Donations are essential to keep Write Out Loud going    

Violation

Tell me – are you proud to be British?

I am quite sure I used to be

before we got this coalition

and such unfair society.

The word ‘disabled’ has been removed

from British Human Rights Act.

Silent deed against democracy,

a shocking, little known fact.

 

They’ve waged war on the vulnerable

in attempts to shrink the state.

The United Nations have stepped in

to investigate our fate.

Our once great nation is to be the first

to face a UN inquiry

on grave and systemic violation

of rights for disability.

 

Tories won appeal to delay hearing

’til after general election,

so why don’t the press print the truth?

They are evading our detection.

Cameron talks about human rights

when it comes to other nations

but wants us unaware of his crimes

as we go to polling stations.

 

◄ 4 a.m.

Downfall ►

Comments

Profile image

Lynn Dye

Wed 25th Mar 2015 13:17

Hello, M.C. Firstly, many apologies for my severe lateness in answering your comment.

I would agree that when checking online, the disabled look to be catered for in law, and I find it inconceivable that they would have lost all rights in society.

However, I did read in a couple of blogs that their protection had been removed from Section 149 of the equality act. The only official record of this I could find was from the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights, and it is this committee that have stated, “We are concerned that a part of the Law on treating people equally and fairly (Equality Act section 149) does not say anymore that disabled people should be involved.”

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/joint-committees/human-rights/087%20EasyRead%20Ind%20Liv%20substantive.pdf

There are a whole host of benefit reforms that have adversely affected the disabled – unfairly set work care assessments, retraction of money while awaiting appeals, and the under occupancy penalty, hence the UN inquiry.

At the announcement of the inquiry, a UN spokesman said the UK had been given time to put the matters right, but had failed to do so, and the violation has to be grave and systemic for the investigation to be going ahead.

Regarding the term “British”, personally, I have no problem calling myself British. I do find it is PC gone mad, however, if we cannot use the word “English” in other situations. In fact, I seem to remember writing a poem on this one! :-)

Thank you very much for your comment, MC, and thank you for your time.

Profile image

M.C. Newberry

Wed 18th Mar 2015 16:43

I confess to being somewhat in the dark about this.
Having checked online, I've found the "Disability
Discrimination Act 1995", the "Human Rights Act 1998/2000"
and the "Equality And Human Rights Commission Equality
Act 2010" - but would appreciate knowing what is being
intended by U.K. politicians as set out in these lines, since
it appears that the concerns of the disabled appear well
catered for in law.
"Disabled" covers a multitude of conditions affecting human
ability and needs a comprehensive interpretation to ensure
the most just administration of the law. What are
our politicians up to - and to what purpose - that has encouraged the above clearly indignant post?
As for "British": I resent being sent official documents
that list definitions that usually omit "English"...the
description which - these days - apparently dares not speak its name (an apologetic nod to Oscar Wilde!)
for reasons we are never told but can probably guess
with some accuracy.

Profile image

Lynn Dye

Tue 17th Mar 2015 19:03

Thank you for your comment, Harry.

Yes, that would be an accurate name for them. I don't think the country is what it was. Cheers :-)

Profile image

Harry O'Neill

Sun 15th Mar 2015 19:29

Lynn,

I think we should call these kinds of poems `revelationals`

they make us think a bit.

If you wish to post a comment you must login.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

Find out more Hide this message