human environment
Situation in Libya – U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011)
2011-03-21: Around this time, in 2003, we were witnessing the First Christian Fundamentalist Crusade of the 21st Century (the so-called ‘Information Age’) … the Illegal Invasion of Iraq … payback time for the WTC Incident (9-11) in New York … and an excuse to plunder and loot the valuable oil and other assets belonging to an Independent, Sovereign State. What an ugly, unresolved mess it remains !
And yet … here they go again with Libya … the Rogue’s Gallery of the United States of America, Great Britain, France, Italy and Qatar … with the League of Arab States providing the necessary cover of respectability. How will this military intervention turn out ?
There is now, however, a U.N. Resolution. But … will the scope and terms of the Resolution be respected ? Judge for yourselves, as events unfold …
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 (2011)
17 March 2011 – 6498th Meeting
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (52kb)
.
Without any further delay … the present structure and legal framework of the United Nations must be revised, and updated, to meet the changed circumstances of the 21st Century.
Respect for International Law … Human and Social Rights for All … and Lasting Peace … are essential prerequisites for Sustainable Human & Social Development !
.
.
END
‘Accessibility-for-All’ – Post EU Ratification of the 2006 UN CRPD
2011-02-28: Further to my posts, dated 15 January 2011 and 5 February 2011 …
There is an easy way to understand the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which was ratified by the European Union (EU) just before Christmas Day 2010:
For a sizeable group of vulnerable people in all of our societies, the sole route of access to many, if not most, of the Human and Social Rights set down in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) … is the UN CRPD … which only became an International Legal Instrument on 3 May 2008 … just short of 60 Years after the UDHR was adopted on 10 December 1948 !
That is precisely why Accessibility is such a critical component of the 2006 UN Convention … which has already been described, here, as a ‘Mixed Agreement’ (see the post of 5 February 2011).
Accessibility is the principal, common ingredient in ‘fields that fall in part within the competence of the European Union, in part within that of the Member States and in part within the shared competence of the EU and its Member States’. Accessibility has an impact … and always will have an impact … on all of these fields.
Policy and Decision Makers at every level within the European Union and the EU Member States would need to become accustomed to this new concept very, very quickly.
It is also essential, therefore, for the EU and the Member States to closely co-operate in implementing legislation which stems from the UN CRPD in a coherent manner … and to ensure unity in the international representation of the Union.
.
APPROACHING THE TASK OF ACCESSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION
1. Establishing an Initial Framework …
Exactly how should we make sense of … bring order and assign priorities to … the Accessibility-related Articles in the UN Convention … using the different terms ‘Accessibility’ and ‘Accessibility-for-All’ … ‘People/Persons with Disabilities’ and ‘People with Activity Limitations’ (2001 WHO ICF) … in relation to the different components of the Human Environment, i.e. the Built, Social, Virtual and Economic Environments ???
Our recommendation … SDI’s Recommendation … is to refer, in the first instance, to this ‘Accessibility-for-All’ Matrix … which we developed a few years ago … in preparation for this crucial period of implementation …
Colour image showing Sustainable Design International's 'Accessibility-for-All' Matrix. The Goal is a Sustainable Human Environment which is Accessible-for-All. Click to enlarge.
.
If we then drill down … in order to fully understand ‘Accessibility of a Building’, for example … this then comprises:
- Approach to the building ;
- Entry through principal entrance(s) ;
- Health, Safety, Convenience & Comfort in Use, including thermal comfort, indoor air quality, protection from fire, etc ;
- Egress from the building (during normal conditions) ;
- Removal from the vicinity of the building (during normal conditions) ;
and
- Evacuation from the building (during, for example, a fire emergency) ;
- Safe Movement to a ‘place of safety’ (during, for example, a fire emergency), which is remote from the building ;
and
- Each stage of a Work Process, at every level, in places of work ;
- Use of Electronic, Information & Communication Technologies (EICT’s) ;
and
- Management, Services, and Attitudes of People in the building ;
- Recruitment, Employment, Training & Promotion Practices.
.
2. Overlaying UN CRPD Article 9 – Accessibility …
Onto the Initial Framework outlined above … overlay Article 9 … and crosscheck in detail. Note well the strong language used … ‘States Parties shall’ … and do not forget that this is not a Wish List … but a clear delineation of the Scope of an Important Human and Social Right which now has a proper basis in both International and European Union Law !
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination of obstacles and barriers to accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia:
(a) Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor facilities, including schools, housing, medical facilities and workplaces ;
(b) Information, communications and other services, including electronic services and emergency services.
2. States Parties shall also take appropriate measures:
(a) To develop, promulgate and monitor the implementation of minimum standards and guidelines for the accessibility of facilities and services open or provided to the public ;
(b) To ensure that private entities that offer facilities and services which are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities ;
(c) To provide training for stakeholders on accessibility issues facing persons with disabilities ;
(d) To provide in buildings and other facilities open to the public signage in Braille and in easy to read and understand forms ;
(e) To provide forms of live assistance and intermediaries, including guides, readers and professional sign language interpreters, to facilitate accessibility to buildings and other facilities open to the public ;
(f) To promote other appropriate forms of assistance and support to persons with disabilities to ensure their access to information ;
(g) To promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet ;
(h) To promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible information and communications technologies and systems at an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become accessible at minimum cost.
.
So … what is the situation in the Member States of the European Union ?
In an upcoming post … let’s take Ireland as a case in point, just for the hell of it … and discuss some of the consequences … stemming from the EU’s ratification of the UN CRPD … on the operation of the Building Regulations and Disability Access Certificates (DAC’s).
.
.
END
Personal Ethics – The Heart of Sustainability Implementation !
2011-02-15 …
Regular visitors, here, will have very little doubt about my understanding of Sustainable Human & Social Development … which is an intricate, open, dynamic and continuously evolving concept. And about my firm conviction that Sustainable Design involves far more than merely substituting the word ‘sustainable’ … for ‘green’, ‘ecological’ or ‘environment-friendly’ … or any number of insipid alternatives which still regularly appear in the popular and/or academic media ! Who, in their right minds, wouldn’t be confused ?!?
‘Sustainability’ is Not … and Cannot … be just another graft onto Conventional Design Practice … whether that be Spatial Planning, Architectural / Engineering / Industrial Design or e-Design !
Sustainable Design & Construction … is the ethical response, in built or wrought (worked) form, to the concept of ‘Sustainable Human & Social Development’.
.
SUSTAINABILITY IMPLEMENTATION
Opinion: At the Heart of Implementation which is Authentically ‘Sustainable’ … (a colleague of mine is very fond of using that word ‘authentic’) … must lie a Personal Code of Ethics. By that, I do Not mean … and I am Not referring to … a Professional Code of Conduct … which is mainly about the self-protection and self-preservation of a professional class !
Everyday Reality: If we examine, for a moment, two interesting examples … Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation or the 9-11(2001) Collapses of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 & 7 in New York … such is the great timelag between general societal recognition of a critical design challenge … and then, the passing of relevant national legislation which can really only demarcate a minimal threshold of performance … and next, the associated production of standardized design guidelines … and finally, the imposition of effective monitoring and verification procedures … that the only practical approach is to base Sustainability Implementation on a robust Personal Code of Ethics … with an overt emphasis on Continuing Personal Development (CPD).
I hasten to add that this is not how we (society) are currently educating the design disciplines … and this is not how the professional institutes are operating.
.
PERSONAL CODE OF ETHICS
For many years, in my presentations around Europe, the Arab Gulf Region, India and South America … I have been actively promoting the WFEO/FMOI (UNESCO) Model Code of Ethics as a suitable template for use by all of the design-related disciplines. Recently, however, our Organization … Sustainable Design International … has undertaken a major review of this 2001 Code, and produced a 2011 Update which tackles the following matters of major concern in our world of shameful waste and socially inequality:
- Sustainable Human & Social Development ;
- Climate Change Mitigation & Adaptation ;
- Strengthening the Voice of Vulnerable Social Groups, particularly People with Activity Limitations.
.
WFEO/FMOI (UNESCO)
World Federation of Engineering Organizations – Fédération Mondiale des Organisations d’Ingénieurs
MODEL CODE OF ETHICS
Since 1990, WFEO/FMOI has worked to prepare a Code of Ethics under the supervision of Donald Laplante (Canada), David Thom (New Zealand), Bud Carroll (USA), and others. It is expected that the Model Code, adopted in 2001, will be used to define and support the creation of codes in member and related professional institutions. This version of the Model Code was updated by C.J. Walsh (Ireland) in 2011.
CONTENTS
I. BROAD PRINCIPLES
II. PRACTICE PROVISION ETHICS
III. ETHICS OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
IV. CONCLUSION
INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE
- Sustainable Development & Climate Change
- Protection of the Public, and the Natural Environment
- Faithful Agent of Clients and Employers
- Competence & Knowledge
- Fairness and Integrity in the Workplace
- Professional Accountability & Leadership
.
WFEO/FMOI MODEL CODE OF ETHICS
I. BROAD PRINCIPLES
Ethics is generally understood as the discipline or field of study dealing with moral duty or obligation. This typically gives rise to a set of governing principles or values, which in turn are used to judge the appropriateness of a particular conduct or behaviour. These principles are usually presented either as broad guiding principles of an idealistic or inspirational nature or, alternatively, as a detailed and specific set of rules couched in legalistic or imperative terms to make them more enforceable. Professions which have been given the privilege and responsibility of self regulation, including the engineering professions, have tended to opt for the first alternative, espousing sets of underlying principles as codes of professional ethics which form the basis and framework for responsible professional practice. Arising from this context, professional codes of ethics have sometimes been incorrectly interpreted as a set of ‘rules’ of conduct intended for passive observance. A more appropriate use by practicing professionals is to interpret the essence of the underlying principles within their daily decision-making situations in a dynamic manner, responsive to the needs of the situation. As a consequence, a code of professional ethics is more than a minimum standard of conduct ; rather, it is a set of principles which should guide professionals in their daily work.
In summary, the Model Code presented herein elaborates the expectations of engineers and society in discriminating engineers’ professional responsibilities. The Code is based on broad principles of truth, honesty and trustworthiness, respect for human life and social wellbeing, fairness, openness, competence and accountability. Some of these broader ethical principles or issues deemed more universally applicable are not specifically defined in the Code, although they are understood to be applicable as well. Only those tenets deemed to be particularly applicable to the practice of professional engineering are specified. Nevertheless, certain ethical principles or issues not commonly considered to be part of professional ethics should be implicitly accepted to judge the engineer’s professional performance.
Issues regarding protection of the natural environment, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and sustainable development know no geographical boundaries. The engineers and citizens of all nations should know and respect the ethics of sustainability. It is desirable, therefore, that engineers in each nation continue to observe the philosophy of the Principles of Sustainable Ethics, as delineated in Section III of this code.
II. PRACTICE PROVISION ETHICS
Professional engineers shall:
- hold paramount the safety, health and wellbeing of the public, particularly people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups in society … and the protection of both the natural and the built environments in accordance with the Principles of Sustainable Human & Social Development ;
- promote health and safety within the workplace ;
- offer services, advise on or undertake engineering assignments only in areas of their competence, and practice in a careful and diligent manner ;
- act as faithful agents of their clients or employers, maintain confidentially and disclose conflicts of interest ;
- keep themselves informed in order to maintain their competence, strive to advance the body of knowledge within which they practice and provide opportunities for the professional development of their subordinates and fellow practitioners ;
- conduct themselves with fairness, and good faith towards clients, colleagues and others, give credit where it is due and accept, as well as give, honest and fair professional criticism ;
- be aware of and ensure that clients and employers are made aware of the environmental and socio-economic consequences of actions or projects, and endeavour to interpret engineering issues to the public in an objective and truthful manner ;
- present clearly to employers and clients the possible consequences of overruling or disregarding engineering decisions or judgment ;
- report to their association and/or appropriate agencies any illegal or unethical engineering decisions or practices of engineers or others.
III. ETHICS OF SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING
Engineers, as they develop any professional activity, shall:
- try with the best of their ability, courage, enthusiasm and dedication, to obtain a superior technical achievement, which will contribute to and promote a healthy and agreeable surrounding for all people, including indigenous peoples and other vulnerable social groups, in open spaces as well as indoors ;
- strive to accomplish the beneficial objectives of their work with the lowest possible consumption of raw materials and energy and the lowest production of wastes and any kind of pollution ;
- discuss in particular the consequences of their proposals and actions, direct or indirect, immediate or long term, upon human health, social equity and the local culture and system of values ;
- study thoroughly the environment that will be affected, assess all the impacts that might arise in the structure, dynamics and aesthetics of the eco-systems involved, urbanized or natural, as well as in the pertinent socio-economic systems … and select the best alternative for development which is environmentally sound, resilient to climate change and sustainable ;
- promote a clear understanding of the actions required to restore and, if possible, to improve the environment that may be disturbed, and include them in their proposals ;
- reject any kind of commitment that involves unfair damages for human surroundings and nature, and aim for the best possible technical, socio-economic, and political solution ;
- be aware that the principles of eco-system interdependence, biodiversity maintenance, resource recovery and inter-relational harmony form the basis of humankind’s continued existence and that each of these bases poses a threshold of sustainability that should not be exceeded.
IV. CONCLUSION
Always remember that war, greed, misery and ignorance, plus natural disasters and human-induced pollution, climate change and destruction of resources, are the main causes for the progressive impairment of the environment and that engineers, as active members of society, deeply involved in the promotion of development, must use our talent, knowledge and imagination to assist society in removing those evils and improving the quality of life for all people, including indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups.
.
INTERPRETATION OF THE WFEO/FMOI MODEL CODE
The interpretive articles which follow expand on and discuss some of the more difficult and inter-related components of the Code, especially with regard to the Practice Provisions. No attempt is made to expand on all clauses of the Code, nor is the elaboration presented on a clause-by-clause basis. The objective of this approach is to broaden the interpretation, rather than narrow its focus. The ethics of professional engineering is an integrated whole and cannot be reduced to fixed ‘rules’. Therefore, the issues and questions arising from the Code are discussed in a general framework, drawing on any and all portions of the Code to demonstrate their inter-relationship and to expand on the basic intent of the Code.
Sustainable Development & Climate Change
Engineers shall strive to enhance the quality, durability and climate change resilience of the Human Environment (including the built, social, economic and virtual environments), and to promote the Principles of Sustainable Human & Social Development.
Engineers shall seek opportunities to work for the enhancement of safety, health, and the social wellbeing of both their local community and the global community through the practice of sustainable development.
Engineers whose recommendations are overruled or ignored on issues of safety, health, social wellbeing, or sustainable development, shall inform their contractor or employer of the possible consequences.
Protection of the Public, and the Natural Environment
Professional Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and wellbeing of the public, including people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups in society … and protection of the natural environment. This obligation to the safety, health and wellbeing of the general public, which includes his/her own work environment, is often dependent upon engineering judgments, risk assessments, decisions and practices incorporated into structures, machines, products, processes and devices. Therefore, engineers must control and ensure that what they are involved with is in conformity with accepted engineering practices, standards and applicable codes, and would be considered safe based on peer adjudication. This responsibility extends to include all and any situations which an engineer encounters, and includes an obligation to advise the appropriate authority if there is reason to believe that any engineering activity, or its products, processes, etc., do not conform with the above stated conditions.
The meaning of paramount in this basic tenet is that all other requirements of the Code are subordinate, if protection of public safety, the natural environment or other substantive public interests are involved.
Faithful Agent of Clients and Employers
Engineers shall act as faithful agents or trustees of their clients and employers with objectivity, fairness and justice to all parties. With respect to the handling of confidential or proprietary information, the concept of ownership of the information and protecting that party’s rights is appropriate. Engineers shall not reveal facts, data or information obtained in a professional capacity without the prior consent of its owner. The only exception to respecting confidentially and maintaining a trustee’s position is in instances where the public interest or the natural environment is at risk, as discussed in the preceding section ; but even in these circumstances, the engineer should endeavour to have the client and/or employer appropriately redress the situation, or at least, in the absence of a compelling reason to the contrary, should make every reasonable effort to contact them and explain clearly the potential risks, prior to informing the appropriate authority.
Professional Engineers shall avoid conflict of interest situations with employers and clients but, should such conflict arise, it is the engineer’s responsibility to fully disclose, without delay, the nature of the conflict to the party/parties with whom the conflict exists. In those circumstances where full disclosure is insufficient, or seen to be insufficient, to protect all parties’ interests, as well as the public, the engineer shall withdraw totally from the issue or use extraordinary means, involving independent parties if possible, to monitor the situation. For example, it is inappropriate to act simultaneously as agent for both the provider and the recipient of professional services. If a client’s and an employer’s interests are at odds, the engineer shall attempt to deal fairly with both. If the conflict of interest is between the intent of a corporate employer and a regulatory standard, the engineer must attempt to reconcile the difference, and if that is unsuccessful, it may become necessary to inform his/her association and the appropriate regulatory agency.
Being a faithful agent or trustee includes the obligation of engaging, or advising to engage, experts or specialists when such services are deemed to be in the client’s or employer’s best interests. It also means being accurate, objective and truthful in making public statements on behalf of the client or employer when required to do so, while respecting the client’s and employer’s rights of confidentiality and proprietary information.
Being a faithful agent includes not using a previous employer’s or client’s specific privileged or proprietary information and trade practices or process information, without the owner’s knowledge and consent. However, general technical knowledge, experience and expertise gained by the engineer through involvement with the previous work may be freely used without consent or subsequent undertakings.
Competence & Knowledge
Professional Engineers shall offer services, advise on or undertake engineering assignments only in areas of their competence by virtue of their training and experience. This includes exercising care and communicating clearly in accepting or interpreting assignments, and in setting expected outcomes. It also includes the responsibility to obtain the services of an expert if required or, if the knowledge is unknown, to proceed only with full disclosure of the circumstances and, if necessary, of the experimental nature of the activity to all parties involved. Hence, this requirement is more than simply duty to a standard of care, it also involves acting with honesty and integrity with one’s client or employer, and one’s self. Professional Engineers have the responsibility to remain abreast of developments and knowledge in their area of expertise, that is, to maintain their own competence. Should there be a technologically driven or individually motivated shift in the area of technical activity, it is the engineer’s duty to attain and maintain competence in all areas of involvement including being knowledgeable with the technical and legal framework and regulations governing their work. In effect, it requires a personal commitment to ongoing professional development, continuing education and self-testing.
In addition to maintaining their own competence, Professional Engineers have an obligation to strive to contribute to the advancement of the body of knowledge within which they practice, and to the profession in general. Moreover, within the framework of the practice of their profession, they are expected to participate in providing opportunities to further the professional development of their colleagues.
This competence requirement of the Code extends to include an obligation to the public, the profession and one’s peers, that opinions on engineering issues are expressed honestly and only in areas of one’s competence. It applies equally to reporting or advising on professional matters and to issuing public statements. This requires honesty with one’s self to present issues fairly, accurately and with appropriate qualifiers and disclaimers, and to avoid personal, political and other non-technical biases. The latter is particularly important for public statements or when involved in a technical forum.
Fairness and Integrity in the Workplace
Honesty, integrity, continuously updated competence, devotion to service and dedication to enhancing the life quality of society are cornerstones of professional responsibility. Within this framework, engineers shall be objective and truthful and include all known and pertinent information in professional reports, statements and testimony. They shall accurately and objectively represent their clients, employers, associates and themselves, consistent with their academic experience and professional qualifications. This tenet is more than ‘not misrepresenting’ ; it also implies disclosure of all relevant information and issues, especially when serving in an advisory capacity or as an expert witness. Similarly, fairness, honesty and accuracy in advertising are expected.
If called upon to verify another engineer’s work, there is an obligation to inform (or make every effort to inform) the other engineer, whether the other engineer is still actively involved or not. In this situation, and in any circumstance, engineers shall give proper recognition and credit where credit is due and accept, as well as give, honest and fair criticism on professional matters, all the while maintaining dignity and respect for everyone involved.
Engineers shall not accept, nor offer covert payment or other considerations for the purpose of securing, or as remuneration for, engineering assignments. Engineers should prevent their personal or political involvement from influencing or compromising their professional role or responsibility.
Consistent with the Code, and having attempted to remedy any situation within their organization, engineers are obligated to report to their association or other appropriate agency any illegal or unethical engineering decisions by engineers or others. Care must be taken not to enter into legal arrangements which compromise this obligation.
Professional Accountability & Leadership
Engineers have a duty to practice in a careful and diligent manner, and accept responsibility and be accountable for their actions. This duty is not limited to design, or its supervision and management, but applies to all areas of practice. For example, it includes construction supervision and management, preparation of drawings, engineering reports, feasibility studies, sustainability impact assessments, engineering developmental work, etc.
The signing and sealing of engineering documents indicates the taking of responsibility for the work. This practice is required for all types of engineering endeavour, regardless of where or for whom the work is done, including but not limited to, privately and publicly owned firms, large corporations, and government agencies or departments. There are no exceptions ; signing and sealing documents is appropriate whenever engineering principles have been used and public wellbeing may be at risk.
Taking responsibility for engineering activity includes being accountable for one’s own work and, in the case of a senior engineer, accepting responsibility for the work of a team. The latter implies responsible supervision where the engineer is actually in a position to review, modify and direct the entirety of the engineering work. This concept requires setting reasonable limits on the extent of activities, and the number of engineers and others, whose work can be supervised by the responsible engineer. The practice of a ‘symbolic’ responsibility or supervision is the situation where an engineer, say with the title of Chief Engineer, takes full responsibility for all engineering on behalf of a large corporation, utility or governmental agency, even though the engineer may not be aware of many of the engineering activities or decisions being made daily throughout the firm or agency. The essence of this approach is that the firm is taking the responsibility by default, whether engineering supervision or direction is applied or not.
Engineers have a duty to advise their employer and, if necessary, their clients and even their professional association, in that order, in situations when the overturning of an engineering decision may result in breaching their duty to safeguard the public, including people with activity limitations, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable social groups. The initial action is to discuss the problem with the supervisor/employer. If the employer does not adequately respond to the engineer’s concern, then the client must be advised in the case of a consultancy situation, or the most senior officer should be informed in the case of a manufacturing process plant or government agency. Failing this attempt to rectify the situation, the engineer must advise in confidence his/her professional association of his/her concerns.
In the same order as mentioned above, the engineer must report unethical engineering activity undertaken by other engineers, or by non-engineers. This extends to include, for example, situations in which senior officials of a firm make ‘executive’ decisions which clearly and substantially alter the engineering aspects of the work, or protection of public wellbeing or the natural environment arising from that work.
Because of developments in technology and the increasing ability of engineering activities to impact on the environment, engineers have an obligation to be mindful of the effect that their decisions will have on the environment and the wellbeing of society, and to report any concerns of this nature in the same manner as previously mentioned. Further to the above, with the rapid advancement of technology in today’s world and the possible social impacts on large populations of people, engineers must endeavour to foster the public’s understanding of technical issues and the role of Engineering more than ever before.
Sustainable development is the challenge of meeting current human needs for natural resources, industrial products, energy, food, transportation, shelter, and effective waste management while conserving and, if possible enhancing, the Earth’s environmental quality, natural resources, ethical, intellectual, working and affectionate capabilities of people and the socio-economic bases essential for the human needs of future generations. The proper observance of these principles will considerably help to eradicate world poverty.
.
WFEO/FMOI Model Code of Ethics, Adopted 2001.
This Version, Updated 2011 & Communicated to UNESCO.
[Footnote to the Code]
Sustainable Human & Social Development: Development which meets the responsible needs, i.e. the Human & Social Rights*, of this generation – without stealing the life and living resources from future generations, especially our children, their children, and the next five generations of children.
*As defined in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights
.
.
END
EU Ratification of UN Disability Convention – EFC Legal Study
2011-02-05: Further to my post, dated 15 January 2011 …
Many people directly or indirectly involved with Disability-Related Issues in Europe … may not yet know that, a few weeks ago, the European Union ratified the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD). They may not even know that their own country, as a Member State of the European Union, had perhaps already ratified the UN Convention one or two years earlier.
At this time, the majority of Member States have proceeded, voluntarily, to ratify the Convention … with some of those, inexplicably, declining/refusing to ratify the Convention’s Optional Protocol.
Human & Social Rights can be a difficult subject area !
Ireland has not ratified the UN Convention … and, unfortunately, the attitude of many policy-makers and decision-makers within our Irish Institutions of State, large and small, is that it’s business as usual … no need to worry or fuss, or give a damn … until this country does actually sign on the Convention’s bottom line … an attitude which displays a magnificent ignorance of the changed reality, post Lisbon Treaty, which is the European Union’s Current Legal Environment !!
Please examine carefully, for yourselves, the findings of this Legal Study, recently approved for publication by the European Commission …
European Foundation Centre (EFC)
Brussels, October 2010
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (1.46 Mb)
.
EU RATIFICATION OF THE UN CRPD – ASPECTS OF EU LAW
The following are selected extracts from the EFC Study … my selection (!) … to answer specific issues relating to UN CRPD Implementation within the European Union. Typographical errors in the Study have also been corrected … and, post Lisbon Treaty, references to the EU Treaties have been properly updated …
The legal basis for the conclusion of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) signals the appropriate legal basis for its implementation within the European Union (EU). In this respect, and in line with Article 4 of the UN Convention, implementation implies that instruments may be adopted or modified by the Union in order to comply with the Convention and give effect to its provisions and principles. Although the choice of the legal basis for the decision concluding an international agreement is very important, it is not decisive for implementation. In European Court of Justice Case C-178/0345, which concerned the implementation of the Rotterdam Convention on International Trade in Hazardous Chemicals, the Court stated that ” the fact that one or more provisions of the Treaty have been chosen as legal bases for the approval of an international agreement is not sufficient to show that those same provisions must also be used as legal bases for the adoption of measures intended to implement that agreement at Community level “. The latter statement means that EU Treaty provisions other than those mentioned in EU Council Decision 2010/48/EC to conclude the UN CRPD can be used as legal bases to implement UN CRPD obligations in specific fields.
.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN CRPD) is an international human rights agreement where both the European Union (EU) and its Member States are contracting parties. The UN Convention is thus a Mixed Agreement. Mixed Agreements involve a Shared Contractual Relationship between the EU, its Member States and one or more third countries and/or international organisations. As a Mixed Agreement, the UN CRPD covers fields that fall in part within the competence of the EU, in part within that of the Member States and in part within the shared competence of the EU and its Member States. It is therefore essential for the EU and the Member States to closely co-operate, in order to implement legislation stemming from the Convention in a coherent manner and ensure unity in the international representation of the Union.
EU Member States, when participating in Mixed Agreements, do not act as entirely autonomous subjects of international law; they are subject to a Duty of Loyal Co-Operation between one another and the EU. This duty extends to each of the negotiation, conclusion and implementation phases. In this sense, there is a collective management of the obligations under international law. The duty of loyal co-operation, deriving from Article 4.3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), embraces two sets of obligations: first, Member States shall take appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the EC Treaty or resulting from action taken by the EU Institutions; and second: Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and shall abstain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives … which are set out in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
Treaty on European Union (TEU) – Consolidated Version, as Amended by the Treaty of Lisbon
Article 4.3
Pursuant to the principle of sincere mutual co-operation, the Union and the Member States shall, in full mutual respect, assist each other in carrying out tasks which flow from the Treaties.
The Member States shall take any appropriate measure, general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising out of the Treaties or resulting from the acts of the institutions of the Union.
The Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives.
.
In relation to EU Member States‘ Compliance with a Mixed Agreement concluded by the EU … the European Court of Justice has inferred that for matters falling within EU competence … the Member States fulfil, within the EU system, an obligation in relation to the Union which has assumed responsibility for due performance of the agreement. In other words, if a Member State fails to take all appropriate measures to implement provisions of the Mixed Agreement that fall within the competence of the EU … it not only fails to fulfil its international obligation, but is also acting in breach of EU Law. The European Commission may thus bring an infringement case against a Member State that has not properly fulfilled its duty. The principle underpinning such mechanisms is the ‘duty of loyal co-operation’, which provides the foundation for managing shared competence within Mixed Agreements.
The line dividing international responsibility for implementation of the International Mixed Agreement between the EU and its Member States depends on the obligations respectively assumed. The UN CRPD contains a clause setting out ‘separate’ responsibility. According to Article 44.1, Regional Integration Organisations acceding to the Convention shall declare, in their instruments of formal confirmation or accession, the extent of their competence. This division of responsibility for implementation implies that the European Union only bears responsibility for the breach of those obligations it has assumed.
EU Council Decision 2010/48/EC on the conclusion of the UN CRPD refers to EU competence in respect of those matters governed by the UN CRPD, and lists EU Instruments which demonstrate such competence.
.
STRUCTURE OF THE EFC REPORT
The main objective of the Study was to analyse the obligations set out in the UN CRPD and, in particular, to gather information about the various practices of the EU Member States and the European Union in implementing the UN CRPD.
The work was carried out by the European Foundation Centre (EFC), representing the European Consortium of Foundations on Human Rights and Disability … under Contract No. VC/2008/1214 … for the European Commission‘s Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion.
Section 1 of this Report sets the appropriate background for the analysis that will follow.
Section 2 of the Report provides an overview and general recommendations on the implementation of the social model of disability, and core obligations deriving from Article 1 and Preamble Paragraph (e) of the UN CRPD.
Section 3 of the Report provides an overview and general recommendations on the implementation of Article 3 (General Principles), Article 4 (General Obligations), Article 5 (Equality and Non-Discrimination), and Article 9 (Accessibility) of the UN CRPD. The section also reviews UN CRPD articles on Inter-Sectionality, namely Articles 6 (Women with Disabilities) and Article 7 (Children with Disabilities). It is worth noting that the articles addressed in this section are articles of general and crosscutting application, and therefore their application is relevant for the implementation of all articles of the Convention.
Section 4 of the Report provides an overview and general recommendations on the implementation of selected substantive provisions of the UN CRPD which apply existing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights within the context of disability. Specifically, the section considers the implementation of Articles 16 (Freedom from Exploitation, Violence and Abuse) and 17 (Protecting the Integrity of the Person), which are seeking to assert protections that underscore the humanity of all persons with disabilities. The section also considers the implementation of Articles 12 (Equal Recognition before the Law) and 19 (Living Independently and Being Included in the Community), both of which aim at maintaining and safeguarding the autonomy of the person. Furthermore, articles on specific accessibility rights, namely Article 13 (Access to Justice) and Article 29 (Participation in Political and Public Life), are likewise addressed. Finally, the section considers the implementation of Articles 24 (Education) and 27 (Work and Employment).
Section 5 of the Report contains an overview and general recommendations on the implementation of articles which outline steps that are necessary to support reforms. Specifically, the section considers the implementation of Article 31 (Statistics and Data Collection), Article 32 (International Co-Operation), and Article 33 (National Implementation and Monitoring).
Section 6 of the Report suggests good practices for the EU and national policy-makers for the future and overall implementation of the Convention, and the effective achievement of its objectives.
It is worth noting that, while it is hard to be definitive, given that the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is still in its infancy and has yet to pronounce on the obligations of the UN CRPD … it is nevertheless possible on the basis of the general principles of the Convention and interpretative tools, such as the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, to identify illustrative challenges to the implementation of the UN CRPD. For the purposes of this Study, the review of EU and Member States policies and legal instruments is based on the analysis of the UN CRPD and checklists that were produced from this Study to measure progress.
Finally, for the purposes of the Study, a challenge is defined as a ‘difficulty’ posed by existing national or EU practice which may potentially hamper the full and effective implementation of the UN CRPD by the EU Member States and/or the European Union. In order to meet such challenges, it will be necessary, inter alia, for the EU (as appropriate) and/or its Member States to review legislation and/or policy with a view to full compliance. On the other hand, a practice is defined as good if it fulfils certain requirements of the Convention or mainstreams the general principles, consistent with Article 3 of the UN CRPD, and has an awareness-raising impact.
.
.
END
EU Accessibility & Ratification of UN Disability Rights Convention
2011-01-15: Recently, I was waiting … and waiting … for the first mention of this important news to pop up on any of the European Disability Networks … the Formal Ratification by the European Union (EU) of the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities … on 23 December 2010 last.
History in the making !!
This U.N. Convention was adopted on 13 December 2006 (2006-12-13), at the United Nations Headquarters in New York … and was opened for signature on 30 March 2007. It entered into force, i.e. became an International Legal Instrument, on 3 May 2008 (2008-05-03). A copy of the Convention can be downloaded, here, on this Site … in my post, dated 31 October 2009.
Finally, on Monday 10 January 2011 … via ICTA-Europe, EDeAN, and the EU Press Release below … it was announced …
EU Press Release IP/11/4 – Brussels, 5 January 2011
EU Ratifies UN Convention on Disability Rights
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (25kb)
So much for instant communication in our much-vaunted Information / Knowledge / Smart Society !!
.
Ordinarily, this news would be nothing to get excited about.
BUT … since the Lisbon Treaty entered into force on 1 January 2009 … the European Union now has a legal personality all of its own, separate from those of the individual EU Member States. See Article 47 in Title VI – Final Provisions – of the Treaty on European Union (consolidated version).
This is the first time that the EU has become a party to an international treaty.
The 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is now part of the European Union’s Acquis Communautaire, i.e. the extensive body of EU Law.
.
The consequential impacts flowing, therefore, from the EU’s Ratification of the U.N. Convention … at both European and Member State (National) levels … will be very, very interesting to observe during the immediate short term. [A note of caution ... be patient, and allow for a short period of 'bedding-in' at the start. See below.]
The European Commission, for example, must now take full account of the Convention in the drafting and implementation of any new legislation, policies and programmes … in fact, all of its activities.
The European Court of Justice must also take full account of the Convention in all of its work.
This will, inevitably, heavily influence what is … or is not … happening with regard to social and other policies at national level in the Member States. Many Member States (16) have already ratified the Convention … and more power to them ! BUT among these 16 … the Czech Republic and Denmark have not yet ratified the UN Convention’s Optional Protocol … how strange … and unacceptable !!
Some Member States … and I am thinking specifically of Ireland … will have to be dragged, screaming, to the point of ratification. And even when that position has been reached … proper implementation will always be an issue. Just consider, for a moment, Ireland’s uncaring and ham-fisted approach to implementation of the 1989 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child … which it did actually ratify way back on 28 September 1992 ! See my post, dated 30 November 2009.
.
Accessibility of the ‘Human Environment’ – A Harmonized EU Understanding !
As far as the European Union must now be concerned … and all of the EU Member States … Preamble Paragraph (g) and Articles 9, 10 & 11 of the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – together – form the basis of a harmonized understanding for Accessibility of the ‘Human Environment’ … which includes the Built Environment, the Social Environment, the Economic Environment, and the Virtual Environment … concepts which I have defined, here, many times before.
Preamble Paragraph (g)
Emphasizing the importance of mainstreaming disability issues as an integral part of relevant strategies of sustainable development,
Article 9 – Accessibility
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination of obstacles and barriers to accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia:
(a) Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor facilities, including schools, housing, medical facilities and workplaces ;
(b) Information, communications and other services, including electronic services and emergency services.
2. States Parties shall also take appropriate measures:
(a) To develop, promulgate and monitor the implementation of minimum standards and guidelines for the accessibility of facilities and services open or provided to the public ;
(b) To ensure that private entities that offer facilities and services which are open or provided to the public take into account all aspects of accessibility for persons with disabilities ;
(c) To provide training for stakeholders on accessibility issues facing persons with disabilities ;
(d) To provide in buildings and other facilities open to the public signage in Braille and in easy to read and understand forms ;
(e) To provide forms of live assistance and intermediaries, including guides, readers and professional sign language interpreters, to facilitate accessibility to buildings and other facilities open to the public ;
(f) To promote other appropriate forms of assistance and support to persons with disabilities to ensure their access to information ;
(g) To promote access for persons with disabilities to new information and communications technologies and systems, including the Internet ;
(h) To promote the design, development, production and distribution of accessible information and communications technologies and systems at an early stage, so that these technologies and systems become accessible at minimum cost.
Article 10 – Right to Life
States Parties reaffirm that every human being has the inherent right to life and shall take all necessary measures to ensure its effective enjoyment by persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others.
Article 11 – Situations of Risk & Humanitarian Emergencies
[My Note: An outbreak of fire in a building would be a situation of serious risk.]
States Parties shall take, in accordance with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed conflict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.
.
Accessibility of the ‘Human Environment’ – Competent & Effective EU Implementation !
Within the European Union as a whole, because it is a party to the Convention in its own right … and also within the individual EU Member States … Articles 31 & 33 of the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – together – mandate that implementation is taken seriously … that it is competent and effective … and, most importantly, that independent monitoring and verification is a fundamental part of the process.
Article 31 – Statistics & Data Collection
1. States Parties undertake to collect appropriate information, including statistical and research data, to enable them to formulate and implement policies to give effect to the present Convention. The process of collecting and maintaining this information shall:
(a) Comply with legally established safeguards, including legislation on data protection, to ensure confidentiality and respect for the privacy of persons with disabilities ;
(b) Comply with internationally accepted norms to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and ethical principles in the collection and use of statistics.
2. The information collected in accordance with this article shall be disaggregated, as appropriate, and used to help assess the implementation of States Parties’ obligations under the present Convention and to identify and address the barriers faced by persons with disabilities in exercising their rights.
3. States Parties shall assume responsibility for the dissemination of these statistics and ensure their accessibility to persons with disabilities and others.
Article 32 – International Co-Operation
1. States Parties recognize the importance of international co-operation and its promotion, in support of national efforts for the realization of the purpose and objectives of the present Convention, and will undertake appropriate and effective measures in this regard, between and among States and, as appropriate, in partnership with relevant international and regional organizations and civil society, in particular organizations of persons with disabilities. Such measures could include, inter alia:
(a) Ensuring that international co-operation, including international development programmes, is inclusive of and accessible to persons with disabilities ;
(b) Facilitating and supporting capacity-building, including through the exchange and sharing of information, experiences, training programmes and best practices ;
(c) Facilitating co-operation in research and access to scientific and technical knowledge ;
(d) Providing, as appropriate, technical and economic assistance, including by facilitating access to and sharing of accessible and assistive technologies, and through the transfer of technologies.
2. The provisions of this article are without prejudice to the obligations of each State Party to fulfil its obligations under the present Convention.
Article 33 – National Implementation & Monitoring
1. States Parties, in accordance with their system of organization, shall designate one or more focal points within government for matters relating to the implementation of the present Convention, and shall give due consideration to the establishment or designation of a co-ordination mechanism within government to facilitate related action in different sectors and at different levels.
2. States Parties shall, in accordance with their legal and administrative systems, maintain, strengthen, designate or establish within the State Party, a framework, including one or more independent mechanisms, as appropriate, to promote, protect and monitor implementation of the present Convention. When designating or establishing such a mechanism, States Parties shall take into account the principles relating to the status and functioning of national institutions for protection and promotion of human rights.
3. Civil society, in particular persons with disabilities and their representative organizations, shall be involved and participate fully in the monitoring process.
.
The European Union’s Disability Strategy 2010-2020 [COM(2010) 636 final]
The general approach to, and the quality of, Accessibility Implementation in Europe … when compared, for example, with Japan … is pathetically inadequate.
It is quite amazing, therefore, that the texts which deal with Accessibility of the ‘Human Environment’ in the EU’s Disability Strategy Document 2010-2020 … are weak and far too vague … basically, meaningless claptrap drafted by desk jockeys / ‘suits who do not know’ ! We did not achieve a ‘Europe Accessible For All’ by 2010 (see below) … do you see it ?? And … at the current rate of progress, neither will we achieve a ‘Europe Accessible For All’ by 2020 !
The European Union’s Accessibility Strategy, related Policies and Programmes … and the monitoring, targeting and independent verification of Accessibility Implementation … all require a radical overhaul !
All those Officials in the European Commission who are involved, in any way, shape or form, with Accessibility of the ‘Human Environment’ would do well to RE-READ AND MEDITATE DEEPLY on the contents of the 2003 Final Report from the Group of Accessibility Experts, which was established by the European Commission itself …
EU 2003 (EYPD) Expert Group on Accessibility
October 2003
2010: A Europe Accessible For All
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (294kb)
I was a Member of that Expert Group !
.
AND SOME WIDER CONCERNS …
1. The European Union HAS NOT RATIFIED the UN Disability Rights Convention’s Optional Protocol. If the Union is so Open and Transparent … and so committed to Human and Social Rights for All EU Citizens … somebody, somewhere, has to scream out loud “Why is the EU Not Ratifying this Optional Protocol ???”. And … we demand an honest answer !!!
Optional Protocol – Article 1
1. A State Party to the present Protocol (‘State Party’) recognizes the competence of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘the Committee’) to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of individuals or groups of individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by that State Party of the provisions of the Convention.
2. No communication shall be received by the Committee if it concerns a State Party to the Convention that is not a party to the present Protocol.
2. The EU Code of Conduct between the Council, the Member States and the Commission setting out internal arrangements for the implementation by and representation of the European Union relating to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Above, I talked about a short period of ‘bedding-in’. BUT … get your teeth into the ‘meat’ of this document … which indicates that it might be a much longer and more difficult process !?!
Official Journal of the European Union (15 December 2010) - 2010/C 340/08
EU Council – UN Disability Rights Convention – 2010 Internal Code of Conduct
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (729kb)
3. At EU Council … How Important is this Issue Considered ? In the 37 Page Report on the Justice and Home Affairs Council Meeting, which was held in Brussels from 2-3 December 2010 … the adoption of the above Internal Code of Conduct rated just a very brief mention on the last page. It was not mentioned, at all, among the Main Results of the Meeting !
4. Will Disability Networks, at both European and Member State (National) levels, have the stamina … and be sufficiently competent and focused … to rigorously monitor European Union Implementation of the UN Disability Rights Convention ?? And … will these Networks be courageous in challenging the EU Institutions … if Implementation is found to be Inadequate ??? I’m not so sure !
.
.
END
2011 Will Be A Great Year ! But … Is It 2011 ??
Today’s date is 11 January, in the year 2011 AD (2011-01-11) … using the Gregorian Solar Calendar … a special day ! We know this well … or, rather, we think that we know this …
BUT … this year is also 1432 H … using the Islamic Lunar Calendar … and it began a few weeks ago, back in early December 2010 ! The ‘H’ after the date indicates that it is the ‘Hijri Calendar’ … based on the Qur’ân [Sûrah 9 (At-Tawba): Verses 36 & 37]. Its proper observance is a sacred duty for Muslims. This is the official calendar for many countries in the Arab Gulf Region.
In Japan … this is the year 23, in the Era of Heisei (written as ‘Heisei 23′) … based on, and beginning with, the reign of the current Emperor Akihito.
In China … the Year of the Rabbit will begin on 3 February 2011 (2011-02-03) !
.
What a wonderful world we live in !
.
.
END
Buon Natale ! – Nollaig Shona ! – Joyeux Noël !
.
To all of our friends – everywhere – have a very Merry Christmas and an even Happier New Year !!
Fröhliche Weihnachten !!
¡¡ Feliz Navidad
Our Planet Is Fragile ... in 2011, let's try to do a much better job of keeping it healthy !!!
.
.
END
European Union Economic Governance – Too Late For Dithering !
2010-12-22: November & December 2010 … when the shit really started to hit the international economic fan ! … there has been an excess of hysterical nonsense in the Irish Media concerning growing European Union (EU) Economic Governance … and a perceived erosion of Irish National Sovereignty. How sad ?!?
Note: Economic Environment … the intricate web of real and virtual human commercial activity – operating at micro and macro-economic levels – which facilitates, supports, but sometimes hampers or disrupts, human interaction in the Social Environment.
Note: Social Environment … the complex network of real and virtual human interaction – at a communal or larger group level – which operates for reasons of tradition, culture, business, pleasure, information exchange, institutional organization, legal procedure, governance, human betterment, social progress and spiritual enlightenment, etc.
However, let me sketch out an altogether different and much more positive picture !
.
Thesis – My Argument
[During 2009, I first raised this issue in meetings of the IIEA (Institute of International & European Affairs) Economists' Group, in Dublin.]
Towards the end of 2010 … we can now see that Inter-Governmental Economic Governance in the European Union has failed … miserably. This has not only destabilized the EuroZone … but the entire European Union, itself, as a political entity … and will continue to do so … until Economic Governance is brought much closer to, and fully within, the Community Method … which is a lengthy and complex process.
Back in 2009, however, when the Financial Markets were not in such a mad frenzy … it would have been natural to imagine that an interim stage in this process would most probably be to adopt an Open Method of Co-Ordination. This is no longer an option … being too little, too late, to calm the Markets.
Throughout this process of reform, the European Central Bank (ECB) and the National Central Banks can, and must, retain their independence … as legally mandated in European Union Primary Legislation, i.e. the Treaties.
.
Three Concerns I have had for some time …
- Economists don’t know the Community Method from the Rhythm Method, and they are ill-equipped to deal with matters of Mainstream European Union Institutional Reform ;
- The use of Economic Performance Indicators in the EU Stability & Growth Pact is simplistic and crude … and, therefore, very problematic ;
- Economic Performance Indicators must be improved … qualitatively … and be mainstreamed in considerations, and the implementation, of Sustainable Human & Social Development … as legally mandated in the EU Treaties.
.
Mr. Olli Rehn, European Commissioner for Economic & Monetary Affairs recently delivered a speech at the Institute of International & European Affairs, in Dublin …
Mr. Olli Rehn, European Commissioner
9 November 2010
Reinforcing EU Economic Governance: Relevance for Ireland
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (39kb)
However … instead of trying to desperately backfill the holes and gaps in the current, failed Inter-Governmental Method of Economic Governance in the European Union … Commissioner Rehn should be clearly identifying the proper target as the Community Method of Economic Governance … and plotting an appropriate course to reach that target … as soon as practicable !
.
This is a useful background document … and includes a lot of information about the EU Stability & Growth Pact …
European Commission & General Secretariat of the EU Council
June 2007
EU Economic & Monetary Union – Legal & Political Texts
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (2.66 Mb)
Since Ireland joined the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973 … after 10 years of accession negotiations ! … an ‘informed’ view of European Integration has always been that the different Countries are pooling their national sovereignty, in an expanding range of specific areas, for the greater benefit of all their citizens. This has certainly been the experience of Ireland. And … let us also not forget that Irish Politicians and Senior Civil Servants have participated directly – at all stages – in the development of the EMU Legal & Political Texts listed. There is no such thing as a Domineering ‘Brussels’ Big Brother !
.
This is the most recent update of the EuroZone’s Economic Performance Indicators …
European Commission, Directorate-General for Economic & Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN)
2 December 2010
Key Economic Indicators for the Euro Area
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (360kb)
It is now widely acknowledged that Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is neither a reliable nor an adequate indicator of Sustainable Human & Social Development. But … that is another story … for another day !
.
Community & Inter-Governmental Methods of Governance
The Community Method is the expression used for the most common and effective operating and decision-making mode of institutions in the European Union. It proceeds from an integration logic, with due respect for the subsidiarity principle … and has the following salient features:
- European Commission monopoly of the Right of Initiative, with a strong monitoring role in implementation ;
- should consensus not be achieved, widespread use of Qualified Majority Voting in the Council of the European Union ;
- an active, participatory role for the European Parliament ;
- uniform interpretation of EU Law by the Court of Justice.
In contrast to the … Inter-Governmental Method … which proceeds from an inter-governmental logic of co-operation between EU Member States … to a large extent outside the institutional framework of the European Union … and has the following salient features:
- the European Commission’s Right of Initiative is shared with the Member States or confined to specific areas of activity … with little, if any, monitoring role for the Commission in implementation ;
- the Council of the European Union generally acts unanimously … and unilaterally ;
- the European Parliament has merely a consultative role ;
- the Court of Justice plays only a minor role.
.
Open Method of Co-Ordination
The Open Method of Co-Ordination (OMC) developed as an instrument of the 2000 Lisbon Strategy, and provided a new framework for co-operation between the EU Member States, whose national policies could thus be directed towards certain common objectives.
Under this method of governance, the Member States are evaluated by one another (peer pressure), with the European Commission’s role being limited to ‘lite’ surveillance. The European Parliament and the Court of Justice play virtually no part in the OMC process.
The Open Method of Co-Ordination takes place in policy areas which fall within the competence of the Member States … such as employment, social protection, social inclusion, education, youth and training.
It is based principally on:
- jointly identifying and defining objectives to be achieved (adopted by the Council of the European Union) ;
- jointly established measuring instruments (statistics, indicators, guidelines) ;
- benchmarking, i.e. comparison of the Member States’ performance and exchange of best practices (oversight by the European Commission).
Depending on the areas concerned, the OMC involves so-called ‘Soft Law’ Measures which are binding on the Member States to varying degrees but which never take the form of ’Hard Law’ Directives, Regulations or Decisions. Thus, in the context of the Lisbon Strategy, the OMC required the Member States to draw up national reform plans and to submit them to the European Commission.
.
Colour photograph showing the last resting place, in Arbour Hill Cemetery Dublin, for many - not all - Executed Leaders of the 1916 Revolution. The Memorial was designed by G. McNicholl. Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2010-10-24. Click to enlarge.
Ireland’s National Sovereignty in 2010/2011 ?
On a beautiful sunny day, this past autumn … I again visited Arbour Hill Cemetery in Dublin … the last resting place for many Executed Leaders of the 1916 Revolution … an event which finally initiated an irrevocable process of terminating a prolonged period of barbaric external imperial domination and cultural cleansing of the indigenous population …
Colour photograph showing, in the background, a latin cross and the Irish language version of the 1916 Proclamation of Independence inscribed on the stone wall, with the simple grass-covered graves of Executed Leaders in the foreground. Detail of the 1916 Revolution Memorial in Arbour Hill Cemetery, Dublin. Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2010-10-24. Click to enlarge.
.
On the wall behind the graves … the 1916 Proclamation of Independence is inscribed in the Irish Language, and also in English …
Poblacht na hEíreann
THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT OF THE IRISH REPUBLIC
TO THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND
IRISHMEN AND IRISHWOMEN: In the name of God and of the dead generations from which she receives her old tradition of nationhood, Ireland, through us, summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom.
Having organized and trained her manhood through her secret revolutionary organization, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and through her open military organizations, the Irish Volunteers and the Irish Citizen Army, having patiently perfected her discipline, having resolutely waited for the right moment to reveal itself, she now seizes that moment, and, supported by her exiled children in America and by gallant allies in Europe, but relying in the first on her own strength, she strikes in full confidence of victory.
We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible. The long usurpation of that right by a foreign people and government has not extinguished the right, nor can it ever be extinguished except by the destruction of the Irish people. In every generation the Irish people have asserted their right to national freedom and sovereignty: six times during the past three hundred years they have asserted it in arms. Standing on that fundamental right and again asserting it in arms in the face of the world, we hereby proclaim the Irish Republic as a Sovereign Independent State, and we pledge our lives and the lives of our comrades-in-arms to the cause of its freedom, of its welfare, and of its exaltation among the nations.
The Irish Republic is entitled to, and hereby claims, the allegiance of every Irishman and Irishwoman. The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.
Until our arms have brought the opportune moment for the establishment of a permanent National Government, representative of the whole people of Ireland and elected by the suffrages of all her men and women, the Provisional Government, hereby constituted, will administer the civil and military affairs of the Republic in trust for the people.
We place the cause of the Irish Republic under the protection of the Most High God, Whose blessing we invoke upon our arms, and we pray that no one who serves that cause will dishonour it by cowardice, inhumanity, or rapine. In this supreme hour the Irish nation must, by its valour and discipline and by the readiness of its children to sacrifice themselves for the common good, prove itself worthy of the august destiny to which it is called.
Signed on Behalf of the Provisional Government,
THOMAS J. CLARKE,
SEAN Mac DIARMADA, THOMAS Mac DONAGH,
P. H. PEARSE, EAMONN CEANNT,
JAMES CONNOLLY, JOSEPH PLUNKETT.
.
As We Approach the 100th Anniversary of the 1916 Revolution … Ireland has failed to implement and foster the social values so eloquently elaborated in the 1916 Proclamation of Independence … widespread, deeply ingrained corruption infects our economic environment … and the institutions of national governance are dysfunctional and no longer ‘fit for purpose’ … while individuals within those institutions rise in rank according to their own natural level of incompetence.
Politically … Ireland has not yet properly matured as an Independent State.
.
Ireland’s Relationship with the European Union … I am more than a little curious as to why Ireland is not associated with Declaration No.52, which is annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon …
52. Declaration by the Kingdom of Belgium, the Republic of Bulgaria, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hellenic Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the Italian Republic, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Lithuania, the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Austria, the Portuguese Republic, Romania, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic on the symbols of the European Union
Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and the Slovak Republic declare that the flag with a circle of twelve golden stars on a blue background, the anthem based on the ‘Ode to Joy’ from the Ninth Symphony by Ludwig van Beethoven, the motto ‘United in diversity’, the euro as the currency of the European Union and Europe Day on 9 May will for them continue as symbols to express the sense of community of the people in the European Union and their allegiance to it.
.
Yes … we have a lot to discuss before 2016 !
.
.
END
2010 UNFCCC Climate Summit in Cancún – Smell The Coffee !
The hype is less this year … and I bet that not too many politicians will be appearing in front of the cameras at the end of this 2010 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Summit … which is being held in Cancún, Mexico … from Monday, 29 November until Friday, 10 December 2010.
If you want to follow what’s happening closely … go to the Official UNFCCC WebSite … and check out the Daily Conference Programme, here, at this address … http://unfccc.int/conference_programme/items/5769.php
.
Let us not forget that the result of last year’s debacle … the 2009 Copenhagen Accord … was an unofficial, political agreement between a small number of Heads of State, Heads of Government, Ministers, and Heads of Delegation – Brazil, South Africa, India and China (BASIC) and the USA – who attended the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, which concluded on Saturday, 19th December 2009. Since then, many countries have made voluntary submissions, i.e. they are not legally binding, to Appendices I and II of the Copenhagen Accord.
An initial overview of the submissions made by Developed Countries, however, revealed the following about the voluntary emissions targets being undertaken …
- they are highly conditional on the performance of other countries ;
- they are disappointing, being well below what is required to cap the planetary temperature rise at 1.5 degrees Celsius ; and
- there is no consistent emission base year … varying from 1990 and 1992, up to 2000 and 2005.
This is very far from being a signal of serious intent from Developed Countries … and is not … in any way, shape or manner … an acceptance of historical responsibilities. It would be reasonable, therefore, to surmise that the process of achieving a global, legally binding, consensus agreement on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets will be long and difficult. The Climate Change Mitigation Agenda is, to put it mildly, fraught with problems … and has an unclear future in the short term.
.
HOWEVER … Back In The ‘Real’ World … GHG Emissions Continue To Rise !
On 24 November 2010 … the United Nations World Meteorological Organization (WMO) published its Greenhouse Gas Bulletin No.6: ‘The State of Greenhouse Gases in the Atmosphere Based on Global Observations through 2009′.
The WMO Global Atmosphere Watch (GAW) Programme coordinates systematic observations and analysis of atmospheric composition, including Greenhouse Gases (GHG) and other trace species. Measurement data are reported by participating countries and archived and distributed by the World Data Centre for Greenhouse Gases (WDCGG) at the Japan Meteorological Agency.
Even here … it is clearly stated that there are still uncertainties …
2009 Global Observations of Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s) in the Atmosphere
24 November 2010
UN World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Greenhouse Gas Bulletin No.6
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (3.37 Mb)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The latest analysis of observations from the WMO Global Atmosphere Watch Programme shows that the globally averaged mixing ratios of Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O) reached new highs in 2009, with CO2 at 386.8 parts per million, CH4 at 1803 ppb and N2O at 322.5 ppb. These values are greater than those in pre-industrial times (before 1750) by 38%, 158% and 19%, respectively.
Atmospheric growth rates of CO2 and N2O in 2009 are consistent with recent years, but are lower than in 2008.
After nearly a decade of no growth, Atmospheric CH4 has increased during the past three years. The reasons for renewed growth of Atmospheric Methane are not fully understood, but emissions from natural sources (from northern latitudes and the tropics) are considered potential causes.
The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Annual Greenhouse Gas Index shows that from 1990 to 2009, radiative forcing by all long-lived greenhouse gases increased by 27.5%, with CO2 accounting for nearly 80% of this increase.
The combined radiative forcing by Halocarbons is nearly double that of N2O.
.
Help with the Technical Terms of Climate Change ?
Give it a lash ! Try out the Encyclopaedia of Earth WebSite … an electronic reference about the Earth, its natural environments, and their interaction with society. The Encyclopaedia is a free, fully searchable collection of articles written by scholars, professionals, educators, and experts who collaborate and review each other’s work. The articles are written in non-technical language and are useful to students, educators, scholars, professionals, as well as to the general public.
.
To Mitigate or Adapt ? – Prioritizing a Strategy for the Built Environment
We are already experiencing the adverse impacts of Climate Change ! And even if sufficient and appropriate Climate Mitigation Measures were succeeding … which they patently are not … the timelag between their implementation and any resulting beneficial environmental impacts is too great … half a century, at least … and full of uncertainty.
BUT … since the minimum period for a Sustainable Building in Use is 100 Years, and nothing less than a Recurrence Interval of 100 years should now be used in design calculations for events such as severe storms and flooding, or deluge rainfalls, etc … anyone involved in the design, construction, management or operation of the Built Environment must think ‘long-term’ … today !
In Dublin … buildings which are 250 or 350 years old still look remarkably good, and are well capable of fulfilling an important function within the social and economic environments of the city. ‘Politically’ and ‘technically’, therefore, it would be more appropriate for the Built Environment if we were concerned with the Long-Term Climate Change Adaptation Agenda … rather than a problematic, Short-Term Mitigation Agenda.
In terms of a building … is there really a clear difference between measures undertaken for the purpose of mitigation and those undertaken for adaptation ? For example, measures to incrementally improve energy efficiency and conserve energy, in accordance with short-term legally binding targets, will serve to mitigate CO2 Emissions … but the same measures will also serve to adapt the building to rapidly dwindling supplies of climate-damaging fossil fuels.
The long-term perspective exerts pressure for more radical, but necessary, actions in the short-term.
BUT … should we not already be undertaking these sorts of measures as part of the Mainstream Sustainability Agenda … in order to improve built environment resilience, prolong life cycles … and achieve social wellbeing for all ?
Generally … Climate Change Adaptation encompasses urgent and immediate short, near and long-term actions at local, national, regional and international levels to reduce the vulnerability and strengthen the resilience of the Human Environment, including ecological and social systems, institutions and economic sectors … to present and future adverse effects of climate change and the impacts of response measure implementation … in order to minimize the local threats to life, human health, livelihoods, food security, assets, amenities, ecosystems and sustainable development.
More specifically … Built Environment Climate Change Adaptation means reliably implementing policies, practices, projects and institutional reforms in the Built Environment … with the aim of reducing the adverse impacts and/or realizing the benefits directly/indirectly associated with climate change, including variability and extremes … in a manner which is compatible with Sustainable Human and Social Development.
Wake Up And Smell The Coffee … It’s Time To Get Serious !!!!
.
.
END
Disability Access Certificates (DAC’s) – Acceptable Accessibility ?
A few weeks ago … in a post dated 20 October 2010 … Japan in April & May 2010 – Accessibility-for-All ! … I discussed some of the many aspects which, together, facilitate a high level of quality in ‘real’, or actually realized, Built Environment Accessibility Performance in Japan … and I illustrated that quality with a number of photographs.
In time, I will add more photographs from my valuable ‘Accessibility in Japan’ Collection !
Note: Built Environment … Anywhere there is, or has been, a man-made or wrought (worked) intervention by humans in the natural environment, e.g. cities, towns, villages, rural settlements, roads, bridges, tunnels, transport systems, service utilities, and cultivated lands, lakes, rivers, coasts, seas, etc. … including the Virtual Environment.
Note: Social Environment … The complex network of real and virtual human interaction – at a communal or larger group level – which operates for reasons of tradition, culture, business, pleasure, information exchange, institutional organization, legal procedure, governance, human betterment, social progress and spiritual enlightenment, etc.
Note: Virtual Environment … A designed environment, electronically-generated from within the Built Environment, which may have the appearance, form, functionality and impact – to the person perceiving and actually experiencing it – of a real, imagined and/or utopian world.
However … many of these aspects are missing in European Approaches to Accessibility-for-All … and, typically, the level of Accessibility Performance which we are used to experiencing, and accepting, is inadequate, sloppy, poor … and to be direct and honest … BRUTAL !!
.
As far back as 2001 … in an Introduction to a Page on our Corporate WebSite illustrating the Inaccessibility of European Union Institutional Buildings … specifically, the European Parliaments in Brussels and Strasbourg … I wrote …
‘ Many times each year, our work takes us to Brussels, Luxembourg and Strasbourg.
In spite of all the rhetoric from European politicians, and the extensive body of European legislation actually in force at national and regional levels in every Member State … the inaccessibility of Institutional Buildings is shockingly and unacceptably bad … in some cases, dangerously so !
Yet, these buildings should represent, in built form, the ideals, values and aspirations of the peoples of Europe – as expressed in the EU Treaties.
What a bitter disappointment ! ‘
.
Today … France, in particular, continues to be a depressing experience … where Talk is far, far too cheap … and Good Accessibility Performance is still all too rare !!
Last Thursday, 25 November 2010 … I attended a Paris Meeting of the Editorial Team for the CIB W108 Report: ‘Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation in the Built Environment’. My airline flights from Dublin brought me in and out through Terminal 1 of Roissy Charles de Gaulle (CDG) Airport in Paris.
A spanking new automatically operated Métro (shuttle) … CDGVAL … connects Terminals 1, 2 & 3, various Multi-Storey Car Parks and Train Stations within the Airport Complex …
Colour image showing the Airport Complex Plan of Roissy Charles De Gaulle in Paris. Note the New CDGVAL Métro ... an important interconnecting transportation system. Click to enlarge.
.
Colour photograph showing the new, automatically operated CDGVAL Métro at Roissy Charles De Gaulle Airport in Paris. Yet another magnificent example of Sloppy French Accessibility Implementation ! Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2010-11-26. Click to enlarge.
.
IF … you search hard enough on the CDG Airport WebSite, you will find these three highlighted short sentences under content with the title ‘Personne à Mobilité Réduite’ … total rubbish and complete bullshit when you actually see the airport’s buildings and many facilities. And … as usual, in French, the disability-related terminology is evil … and sucks !
‘Aéroports de Paris assure l’assistance des passagers handicapés et à mobilité réduite dés leur arrivée, et tout au long de leur parcours dans le terminal.
Aéroports de Paris a depuis longtemps entamé une démarche d’équipement et d’adaptation de ses terminaux pour faciliter les déplacements de tous.
Aujourd’hui, les problématiques d’accessibilités sont systématiquement prises en compte dans l’aménagement de nos infrastructures.’
Colour photograph showing the Door Threshold Detail of the new, automatically operated CDGVAL Métro at Roissy Charles De Gaulle Airport in Paris. In totally new construction ... an unacceptably huge difference between platform height and the shuttle's floor ! This is also now a trip hazard for everyone !! Photograph taken by CJ Walsh. 2010-11-26. Click to enlarge.
.
Why is this relevant for us now … here in Ireland ?
The new scheme of Disability Access Certification, closely modelled on the existing highly problematic scheme of Fire Safety Certification … is undergoing a normal, introductory ‘teething’ process within this jurisdiction … and many questions about interpretation of the law and its operation are being asked.
Important Clarification: The Guidance Text contained in Technical Guidance Document M … is not Law … is not Prescriptive Regulation … is not ‘Deemed to Satisfy’ … and … because the guidance is so incomplete, incoherent and inadequate … does not even indicate Minimum Accessibility Performance !
Part M Functional Requirements – Access for People with Disabilities Second Schedule of the 1997 Building Regulations – As Amended by the Building Regulations (Amendment) Regulations, 2000 – Statutory Instrument No.179 of 2000
Access and Use M1 Adequate provision shall be made to enable people with disabilities to safely and independently access and use a building.
Sanitary Conveniences M2 If sanitary conveniences are provided in a building, adequate provision shall be made for people with disabilities.
Audience or Spectator Facilities M3 If a building contains fixed seating for audience or spectators, adequate provision shall be made for people with disabilities.
Definition for This Part M4 In this Part, ‘people with disabilities’ means people who have an impairment of hearing or sight or an impairment which limits their ability to walk, or which restricts them to a wheelchair.
Application of This Part M5 Part M does not apply to works in connection with extensions to and the material alterations of existing dwellings, provided that such works do not create a new dwelling.
.
Today in Ireland … Talk IS too cheap … and Good Accessibility Performance IS almost non-existent !!! Yes … and that even includes the work of those mighty superheroes in the Office of Public Works (OPW).
Furthermore … the big fun will really start when the New Part M Requirements come into operation on 1 January 2012 … and we will enter a surreal Alice’s Wonderland of Accessibility Ambiguity …
Part M Functional Requirements – Access and Use Second Schedule of the 1997 Building Regulations – As Amended by the Building Regulations (Part M Amendment) Regulations, 2010 – Statutory Instrument No.513 of 2010
Access and Use M1 Adequate provision shall be made for people to access and use a building, its facilities and its environs.
Application of The Part M2 Adequate provision shall be made for people to approach and access an extension to a building.
M3 If sanitary facilities are provided in a building that is to be extended, adequate sanitary facilities shall be provided for people within the extension.
M4 Part M does not apply to works in connection with extensions to and material alterations of existing dwellings, provided that such works do not create anew dwelling.
.
.
END
Search
Recent Comments
- therese on Accessible Toilet Room in a Japanese Public Place – Kanazawa
- noel on Fixing ‘Priory Hall’ in Dublin – Practical Solutions Needed Now !
- dt on Beautiful Sunset – Turgutreis, Bodrum Peninsula, Turkey
- Cathy on A More Balanced Presentation of Recent UN Gaza Flotilla Report
- Jolyn on New EU Construction Product Regulation 305/2011 – Halleluiah !
Categories
- architecture
- art
- built environment
- cinema
- climate change
- design
- economic environment
- eu law
- european union
- fire
- human & social rights
- human environment
- human health & safety
- institutional environment
- international law
- judicial
- media
- national law
- natural environment
- photography
- political environment
- regulations & standards
- social environment
- sustainability
- technical control
- travel
- virtual environment
Links
- 'Spirit of Ireland' Project – National Energy Independence. At last … some 'real' Innovation in this country !
- 2bscene Web Design & Development – Dublin, Ireland.
- AL JAZEERA – News & Views from the ARAB WORLD (1431 H)
- ALBA – Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América / Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America
- Amnesty International – Irish Section
- CJ Walsh: Architectural, Design & Technical Control Practice (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Contact Us – Sustainable Design International Ltd. (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Cuba Support Group – Ireland
- Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) – Ireland
- E-PRTR – European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register … a Europe-wide register providing easily accessible key environmental data from industrial facilities in EU Member States and in Iceland, Liechtenstein & Norway.
- EL NACIONAL – News & Views from VENEZUELA
- EU Fundamental Rights Agency – The Agency focuses on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union (EU) and its 27 Member States.
- EUR-Lex – Full, direct and free access to all European Union (EU) Legislation
- European Consumer Centres' Network (ECC-Net) – European Union (EU) wide network of Consumer Protection Centres, co-sponsored by the European Commission and the Member States. The network comprises 29 Centres … one in each of the 27 EU Member States
- EUROPEANA – Access to Europe’s Cultural & Scientific Heritage though a Cross-Domain Digital Portal
- FireOx International: Fire Engineering Consultancy, Research & Design Practice (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- GRANMA INTERNACIONAL – News & Views from CUBA
- HÜRRİYET – News & Views from TURKEY
- Ireland – Information about our Public Institutions, including Pretty Pictures of our green countryside !
- Irish Seed Savers Association … Working to Conserve Irish Biodiversity. They research, locate, preserve & use traditional varieties, cultivars of fruit, vegetables, potatoes & grains.
- James Taylor – Singer & Songwriter
- JOURNAL DE BRASÍLIA – News & Views from BRAZIL
- Kanchi (Ireland) – Changing Society's View of Disability for the Better
- NAVBHARAT TIMES – News & Views (in Hindi) from INDIA
- PRAVDA – News & Views from RUSSIA
- Robert F Kennedy Centre for Justice & Human Rights (USA)
- Rocky Mountain Institute (USA) – Super Energy Efficiency by Design
- RTE Lyric FM – Classical (in its widest meaning !) Music on Irish Radio
- Senator Shane Ross – Ireland's Principal Economics Troubleshooter. What happened to George ?
- Survivors of Institutional Abuse Ireland [SOIAI] – WE (collectively) did not cherish all the children of OUR nation equally !
- Sustainable Design International: Experts in the Theory & Implementation of Sustainable Human & Social Development (Ireland, Italy & Turkey)
- Tom Doyle's Blog :: TALK
- UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) + Kyoto Protocol + COP-15
- United Nations Human Rights Council – Established 15 March 2006
- WikiLeaks – A non-profit media organization dedicated to bringing important news and information to the public.
- WISE – Water Information System for Europe … a single location (portal) where geographically-mapped information on water-related issues can be found for the whole of Europe.
- XINHUA News Agency – News & Views from CHINA
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008