerging in England at the advantages now acrruing to Scotland, Wales and NI because they have devolved powers. The Inquiry is considering whether devolution might be granted to England on the terms of the principles of the 1998 legislation, namely an English Parliament; or whether instead England should just be reorganised into regional assemblies with greater local government powers. The Inquiry is also looking into the progress of devolution in both Scotland and Wales and into the call in Wales for its Assembly to have primary legislative powers such as enjoyed by the Scottish Parliament.
On March 8th speaking at a public meeting held at the Liberal Democrat spring conference in Liverpool the Inquiry Chairman, Mr Alan Beith MP for Berwick on Tweed made public his support for regional assemblies for England and his opposition to the Welsh Assembly having primary legislative powers. On March 13th the Select Committee held an Evidence Session in Newcastle Upon Tyne to which it invited only supporters of the policy of regional assemblies to give evidence, excluding the representatives of the North East No Campaign which in November 2004 had won the referendum on a regional assembly by a massive 78% to 22%
The Campaign for an English Parliament has made a formal complaint of prejudice to the Committee. It has asked the Committee to suspend its Inquiry until an investigation has been carried out into whether the statements of the Chairman and the exclusion of NE opponents from giving evidence on March 13th are prejudicing the outcome of the Inquiry in favour of the division of England into regions with regional assemblies.
For contacts: Michael Knowles Head of Media Unit, Campaign for an English Parliament Tel: 01260 271139. Email: michael-knowles@tiscali.co.uk
Scilla Cullen, Chairman Tel: 01439 833155 Email: scilla.cullen@thecep.org.uk __________________________________ |
|
|
|
England in crisis!
|
________________________
The Daily Mail reports that 'four in five' say Britain is facing a crisis caused by immigration . . . for 'Britain' read 'England'! Over 84% of Great Britain's population lives in England and over 95% of immigrants settle in England.
Once again, the Mail misrepresents what is essentially an England problem as being Britain's and, in the process, contrives to play down both the existence of England as a nation and how it is suffering the brunt of policies pursued by largely unrepresentative politicians.
Quite simply, Brown, Darling and their fellow Scots in Westminster do not really care about England's problems. After all, they and fellow Scots pledged in 1988 that in all their "actions and deliberations" the interests of the Scottish people "shall be paramount".
Scotland has a population of merely five million and, to approach the kind of problems in England, it would need to increase greatly and be of the order of thirty five to forty million.
Scottish MPs can afford to be complacent about England's dilemmas - and they are!
______________________
Four in five say Britain is facing a crisis over immigration By JAMES SLACK
Last updated at 01:21am on 5th April 2008
Immigration is diluting our culture and leading to the breakdown of society, according to the vast majority of Britons. 83 per cent told pollsters the country had a "population crisis". Strikingly, this view was held by 58 per cent of settled migrants and their British-born children. Most of those interviewed felt that special treatment for newcomers was causing locals to "lose out." The same views were shared across the social classes. The survey for Immigration: The Inconvenient Truth, an investigation by Channel 4's Dispatches, was carried out by YouGov. It found that 15 per cent of Britons would halt immigration altogether and 84 per cent would reduce it. 63 per cent of settled Commonwealth immigrants agreed with them.
 UK-bound migrants are arrested at Calais
Two-thirds of those polled believe that migrant workers are undercutting native workers and taking their jobs. Immigration is also considered by the British to be the biggest factor behind societal breakdown over the past decade. Some 58 per cent think the nation's cultural fabric is being "damaged and diluted" by immigration. Last night, the Government's critics said the case for a cap on migrant numbers - a move resisted by Gordon Brown - was overwhelming. Damian Green, Tory immigration spokesman, said: "We have been saying for some years now that the rate of net immigration should be substantially lower. "That's why we called for an explicit annual limit - and without that the Government will continue to have a crisis on their hands." Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migration Watch UK, a pressure group, said: "This is stunning confirmation that the public want to see firm and effective action to reduce the scale of immigration. It is a view shared by two-thirds of previous immigrants. "The Government cannot remain in denial much longer." The findings on community relations will be equally alarming for ministers who are finally moving away from the doctrine of multiculturalism. Only 25 per cent of those polled said immigration had led to a rich and varied culture in Britain - compared with 58 per cent who said it had not. 69 per cent of Britons said multiculturalism was not working as did 45 per cent of settled migrants and 41 per cent of new arrivals. A third of the latter group agreed with the statement that immigration is making Britain a more dangerous place to live. Three out of ten Britons claim they "never" or "very rarely" interact with people from ethnic minorities. However, 77 per cent of the recent migrants interviewed said they felt they are generally treated fairly by British society. Half of migrants who have moved here since 2000 said they had no intention of becoming a UK citizen. Meanwhile, 51 per cent of Britons said they had considered moving to another country. Among city- dwellers, this figure rose to 75 per cent. The survey's findings end a damaging week for the Government. On Tuesday, an authoritative parliamentary report concluded that migrants bring little or no economic benefit. The report by the Lords Economic Affairs Committee demolished many of the Government's arguments for immigration, describing the key claim that they boost the economy by £ 6billion a year as misleading and irrelevant. Claims that immigrants are needed to fill vacancies and defuse the so- called pensions time bomb' were also dismissed. Responding to the survey, Liam Byrne, the Immigration Minister, said: "I've been saying for two years that immigration is top of the list of voters' concerns. The British public want to see change to the immigration system and the Government has got the message. "That is why 2008 sees the biggest shake-up to immigration and border security in 45 years including a points system like the one in Australia, a new unified border force and compulsory ID cards for foreign nationals." Four in five say Britain is facing a crisis over immigration
________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Gordon's plea for middle England to support more change in Scotland!!!
|
________________________________________
It is reported that Gordon Brown, Scottish First Minister of England, has made a 'plea for middle England to support more change in Scotland'. Once again it is a case of Scotland, first, second, third . . . and last!
With a so called British Prime Minister "pledged to make the interests of the Scottish people paramount", there are no surprises here then!
 Making (yet another) Pledge: Gordon Brown
From the perspective of a long standing, indigenous English person - one of a population of over 50 million - it is becoming increasingly irritating and intolerable to have this sanctimonious representative of a community of a mere 5 milllion presuming to preach to us!
Of course Brown professes to oppose Scottish nationalism of the variety now ensconced in Holyrood. However, the reality is that the Labour Party, when adjudged by its actions in government, itself is clearly a Scottish nationalist party which has blatantly discriminated against England and the English to an extent which would have been simply inconceivable in the days of Attlee, Gaitskell, Bevin, Bevan, Cripps and Foot. If he had any pride left, the Beast of Bolsover would have been vociferous in defence of England, ostensibly his country of birth, during the last ten years! (Is it not odd that Scottish nationalism is portrayed as being 'left wing', whilst English nationalism is labelled as being 'right wing' almost to the point of being fascist?)
The more perceptive of us are well aware that Brown's professed 'Britishness' is very superficial. Claiming to be British is the means whereby Scots, Welsh and other non-English can occupy positions in England. Amazingly, prominent Scottish politicians have asserted in support of retaining 'the Union', that some 500,000 Scots live and work in England, which is around 10% of Scotland's population!
How many English people live and work in Scotland? Quite simply, we don't know because the opportunity for English people to record THEIR ethnicity was excluded from the 2001 Census of Great Britain; yet another example of the malign attitude of 'New Labour' to the English! One of the ways of eliminating the English as an ethnic group is to minimise references to them, even to the extent of preventing a census record being created.
Even so, we can confidently assert that, as in so many other things, this exchange of 'British' citizens is largely one way, and the number of English people living and working in Scotland is probably much less than 100,000.
Just imagine if around 10% of England's population (over 5 million) had settled in hostile Scotland? Of course the notion is absurd - as absurd as treating Scotland as being not merely the equal of England, but somehow superior! Indeed, the arrogant posture of 'Celtic superiority' over the 'Anglo Saxon' English adopted by many Scots is uncomfortably reminiscent of Hitler's 'pure Aryan' attitude.
Scots should never forget that, in a true democracy, the majority should generally prevail, and they are a minority; the Kurds or Basques of Great Britain so to speak! They should consider what eventually happens to minorities which contrive to subordinate to minority interests majorities in their shared state. History is littered with the bloody unrest which ensued in such circumstances.
|
25 Mar 2008 by The Venerable Bede
|
|
|
|
The indigenous English have rights also!
|
____________
There have been calls for an English Parliament since 1998, when Tereasa Gorman MP submitted her Private Member's Bill to Parliament with the support of colleagues like the redoubtable and now lamented Eric Forth MP deceased.
Who would have thought that the UN Commission on Human Rights had been working prior to that (since the early 1990s) on a UN Declaration setting out the rights of indigenous peoples?
Shamefully, the various calls for a separate parliament for the people of England have been met with unremitting resistance from the Scotto-Brit Government now holding sway in Westminster, which has seen fit to institute devolved bodies in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales but not in England.
Who would have thought that the British Government would so wilfully disregard the principles set out in Articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 (for example) of UN Declaration 61/295 in its persistent discrimination for over a decade against the English, by far the largest single nation in Great Britain?
Who would have thought that the unfairnesses heaped on the English would have been presided over by one of the most religiously sanctimonious prime ministers in the last Century? Those of us already not of a religious bent could be forgiven for eschewing religious worship permanently after witnessing Tony Blair's mean-minded and dubious conduct in office!
The present prime minister is no better. Despite Articles 6, 11, 12 and 13, this anti-English Scot prevaricates about according the English no less rights to fly the English flag in England than the Scots and Welsh have to fly their respective flags in their countries.
Moreover, Prime Minister Brown is singling out schools in England to impose instruction in Britishness in direct contravention of Article 14.
In England, the indigenous people is the English, not the Jews, not the Muslims, not the Scots, the Welsh, the French, the Germans, the Italians, the Poles, the Czechs, the Romanians, nor Africans, Asians nor West Indians!
It is our language, our religion, our culture, our way of life which is being attacked and destroyed by the EU and by non-English people who have enmeshed themselves in British institutions and are exercising power and influence whilst disregarding the collective wishes of the English and ensuring that those wishes are silenced.
We must take action. We cannot rely upon the three main British political parties to remedy our situation.
England, awake, awake!
__________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
United Nations A/RES/61/295
General Assembly Distr.: General
2 October 2007
Sixty-first session
Agenda item 68
06-51207
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly
[without reference to a Main Committee (A/61/L.67 and Add.1)]
61/295. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples
The General Assembly,
Taking note of the recommendation of the Human Rights Council contained in its resolution 1/2 of 29 June 2006, by which the Council adopted the text of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,
Recalling its resolution 61/178 of 20 December 2006, by which it decided to defer consideration of and action on the Declaration to allow time for further consultations thereon, and also decided to conclude its consideration before the end of the sixty-first session of the General Assembly,
Adopts the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as contained in the annex to the present resolution.
107th plenary meeting
13 September 2007
Annex
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
The General Assembly,
Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and good faith in the fulfilment of the obligations assumed by States in accordance with the Charter,
Affirming that indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such,
Affirming also that all peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humankind,
Affirming further that all doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally condemnable and socially unjust,
Reaffirming that indigenous peoples, in the exercise of their rights, should be free from discrimination of any kind,
Concerned that indigenous peoples have suffered from historic injustices as a result of, inter alia, their colonization and dispossession of their lands, territories and resources, thus preventing them from exercising, in particular, their right to development in accordance with their own needs and interests,
Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources,
Recognizing also the urgent need to respect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples affirmed in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements with States,
Welcoming the fact that indigenous peoples are organizing themselves for political, economic, social and cultural enhancement and in order to bring to an end all forms of discrimination and oppression wherever they occur,
Convinced that control by indigenous peoples over developments affecting them and their lands, territories and resources will enable them to maintain and strengthen their institutions, cultures and traditions, and to promote their development in accordance with their aspirations and needs,
Recognizing that respect for indigenous knowledge, cultures and traditional practices contributes to sustainable and equitable development and proper management of the environment,
Emphasizing the contribution of the demilitarization of the lands and territories of indigenous peoples to peace, economic and social progress and development, understanding and friendly relations among nations and peoples of the world,
Recognizing in particular the right of indigenous families and communities to retain shared responsibility for the upbringing, training, education and well-being of their children, consistent with the rights of the child,
Considering that the rights affirmed in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements between States and indigenous peoples are, in some situations, matters of international concern, interest, responsibility and character,
Considering also that treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements, and the relationship they represent, are the basis for a strengthened partnership between indigenous peoples and States,
Acknowledging that the Charter of the United Nations, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights2 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, affirm the fundamental importance of the right to self-determination of all peoples, by virtue of which they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development,
Bearing in mind that nothing in this Declaration may be used to deny any peoples their right to self-determination, exercised in conformity with international law,
Convinced that the recognition of the rights of indigenous peoples in this Declaration will enhance harmonious and cooperative relations between the State and indigenous peoples, based on principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, non-discrimination and good faith,
Encouraging States to comply with and effectively implement all their obligations as they apply to indigenous peoples under international instruments, in particular those related to human rights, in consultation and cooperation with the peoples concerned,
Emphasizing that the United Nations has an important and continuing role to play in promoting and protecting the rights of indigenous peoples,
Believing that this Declaration is a further important step forward for the recognition, promotion and protection of the rights and freedoms of indigenous peoples and in the development of relevant activities of the United Nations system in this field,
Recognizing and reaffirming that indigenous individuals are entitled without discrimination to all human rights recognized in international law, and that indigenous peoples possess collective rights which are indispensable for their existence, well-being and integral development as peoples,
Recognizing that the situation of indigenous peoples varies from region to region and from country to country and that the significance of national and regional particularities and various historical and cultural backgrounds should be taken into consideration,
Solemnly proclaims the following United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a standard of achievement to be pursued in a spirit of partnership and mutual respect:
Articles 1 to 46
Article 1
Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law.
Article 2
Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples and individuals and have the right to be free from any kind of discrimination, in the exercise of their rights, in particular that based on their indigenous origin or identity.
Article 3
Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
Article 4
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions.
Article 5
Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.
Article 6
Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality.
Article 7
1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person.
2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.
Article 8
1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;
(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.
Article 9
Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of thecommunity or nation concerned. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right.
Article 10
Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.
Article 11
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature.
2. States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.
Article 12
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of their human remains.
2. States shall seek to enable the access and/or repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains in their possession through fair, transparent and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned.
Article 13
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means.
Article 14
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning.
2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination.
3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language.
Article 15
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.
2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments of society.
Article 16
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity.
Article 17
1. Indigenous individuals and peoples have the right to enjoy fully all rights established under applicable international and domestic labour law.
2. States shall in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples take specific measures to protect indigenous children from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development, taking into account their special vulnerability and the importance of education for their empowerment.
3. Indigenous individuals have the right not to be subjected to any discriminatory conditions of labour and, inter alia, employment or salary.
Article 18
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions.
Article 19
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.
Article 20
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities.
2. Indigenous peoples deprived of their means of subsistence and development are entitled to just and fair redress.
Article 21
1. Indigenous peoples have the right, without discrimination, to the improvement of their economic and social conditions, including, inter alia, in the areas of education, employment, vocational training and retraining, housing, sanitation, health and social security.
2. States shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special
measures to ensure continuing improvement of their economic and social conditions. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities.
Article 22
1. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities in the implementation of this Declaration.
2. States shall take measures, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, to ensure that indigenous women and children enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination.
Article 23
Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development. In particular, indigenous peoples have the right to be actively involved in developing and determining health, housing and other economic and social programmes affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through their own institutions.
Article 24
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices, including the conservation of their vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals. Indigenous individuals also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services.
2. Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. States shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right.
Article 25
Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard.
Article 26
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired.
3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.
Article 27
States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to indigenous peoples’ laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous peoples shall have the right to participate in this process.
Article 28
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent.
2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the peoples concerned, compensation shall take the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress.
Article 29
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programmes for indigenous peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination.
2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
3. States shall also take effective measures to ensure, as needed, that programmes for monitoring, maintaining and restoring the health of indigenous peoples, as developed and implemented by the peoples affected by such materials, are duly implemented.
Article 30
1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by a relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by the indigenous peoples concerned.
2. States shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior to using their lands or territories for military activities.
Article 31
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.
2. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.
Article 32
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or territories and other resources.
2. States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources.
3. States shall provide effective mechanisms for just and fair redress for any such activities, and appropriate measures shall be taken to mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social, cultural or spiritual impact.
Article 33
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live.
2. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures.
Article 34
Indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures and their distinctive customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards.
Article 35
Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the responsibilities of individuals to their communities.
Article 36
1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders.
2. States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right.
Article 37
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.
2. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as diminishing or eliminating the rights of indigenous peoples contained in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.
Article 38
States in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take the appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the ends of this Declaration.
Article 39
Indigenous peoples have the right to have access to financial and technical assistance from States and through international cooperation, for the enjoyment of the rights contained in this Declaration.
Article 40
Indigenous peoples have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with States or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of their individual and collective rights. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules and legal systems of the indigenous peoples concerned and international human rights.
Article 41
The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations shall contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration through the mobilization, inter alia, of financial cooperation and technical assistance. Ways and means of ensuring participation of indigenous peoples on issues affecting them shall be established.
Article 42
The United Nations, its bodies, including the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and specialized agencies, including at the country level, and States shall promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.
Article 43
The rights recognized herein constitute the minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world.
Article 44
All the rights and freedoms recognized herein are equally guaranteed to male and female indigenous individuals.
Article 45
Nothing in this Declaration may be construed as diminishing or extinguishing the rights indigenous peoples have now or may acquire in the future.
Article 46
1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.
2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society.
3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.
______________________________
|
11 Mar 2008 by The Venerable Bede
|
|
|
|
Clegg fails first public test as leader.
|
________________________
Mr Clegg created a split within his
party over the referendum vote
In a number of ways and on a number of levels, Nick Clegg has failed abysmally to pass his first important test as Liberal leader.
BBC News reports: "Leader Nick Clegg had ordered his 63 MPs to abstain in the vote on calls for a referendum on the EU Lisbon Treaty." - note the word 'ordered'! So much for his party comprising 'democrats'!
Not only has he caused an unnecessary division in the ranks of his parliamentary party, but he exposed his MPs to ridicule and contempt! Clegg's silly decision to 'order' his MPs to abstain from freely carrying out one of their most important functions - voting in Divisions - runs counter to any concept of consensuality. Surely, truly democratic political parties arrive at such decisions collectively, rather than have them arbitrarily imposed by a juvenile leader? To refer to him and his gang as 'democrats' now amounts to gross misrepresentation.
The effect of Clegg's decision, whereby some forty five or so MPs failed to vote in favour of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, is to deny Great Britain's voters opportunity to record collective opinions; this is consistent with the arrogant, bossy attitude he has transplanted from the EU Parliament.
The worst aspect of his arbitrary decision is the breach of faith between him and those who voted for his party's candidates on the strength of its manifesto, a breach emphasised by Conservative MP, Peter Lilley, himself no supporter of referenda who felt honour bound to vote in accordance with HIS party's 2005 General Election manifesto!
It appears that the Liberals wanted a different question to answer; in Commons parlance, a question about "In or Out?" rather than "Yes or No?" So, because the question posed was too difficult for most of 'em, they abstained with a relatively few honourable exceptions.
One wonders what important principle impelled Clegg to act so stupidly? In the absence of any information about any such principle and, given the general corruption in Parliament which has been exposed in recent months, one wonders what political deal Mr Clegg entered into with the Labour Government?
The alternative in a new political party leader hardly bears contemplation!
|
06 Mar 2008 by The Venerable Bede
|
|
|
|
Continuing the elimination of the English.
|
___________________________
Some of us are acutely aware of how little the BBC represents the English, in particular the white English. In programme after programme, there is a clear preference to broadcast faces other than white and very often, when they are white, it is obvious that they are not English! West Indians, Asians, Africans, Scots, Irish all seem to be given preference over white English.
On the radio, foreign accents predominate. On major issues, it seems that the white English must have the opinions of foreigners thrust down their collective throats from dawn to dusk and even later! One would imagine that the minority category of citizen in England is the white English person!
It comes as no surprise then to discover that 'a senior BBC executive' named Richard Klein has suddenly become aware that "The white working class also feels ignored by the political classes . . " he is reported as saying. How odd that he has not also realised that the BBC and other broadcasters are complicit in creating this situation!
Richard Klein: 'Channel 4 tends to laugh at people,
the BBC ignores them'
The political selectivity of the news media, including the BBC, was amply demonstrated this week by the absence of any coverage of the mass demonstration and lobby of Parliament by thousands of citizens demanding a referendum on the question of whether Great Britain should be party to the Lisbon treaty (see piece immediately below). Instead, there was wholesale coverage of the antics of four or five campaigners opposing a third runway for London Airport who climbed onto the roof of the Houses of Parliament to publicise their opposition.
More recently, the media has gone to absurd lengths to discuss ad nauseum the disclosure that Prince Harry has been on active service as a soldier in Afghanistan. Top marks to Harry, but much fewer for the media's hugely disproportionate and sycophantic focus on that single news item at the expense of other items of public interest.
One has only to turn to regular BBC programmes such as "Any Questions?" on Radio Four and "Question Time" on BBC Two to see how much the white English are crowded out. This week's "Question Time" broadcast from Stirling was a classic. The entire panel comprised Scots - Annabel Goldie, Nichol Stephen, Nicola Sturgeon, George Galloway and Cathy Jamieson. Contrast that with the eclectic panels chosen when the programme takes place in England!
Hot on the heels of Mr Klein's sudden enlightenment, comes an announcement that the BBC intends to recruit yet more so called 'ethnic minorities'.
Funny how everyone must have their 'role models', be represented! Everyone that is except the white English!
For those who wish to read the reports for themselves, here are the links:
|
|
|
|
Hundreds protest over EU treaty
|
_____________________________________
Hundreds of campaigners have gathered outside Parliament in an effort to persuade MPs to back a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. The I Want a Referendum group's supporters formed a long queue towards the Westminster Palace security booth. The Tories and some Labour and Lib Dem MPs want a referendum on ratifying the treaty, which they say is largely the same as the discarded EU Constitution. But the government says Parliament, not the public, should have the final say. I Want a Referendum hopes to per | | |
