human environment
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
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
New SDI Report on Climate Change Adaptation – Comments ?
This is the HomePage of my Technical Blog … but on a separate WebPage (see the toolbar above), I have been slowly building content, with links to related sources of information, on the subject of a CIB Working Commission 108 International Climate Change Project, which is about to enter its final important stage.
When published in the spring/early summer of next year … 2011 … the CIB W108 Report: ‘Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation in the Built Environment’ will comprise 2 Parts:
I - International Synthesis on Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation.
II - National Perspectives on Sustainable Climate Change Adaptation.
.
Today, 18 November 2010 … I uploaded onto that separate WebPage the National Report for ‘IRELAND’, which will appear in Part II of the CIB Publication. I am the person who drafted this report … and it has not been an easy task ! You will see that much attention is paid to institutional and implementation issues.
I now invite comments on the National Report … any comments … from those with a particular interest in the subject … and from the general public.
Comments should arrive here no later than Monday, 20th December 2010 … pretty please !
.
Before commenting upon the National Report, however, it would be useful if you also took a glance at the following three relevant documents …
- Ireland’s 5th National Communication (NC5) under the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, dated 3 March 2010 ;
- UNFCCC In-Depth Review of Ireland’s 5th National Communication (NC5), dated 2 November 2010 ;
- EU WHITE PAPER – Adapting to Climate Change: Towards a European Framework for Action … European Commission Communication COM(2009) 147 final, dated 1 April 2009.
.
2009 EU White Paper – ‘Introduction’ (Page 3, first three paragraphs)
Climate change increases land and sea temperatures and alters precipitation quantity and patterns, resulting in the increase of global average sea level, risks of coastal erosion and an expected increase in the severity of weather-related natural disasters. Changing water levels, temperatures and flow will in turn affect food supply, health, industry, and transport and ecosystem integrity. Climate change will lead to significant economic and social impacts with some regions and sectors likely to bear greater adverse affects. Certain sections of society (older people, people with activity limitations, low-income households) are also expected to suffer more.
Addressing climate change requires two types of response. Firstly, and importantly, we must reduce our greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), i.e. take mitigation action … and secondly, we must take adaptation action to deal with the unavoidable impacts. The EU’s recently agreed climate change legislation puts in place the concrete measures to reach the EU’s commitment to reduce emissions to 20% below 1990 levels by 2020 and is capable of being amended to deliver a 30% reduction if agreed as part of an international agreement in which other developed countries agree to comparable reductions and appropriate contributions by economically more advanced developing countries based on their responsibilities and capabilities. However, even if the world succeeds in limiting and then reducing GHG emissions, our planet will take time to recover from the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. Thus, we will be faced with the impact of climate change for at least the next 50 years. We need therefore to take measures to adapt.
Adaptation is already taking place but in a piecemeal manner. A more strategic approach is needed to ensure that timely and effective adaptation measures are taken, ensuring coherency across different sectors and levels of governance.
.
2009 EU White Paper – The Proposed EU Framework: Objectives & Action (Page 7, #3)
The Objective of the EU’s Adaptation Framework is to improve the EU’s resilience to deal with the impact of climate change. The framework will respect the principle of subsidiarity and support overarching EU objectives on sustainable development.
The EU’s framework adopts a phased approach. The intention is that phase 1 (2009-2012) will lay the groundwork for preparing a comprehensive EU Adaptation Strategy to be implemented during phase 2, commencing in 2013.
Phase 1 (2009-2012) will focus on four pillars of action:
1) building a solid knowledge base on the impact and consequences of climate change for the EU ;
2) integrating adaptation into EU key policy areas ;
3) employing a combination of policy instruments (market-based instruments, guidelines, public-private partnerships) to ensure effective delivery of adaptation ; and
4) stepping up international co-operation on adaptation.
For phase 1 to be a success … the EU, national, regional and local authorities must co-operate closely.
The proposals set out in this paper cover actions to be taken in the first phase and are without prejudice to the future structure of the EU budget and to the current and future multi-annual financial framework.
.
IRELAND – Part II National Report for CIB W108 Climate Change Project
In the spring of 2007, the Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) – Ireland’s statutory Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) – published the ‘National Climate Change Strategy 2007-2012′. This document can be accessed and downloaded at … http://www.environ.ie/en/Environment/Atmosphere/ClimateChange/ It is of concern to note, however, that ‘Climate Change’ related content is not easy to find on this WebSite ! Comprehensive Enabling Climate Change Legislation, which this Department, and the Irish Government, initially promised for Easter 2010 … and then June 2010 … has, at the time of writing (mid-November 2010), still not made an appearance in the Dáil (Ireland’s Parliament) !
The Department of Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) lacks strong and competent political direction and the institutional capacity to effectively co-ordinate and oversee the implementation of National Climate Action. For this reason, closer scrutiny of its activities will be required from the Dáil Committee System.
Contrary to current practice … Foreign Development Aid should not be used to obtain any sort of domestic or in-country credit for Ireland’s National Climate Change Strategy !
Specifically concerning Climate Change Adaptation … the following is stated on Page 45 of the 2007-2012 National Climate Change Strategy Document …
‘As part of a comprehensive policy position on climate change, the Government is committed to developing a national adaptation strategy over the next two years. This strategy will provide a framework for the integration of adaptation issues into decision-making at national and local level.’
The DEHLG does not, however, intend to publish a National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy until 2013 (Ireland’s NC5).
.
Climate Change Action in Ireland – Summary
Ireland’s Climate Action to date, i.e. effective Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Implementation, has been laboriously slow and lethargic. It may best be characterized as ‘Business as Usual’, combined with some ‘Cosmetic Tinkering at the Edges’ as the need arises … the universal excuse, almost a mantra, being that “the competitiveness of the national economy must not be impaired”. National Performance has been guided by an official policy of exploiting to the maximum all of the UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol’s Flexibility Mechanisms while, at the same time, showing a stark indifference to Climate Adaptation … an over-reliance on Marketing Campaigns in the public media as opposed to mandatory implementation on the ground … and a preference for ‘Soft’ Performance Estimation on paper/computer monitor rather than the more painful ‘real’ performance calculation, which would generate reliable data and statistics to be managed by Ireland’s Central Statistics Office, in co-ordination with EuroStat in Luxembourg.
Despite the importance of the Construction Sector in Ireland and Europe … and its very large adverse impacts on regional and local climate … a significant barrier to concerted Sectoral Climate Action exists because ‘construction’ is not yet identified as a separate Sector, by either the Environmental Protection Agency (Ireland) or the European Environment Agency (Copenhagen) … in National and European Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Databases. Furthermore, our systems of governance and institutional organization, at both levels, do not appear to have the capacity … either to understand or to manage an effective response to the climate challenges created by the Sector.
Climate Change Mitigation Efforts are failing in Ireland; the current economic downturn merely camouflages that unpalatable fact. Therefore, the necessary corrective actions described in this National Report fall under the heading of ‘Climate Change Adaptation’.
.
.
END
Irish Nursing Home Care – Dysfunctional National Governance !!
On Tuesday last … 9 November 2010 … Ireland’s Office of the Ombudsman issued a Report to the Irish Oireachtas (the Dáil and Seanad) … in accordance with Section 6(7) of the 1980 Ombudsman Act … concerning an Investigation based on more than 1,000 individual complaints made, since 1985, on behalf of older people who were unable to get long-term nursing home care from their health boards … now the Health Service Executive (HSE).
Please Note Well … this Report is not just about Older People !
This document raises a number of very serious and fundamental issues concerning our current system of Dysfunctional National Governance in Ireland. Every Irish person should, therefore, expend a small bit of time and effort in making themselves familiar with these problems … especially in the run-up to any by-elections … or, perhaps, even a general election … and certainly before we enter a prolonged period of being hammered in a Draconian Series of 4 Budgets !
This Report places a major question mark over the positions of Ms. Mary Harney T.D., Minister for Health & Children (a woman of strong ‘Boston-esque’, neo-liberal and anti-social convictions) … and the Senior Civil Servants (plural !) in Her Department.
And don’t be fooled into thinking, either, that the Department of Health & Children is our only dysfunctional national ministry ! See my previous Posts.
Ms. Emily O’Reilly, Ireland’s Ombudsman, deserves our full support !
.
This is the Full Ombudsman’s Report …
9 November 2010 – Office of the Ombudsman
WHO CARES ? An Investigation into the Right to Nursing Home Care in Ireland
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (621kb)
.
Conclusions (Executive Summary)
The conclusions of this investigation are easily stated:
- The Health Act 1970 has required the State to provide nursing home care for those who need it.
- It is an open question as to whether that obligation continues in place, notwithstanding recent amendments to the Health Act 1970.
- The State has failed consistently to meet this obligation over four decades.
- The State has failed over that same period, and despite repeated commitments (especially since 2001), to amend the law so as to bring actual practice and legal obligations into harmony.
- Very many people over these decades have been deprived of their legal entitlement.
- Access to nursing home care over this period has been marked by confusion, uncertainty, misinformation, inconsistency and inequity.
- Very many people over this period have suffered significant adverse affect.
- This situation has been allowed to continue with the full knowledge and consent of the responsible State agencies.
- Arising from these failures, the State is now facing several hundred legal actions from, or on behalf of, people seeking compensation for the costs incurred in having to avail of private nursing home care.
- These particular failures, which have been allowed to continue for decades, point inevitably to wider failures in government.
.
The conduct of the investigation and the preparation of this report for the Oireachtas have been marked by an unprecedented level of rancour and disagreement.
The Department, in particular, has laid a multiplicity of charges against the Ombudsman regarding the manner in which the investigation has been conducted. Amongst its charges are:
- that the Ombudsman exceeded her jurisdiction in undertaking this investigation ;
- that the Ombudsman failed to abide by fair procedures particularly in relation to the provision of a draft version of the investigation report ;
- that the Ombudsman displayed prejudice and objective bias in the course of the investigation ;
- that the Ombudsman displayed arrogance in purporting to interpret the law ;
- that the Ombudsman has purported to deny the State bodies concerned their right to have the litigation (detailed in this report) determined by the Courts.
The Minister, acting on behalf of the Government, has informed the Ombudsman that the Government supports the submission of her Department in which these charges are made. While the HSE, in general, has been more temperate, it has specifically charged the Ombudsman with attempting to influence the outcome of court proceedings. In effect, the Department and the HSE are saying that the Ombudsman undertook this investigation in bad faith.
.
In fact, the Ombudsman’s motivation in producing this report was five-fold:
1. To highlight the very significant difficulties faced over several decades by families seeking to make arrangements for long-term nursing home care for a family member.
2. To represent, in many instances through their own words, the distress and upset (including financial) of people who complained to the Ombudsman’s Office over the years in relation to nursing home care.
3. To highlight the inadequacy and the tardiness of the State’s responses to these problems.
4. To raise the issue of whether and, if so how, people adversely affected should have some recognition of having been failed by the State.
5. To raise wider questions of governance prompted by the practices highlighted in this report.
.
In the 2001 Report: ‘Nursing Home Subventions’, the then Ombudsman expressed the view that the issues of bad administration dealt with in that report reflected significant dysfunction in our system of government. That view could, with only minor contextual amendments, be reproduced in full here with the same validity as in 2001.
The then Ombudsman identified deficits in three sets of relationships which, in his view, contribute significantly to this dysfunction.
These relationships are:
The Relationship between the Oireachtas and the Executive – the Constitutional model whereby the Legislature makes the laws and the Executive implements them has become a fiction; in fact, it is the Executive (Government) ‘which decides policy; which proposes legislation and ensures its passage through the Oireachtas and, subsequently, in its executive capacity ensures that the laws are implemented’. Parliament is relatively powerless and not in a position to exercise the role (including that of calling the Executive to account) envisaged in the Constitution.
Relationships within the Executive – in the past, there was a clear division of functions as between the political (Ministerial) side and the official side. The integrity of the governmental process depended, to a large extent, on the official side being seen to be non-political; the tension inevitably generated by this division was regarded as necessary and healthy. ”Good government”, as Professor Séamus Ó Cinnéide put it, “depended on a certain distance and balance between the two sides”. This distance and balance no longer applies and, again to quote Professor Ó Cinnéide, this change is part of “an unspoken revolution in our system of governance”. Again, another key element in the overall model of government has been discarded or, at the very least, diluted considerably.
Relationship between Department and Health Boards – similar to the relationships within the Executive, the relationship between the Department and the health boards is most effective where the latter are prepared to keep a certain distance from the former and to exercise, as necessary, their status as independent, statutory bodies. But the health boards, for the greater part, failed to act independently; to ‘a large extent, health boards appear to act in relation to the Department as if they are satellites rather than independent bodies [...] The majority of the health boards were prepared to continue with a scheme, about which they increasingly had doubts, for as long as the Department told them they should.’
The present Ombudsman comments on these three areas from the perspective of today and concludes that, if anything, matters have disimproved rather than improved. In relation to the role of the Oireachtas, the Ombudsman observes that parliament has been sidelined and exercises only a limited role. Reflecting the views of many commentators, the Ombudsman observes that our governmental arrangements are undermined significantly by virtue of having an Executive which is too powerful and a Legislature which is too weak.
As regards relationships within the Executive, and taking the example of the Department of Health & Children, the Ombudsman observes that the distance between Ministers and senior civil servants – which was a necessary feature of our model of government – no longer exists. In the wider context of the health service, the Ombudsman draws attention to a continuing confusion as to the respective roles of the HSE and of the Department.
.
Findings (Executive Summary)
The Ombudsman finds, in relation to the type of complaints dealt with in this investigation, that the health boards (HSE) failed to fulfil their obligations to older people under section 52 of the Health Act 1970 and that this failure came about with the full knowledge and agreement of the Department. As a result of these failures, very many older people (and their families) suffered significant adverse affect over several decades. The Ombudsman finds that these failures of the health boards (HSE) and of the Department constitute (to use the language of the Ombudsman Act) actions “based on an undesirable administrative practice” and also actions “contrary to fair or sound administration”. These findings are at a level of generality as this investigation is an ‘own initiative’ one rather than one linked to specific, named complainants.
The Ombudsman takes the view that the HSE and the Department should acknowledge formally that the State, in the case of older people needing long-term nursing home care, has not been meeting its obligations under section 52 of the Health Act 1970. This acknowledgment could be in the form of a public statement from the two bodies and could be made on a ‘without prejudice’ basis.
There is no satisfactory solution to the issue of whether there should be financial redress for those who have been adversely affected by the State’s failure to provide long-stay care. The financial consequences for the State, in meeting a recommendation to compensate all those adversely affected, would be enormous, potentially running to several billion euros. In present circumstances, it appears this is not a cost which the State can meet. Nor is it likely that the State will be in a position to meet this type of charge for many years to come. On the other hand, not to recommend financial redress, might be seen as condoning maladministration and allowing bad practice to go unchecked. It would also mean that individual people and their families are being left with nowhere to turn and with a financial burden to bear which, as the Ombudsman understands the law, should have been borne by the State.
With considerable reluctance, the Ombudsman takes the view that in present circumstances the public interest is best served in not recommending any specific redress in the sense of financial compensation for those affected adversely. The Ombudsman suggests that some thought be given within the Department to devising some limited scheme under which families which have suffered serious financial hardship might be assisted. One possibility, in this regard, is that the existing Supplementary Welfare Allowance scheme might provide the statutory mechanism for the making of one-off payments, based on exceptional need, for such people affected adversely by the State’s failure to provide nursing home care for a family member.
The Ombudsman feels it is vital that steps be taken to prevent situations, such as described in this report, coming about in the future; or, where they do come about, there should be mechanisms in place to deal with them at an early stage. The Ombudsman proposes that, in future, measures to deal with such instances should be conducted with full transparency and in the public domain. The Ombudsman proposes the creation of an independent group whose function would be to advise Government on how best to handle legal actions, or threatened legal actions, which involve numbers of people and which arise from a contended failure of a State agency to meet statutory obligations particularly in instances where those claimed to be affected belong to a vulnerable group in society. Past examples of situations where such an approach might have been helpful include:
- the army deafness claims ;
- the contaminated blood claims ;
- education rights of autistic children ;
- provision of secure care for children ; and
- the right of older people to long stay nursing home care.
This proposal is based on the premise that the State should react to such situations, not simply in legalistic terms, but in terms which have regard both to legal rights (including human rights), to the State’s finances and the overall public interest. The proposal envisages that, while ultimate legal responsibility for dealing with such claims will continue to rest with the State (and its relevant agency), the direction of the State’s response should have regard to the advice of this group. Amongst the options for this group would be that of stating a case to the High Court, perhaps at an early stage, in order to get legal clarity where that is needed. The overall thrust of this proposal is that the State’s response to situations of this kind should be speedy, be made at an early stage, and be based on considerations of fairness and the public good rather than, as tends to happen at present, being defensive, combative and legalistic.
Some thought might be given to the possibility of such a group acting as adviser to the Attorney General in fulfilling the role of guardian of the public interest or, alternatively, that this group would replace the Attorney General in fulfilling that role. In any case, there is certainly considerable scope for improving our governmental mechanisms with a view to ensuring that, where these major issues arise, they will be handled always with a view to securing the public interest.
Emily O’Reilly – Ombudsman – November 2010
.
.
END
Please Defend Ireland’s Pension for Older People !
So … RTÉ (Radio Teilefís Éireann, Ireland’s National Public Service Broadcaster) has decided to Ban Advertisements for this Video … produced by Older & Bolder … an Alliance of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO’s) which champions the rights of all older people, and seeks to combat ageism …
http://www.olderandbolder.ie/content/sign-our-petition-defend-state-pension#video
The Current Member Organizations of ‘Older & Bolder’ are:
- Active Retirement Ireland ;
- Age & Opportunity ;
- The Alzheimer Society of Ireland ;
- The Carers’ Association ;
- The Irish Hospice Foundation ;
- The Irish Senior Citizens’ Parliament ;
- The Older Women’s Network ; and
- The Senior Help Line.
The Vision of ‘Older & Bolder’ … An Ireland which affirms ageing and the rights of all older people, enabling everyone to live and die with confidence and dignity … as equal, respected and involved members of society.
The Older & Bolder Alliance Acts as a Catalyst for …
1. Supporting older people, through its member organizations, as active participants in shaping an Ireland which fosters the welfare and quality of life of all its citizens.
2. Positively influencing and shaping beliefs and values, attitudes and opinions regarding ageing and older people.
3. Valuing the role of older people in the community … and understanding the diversity of older people, including those with an impairment or a health condition.
4. Promoting an age-friendly society where decisions are informed by the expressed needs and preferences of older people, and empirical (i.e. evidence-based) research.
.
I have seen this ‘Older & Bolder’ Video … and signed the Petition at … http://www.olderandbolder.ie/
.
.
END
Institutional Failure Increasing European Biodiversity Losses ?
Our Ultimate Goal … as Human Beings … must be to arrive, as quickly as practicable, at a dynamic and harmonious balance between a Sustainable Human Environment and a flourishing, not just a surviving, Natural Environment … with the Overall Aim of achieving Social Wellbeing for All.
Note: Human Environment … Anywhere there is, or has been, an intrusion by a human being in the natural environment.
Note: Social Wellbeing … A general condition – in a community, society or culture – of health, creativity, responsible fulfilment, and sustainable development.
Simply stated … Biodiversity is Critical for the Good Health of the Natural Environment ! And yes … the Natural Environment is a Living System … and we must become comfortable when using such terms as ‘health’, ‘injury’ or ‘harm’ in relation to its condition. Or, should I say ‘her’ condition ??
Furthermore … a Flourishing Natural Environment is an essential foundation for Biodiversity within a Sustainable Built Environment.
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.
[A Short Digression: One important point needs immediate and unequivocal clarification ... it is only in the context of Biodiversity within the Built Environment can there be any consideration or discussion about the Sustainable Use/Exploitation of that Biodiversity !]
.
Shamefully … as Human Beings … we have made a terrible, terrible mess of Our Planet. And it continues … and continues …
Initiated at the time of the Deepwater Horizon Offshore Drilling Rig Explosion and Fire, on 20th April 2010 … this summer’s BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico … an unprecedented Local Environmental, Social and Economic Tragedy and a Regional Disaster … unfolded very quickly and very prominently in front of our eyes. It was a long time, however, before the full nature and extent of this catastrophic incident was revealed.
Excluding the issues of Public Relations Spin, Withholding and/or Concealment of Vital Information, Individual Incompetence, and Lies … Institutional Failure (or, to put it another way, Lack of Institutional Capacity) alone … i.e. failure to properly anticipate, or to be adequately prepared, and/or to respond effectively and in a timely manner … added to, and magnified, the scale of this disaster.
.
On Wednesday, 14 July 2010, the following brief overview describes the United States Disaster Response … my sincere apologies for reproducing the quaint, but prehistoric, Imperial Units of Measure …
Disaster Response Vessels
- Vessels of Opportunity: 2,754
- Barges: more than 540
- Skimmers: more than 580
- Other Vessels: more than 3,000
- Total Active Response Vessels: more than 6,870
and
- Aircraft: 119
Boom Data
- Boom deployed: more than 3.27 million feet
- Boom available: more than 855,000 feet
- Total Boom: more than 4.12 million feet
Oil Recovered
- Oily Water Recovered: nearly 32.9 million gallons
- Amount Estimated Burned: nearly 10.97 million gallons
- Oil Captured (CAP) over last 24hrs: more than 539,000 gallons
Oil Dispersants
- Surface dispersant used: more than 1.07 million gallons
- Sub-sea dispersant used: more than 762,000 gallons
- Total Dispersant Used: more than 1.83 million gallons
Personnel Involved
- Overall Personnel Responding: more than 44,000 personnel
[Source ... http://www.restorethegulf.gov/release/2010/07/15/operations-and-ongoing-response-july-15-2010]
.
United States National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling
Staff Working Paper No.2 – 6 October 2010
Decision-Making within the Unified Command
Click the Link Above to read and/or download PDF File (276kb)
.
.
IN EUROPE … during this International Year of Biodiversity … a Major and Widespread Regional Disaster is unfolding quietly, slowly … hidden from the view of the general European public … and in relation to which important lessons must be learned from the Gulf of Mexico Oil Disaster. Please examine closely that U.S. National Commission’s Staff Working Paper No.2 above.
On 4th October 2010 … the European Environment Agency (EEA) published Report No.5 : ‘Assessing Biodiversity in Europe’ … which clearly stated (in the final paragraph of the final chapter … and then, only when quoting from another document !) …
‘ a large proportion of European species and habitats are either facing extinction, have an unfavourable conservation status, or their status is unknown.’
.
THE QUESTION which must be asked is … whether there is yet proper … or even sufficient … Institutional Capacity at European Union and EU Member State levels to implement Any European Biodiversity Strategy … with the clearly specified target of protecting, conserving and nurturing Biological Diversity in Europe ???
.
Does the following cautiously worded text convince you ? Not me, I’m afraid !
EEA Technical Report No.5 / 2010 – Chapter 4 – ‘Conclusions, Way Forward & Knowledge Gaps’
European Biodiversity has declined dramatically in the last two centuries, with the conversion of natural habitats to meet growing demands for food, energy and infrastructure. Although the pace of change has varied across the region and has generally slowed considerably in the last couple of decades, agricultural land use now accounts for almost half of the European terrestrial area.
In coastal and marine areas, industrial fishery operations have had similarly large impacts, affecting both fish populations and habitats throughout European coastal and marine waters. Nearly half of assessed fish stocks in Europe fall outside safe biological limits. The majority of biodiversity in Europe now exists within a mosaic of heavily managed land and seascapes, and is to a large degree linked to agricultural, forestry and fishery practices across the continent.
In recent decades, growing awareness of biodiversity decline has led to improved commitments, policies and practices for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity throughout much of Europe. Biodiversity is now higher on the political agenda in Europe than ever before. Significant targeted responses have been made by public, civil society and private institutions to restore habitats, protect threatened species and reduce the main threats to biodiversity in Europe.
As a result of the policies adopted and implemented at international and European scales, including the Birds, Habitats, and Water Framework Directives, there are indications that some aspects of biodiversity are improving in status in parts of Europe. There have been significant increases in forest cover in the last two decades across northern Europe and the status of many waterways has improved across Europe as a result of reduced industrial and agricultural pollution in many countries. Recovery plans have been documented and are being implemented for many of Europe’s threatened species, with some successes.
While ambitious targets are being set in Europe to halt biodiversity loss and some progress is being made, many threats remain and new ones are growing. This erodes the ability of ecosystems to provide services to people in Europe and beyond.
Threats to Europe’s biodiversity include habitat loss and degradation, unsustainable harvesting, establishment and spread of invasive alien species, pollution from agricultural runoff in many countries, unsustainable forest and agriculture management, increasing water abstraction and use, and increasing climatic change impacts, especially in southern and northern Europe, and in mountainous areas across the region. The loss of wetland and dryland habitats also continues.
Future Progress in addressing these threats and conserving Europe’s Remaining Biodiversity will depend on success in Four Key Areas:
1. Enhanced Implementation Of Measures Targeted At Biodiversity Conservation. There has been progress in protecting and restoring threatened species and habitats across much of Europe, and protected areas and sustainable farmland and forestry management practices have grown steadily. However, there remains considerable opportunity to scale up such practices across the region, including coastal and marine areas. Such direct efforts for biodiversity conservation are a cornerstone of conservation. They are essential to manage the most important threats and conserve the most threatened biodiversity. However, alone they are insufficient to address biodiversity loss in the medium and long term because many of the direct drivers, and all of the indirect drivers of biodiversity loss, emanate from other sectors.
2. Policy Coherence On Biodiversity Is Required With Other Sectors. In order to conserve and sustainably use biodiversity, policies in other sectors that have an impact on or depend on biodiversity need to be supportive. These include those on trade, agriculture, fisheries, planning, transport, health, tourism, and the financial sector, including insurance. In many EU countries, considerable funding for managing biodiversity in landscapes is obtained from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Mainstreaming biodiversity into these areas – in both the public and private sectors – is essential for an integrated approach to biodiversity conservation. Successful mainstreaming will require all sectors to recognise the value of biodiversity. Recent efforts to ascribe accurate economic values to biodiversity and ecosystem services, for example ‘The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity’ (TEEB, 2010), provide a basis for mainstreaming.
3. A More Integrated Approach Across Sectors And Administrative Boundaries, At Landscape And Seascape Scales. This entails applying the ecosystem approach more widely, and requires co-operation across sectors for successful implementation. The present report shows that management of some habitat types, such as forestry and freshwater systems, is already starting to apply such approaches. Others, such as marine habitats, mountains and agricultural land, have not yet been adjusted sufficiently. Integrating protected areas, ecological networks, connectivity areas, production and urban landscapes into multifunctional land-use planning at a regional scale will be an essential element of a successful European conservation strategy. Likewise at watershed and landscape scales, the integration of biodiversity and natural resources management, including that of water, will require dialogue and agreement between the multiple stakeholders using, depending on, and managing such resources.
4. Public Awareness Of The Relevance Of Biodiversity To The Lives Of European Citizens, And The Consequences Of Biodiversity Loss At Local, European And Global Scales, Needs To Be Raised. Significant efforts are therefore required on communication, education and public awareness, to complement the policy framework and to encourage both individual action for biodiversity conservation, and a supportive public opinion for changes in policy and practice.
This report shows that, particularly regarding forest habitats, public awareness of the value of sustainable practices and recycling is increasing. This can be enhanced by publicising how more sustainable practices can benefit both society and the ecosystems themselves.
Despite being the region with the longest and broadest biodiversity knowledge base, key knowledge gaps remain across Europe. Filling such gaps would support action and policies across the four key areas.
Knowledge gaps exist in individual elements of biodiversity. Little is known, for example, about many aquatic systems (and especially floodplains and deltas), genetic diversity beyond the agricultural sector, and for many taxa at the species level. Considerable further work is required to assess the status of plants, invertebrates and fungi, and to assess trends in species status. A global base of species level assessments (or ‘Barometer of Life’) would cost some €45 million (Euros), according to recent estimates (Stuart et al., 2010).
My Note: Taxon (plural Taxa) … Any unit used in the science of Biological Classification, or Taxonomy. Taxa are arranged in a hierarchy from kingdom to sub-species, a given taxon ordinarily including several taxa of lower rank. In the classification of protists, plants and animals, certain taxonomic categories are universally recognized; in descending order, these are kingdom, phylum (in plants, division), class, order, family, genus, species, and sub-species, or race.
In addition to knowledge of specific elements of biodiversity, interdisciplinary knowledge gaps are particularly apparent, with little in the way of accumulated knowledge on the interlinkages between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human wellbeing. Recent efforts to link biodiversity science with economics have been particularly promising but further interdisciplinary research and assessment would support strengthened decision-making and policymaking processes on European biodiversity in the 21st century.
Key Gaps in Knowledge that emerge from this report are as follows …
- Data Availability: Data beyond EU-27 Member States are often limited, especially European-level information on biodiversity (species, communities and genetic stock). Generally, data for marine species and habitats are much scarcer than for terrestrial ecosystems, and across Europe some important ecosystem types (e.g. marine and coastal) are among the least studied. Data are often lacking at relevant scales, e.g. for key environmental drivers or habitat change. This information would help set solid and relevant targets and continually improve sustainable management schemes.
- Climate Change Adaptation Strategies: Information on adaptation measures and strategies is often insufficient for many European ecosystems to counteract adverse climate change impacts and maintain ecosystem goods and services (e.g. FAO, 2009). While climate change considerations have largely driven the debate on adaptive capacity and vulnerability, there is now increased recognition of the multidimensional nature of drivers of change, responses and feedback mechanisms (e.g. CDE, 2009).
- Ecosystem Services: Enhanced information on environmental, economic and social benefits of the ecosystem services supplied by biodiversity is lacking to inform sustainable management of ecosystems and raise public awareness of biodiversity’s value and the link to livelihoods. The value of non-marketed goods and services are an important element in this.
- Optimal Land-Use Strategies: It is important to finding the optimal mix of protected and productive areas, whether used for intensive agriculture or biomass for energy. More detailed data and analysis are needed to assess the extent and consequences of losing natural habitats through land conversion for increased biomass, e.g. biofuel feedstock production (FAO, 2008). Ecosystem approaches are also particularly well suited for addressing competing land-use issues in a systematic and holistic framework, even in the absence of economic valuations, and they have considerable potential as an integrated management tool (Hicks et al., 2008).
- Sustainable Management Indicators: More knowledge on sustainable management indicators is required along the lines of the pan-European indicators of sustainable forest management.
- Green Infrastructure: More information is required on the potential benefits of a green infrastructure approach to facilitate land development and land conservation together in a way that is consistent with existing natural features to deliver multiple benefits to people and biodiversity.
Recognising the urgent need to address these issues and reverse the trends of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, the Environment Council adopted the 2020 Headline Target on 15 March 2010 and the European Council endorsed the Long-Term Biodiversity Vision on 26 March 2010. These ambitious initiatives will underpin the new EU Biodiversity Strategy to be finalised by the end of 2010. In its conclusions, the European Council specified that the strategy to address biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation should set a clear baseline outlining the criteria against which achievements are to be assessed.
EEA developed the EU 2010 Biodiversity Baseline (EEA, 2010) to respond to this need. It offers a comprehensive snapshot of the current state of biodiversity. It thereby supports the EU in developing the post 2010 sub-targets as part of the biodiversity strategy and provides factual data for measuring and monitoring progress in the EU from 2011 to 2020. This new information tool demonstrates that a large proportion of European species and habitats are either facing extinction, have an unfavourable conservation status or their status is unknown. It highlights the urgent need for conservation actions and intensified efforts.
.
In Ireland … am I convinced that the New National Biodiversity Plan 2010-2015 (draft for public consultation, dated 1st September 2010) will turn out to be anything more than just another slick looking public relations document issued by our one and only Department of the Environment, Heritage & Local Government (DEHLG) ? I’ll give you one guess what my answer is !!!
.
.
END
Israel – A Criminal, Apartheid State & Its Own Worst Enemy !
Related to the previous Post (2010-10-01) … ‘New York 9-11 WTC Incident – Any Societal Lessons Learned ?’ …
.
On 22nd September, 2010 … the United Nations Human Rights Council issued the following Report (Document Reference A/HRC/15/21) …
‘ Report of the international fact-finding mission to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, resulting from the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian assistance.’
Report Summary (in full):
This report was prepared by the fact-finding mission established by the Human Rights Council, in resolution A/HRC/RES/14/1 of 2 June 2010, to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, resulting from the interception by Israeli forces of the humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza on 31 May 2010 during which nine people were killed and many others injured.
The report sets out background information relating to the interception of the flotilla as well as the applicable international law.
The fact-finding mission conducted interviews with more than 100 witnesses in Geneva, London, Istanbul and Amman. On the basis of this testimony and other information received, the Mission was able to reconstruct a picture of the circumstances surrounding the interception on 31 May 2010 and its aftermath. The report presents a factual description of the events leading up to the interception, the interception of each of the six ships in the flotilla as well as a seventh ship subsequently intercepted on 6 June 2010, the deaths of nine passengers and wounding of many others and the detention of passengers in Israel and their deportation.
The report contains a legal analysis of facts as determined by the Mission with a view to determining whether violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, took place.
The fact-finding mission concluded that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers in Israel prior to deportation.
.
Report Conclusions (Section V in full):
260 The attack on the flotilla must be viewed in the context of the ongoing problems between the Israeli Government and the Palestinian Authority and People. In carrying out its task, the Mission was exposed to the depth of conviction on both sides of the correctness of their respective positions. Similar disasters are likely to reoccur unless there is a dramatic shift in the existing paradigm. It must be remembered that might and strength are enhanced when attended by a sense of justice and fair play. Peace and respect have to be earned not bludgeoned out of any opponent. An unfair victory has never been known to bring lasting peace.
261 The Mission has come to the firm conclusion that a humanitarian crisis existed on the 31 May 2010 in Gaza. The preponderance of evidence from impeccable sources is far too overwhelming to come to a contrary opinion. Any denial that this is so cannot be supported on any rational grounds. One of the consequences flowing from this is that for this reason alone the blockade is unlawful and cannot be sustained in law. This is so regardless of the grounds on which it is sought to justify the legality of the blockade.
262 Certain results flow from this conclusion. Principally, the action of the IDF (Israeli Defence Forces) in intercepting the Mavi Marmara in the circumstances and for the reasons given on the high sea was clearly unlawful. Specifically, the action cannot be justified in the circumstances, even under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
263 Israel seeks to justify the blockade on security grounds. The State of Israel is entitled to peace and security like any other. The firing of rockets and other munitions of war into Israeli territory from Gaza constitutes serious violations of international and international humanitarian law. But action in response which constitutes collective punishment of the civilian population in Gaza is not lawful in the present or any circumstances.
264 The conduct of the Israeli military and other personnel towards the flotilla passengers was not only disproportionate to the occasion but demonstrated levels of totally unnecessary and incredible violence. It betrayed an unacceptable level of brutality. Such conduct cannot be justified or condoned on security or any other grounds. It constituted grave violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law.
265 The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been committed. It is not satisfied that, in the time available, it can say that it has been able to compile a comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
- wilful killing ;
- torture or inhuman treatment ;
- wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.
The Mission also considers that a series of violations of Israel’s obligations under international human rights law have taken place, including:
- right to life (article 6, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) ;
- torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 7, ICCPR; Convention Against Torture) ;
- right to liberty and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention (article 9, ICCPR) ;
- right of detainees to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person (article 10, ICCPR) ;
- freedom of expression (article 19, ICCPR).
The right to an effective remedy should be guaranteed to all victims. The Mission must not be understood to be saying that this is a comprehensive list by any means.
266 The Mission notes that the retention by the Israeli authorities of unlawfully seized property remains a continuing offence and Israel is called upon to return such property forthwith.
267 The perpetrators of the more serious crimes being masked cannot be identified without the assistance of the Israeli authorities. They reacted in a violent manner whenever they thought that anyone was attempting to identify them. The mission sincerely hopes that there will be co-operation from the Israeli government to assist in their identification with a view to prosecuting the culpable and bring closure to the situation.
268 The Mission is aware that this is not the first time that the Government of Israel has declined to co-operate with an inquiry into events in which its military personnel were involved. On this occasion the Mission accepts the assurances of the Israeli Permanent Representative that the position which he was directed to follow was in no way directed towards the members of the Mission in their personal capacities. It is nonetheless regrettable that, on yet another occasion of an enquiry into events involving loss of life at the hands of the Israeli military, the Government of Israel has declined to co-operate in an enquiry not appointed by it or on which it was significantly represented.
269 The Mission regrets that its requests to the Permanent Mission of Israel for information were not entertained. The reason initially given was that the Government of Israel had established its own independent panel of distinguished persons to investigate the flotilla incident. The Mission was told that for that reason and also because the Secretary-General (of the United Nations) had also announced the establishment of another distinguished panel with a similar mandate, that “an additional Human Rights Council initiative in this regard are both unnecessary and unproductive”.
270 The Mission did not agree with that position and for that reason suggested to the Permanent Representative of Israel that he should direct to the Council and not the Mission a request that the Mission defer submitting its report to permit other enquiries to complete their tasks. The Mission has not received any direction from the Council to date and considers that it would have been obligated to respond positively to any such directive from the Council.
271 In the light of the fact that the Turkel Committee (Israeli Inquiry) and the Secretary-General’s Panel have not concluded their sittings, the Mission will refrain from any remarks which are capable of being construed as not allowing those bodies to complete their tasks “unfettered by external events”. The Mission confines itself to the observation that public confidence in any investigative process in circumstances such as the present is not enhanced when the subject of an investigation either investigates himself or plays a pivotal role in the process.
272 Elsewhere in this report, the Mission has referred to the fact that it found it necessary to re-interpret its mandate because of the manner in which the resolution appointing it was couched. It is important in the drafting of matters of this sort that the impression is not given of the appearance of any pre-judgment. The Mission took particular care, at the first opportunity, to indicate that it interpreted its mandate as requiring it to approach its task without any preconceptions or prejudices. It wishes to assure all concerned that it has held to that position scrupulously.
273 All the passengers on board the ships comprising the flotilla who appeared before the Mission impressed the members as persons genuinely committed to the spirit of humanitarianism and imbued with a deep and genuine concern for the welfare of the inhabitants of Gaza. The Mission can only express the hope that differences will be resolved in the short rather than the long-term so that peace and harmony may exist in the area.
274 Nine human beings lost their lives and several others suffered serious injuries. From the observations of the Mission, deep psychological scars have been inflicted by what must have been a very traumatic experience not only for the passengers but also the soldiers who received injuries. The members of the Mission sympathise with all concerned and, in particular, with the families of the deceased.
275 The Mission is not alone in finding that a deplorable situation exists in Gaza. It has been characterized as ‘unsustainable’. This is totally intolerable and unacceptable in the 21st Century. It is amazing that anyone could characterise the condition of the people there as satisfying the most basic of acceptable standards. The parties and the international community are urged to find the solution that will address all legitimate security concerns of both Israel and the people of Palestine, both of whom are equally entitled to “their place under the heavens”. The apparent dichotomy in this case between the competing right of security and the right to a decent living can only be resolved if old antagonisms are subordinated to a sense of justice and fair play. One has to find the strength to pluck from the memory rooted sorrows and to move on.
276 The Mission has given thought to the position of humanitarian organizations who wish to intervene in situations of long-standing humanitarian crisis where the international community is unwilling, for whatever reason, to take positive action. Too often are they accused as being meddlesome and, at worst, as terrorists or enemy agents.
277 A distinction is made between activities taken to alleviate crises and action to address the causes creating the crisis. The latter action is characterized as political action and therefore inappropriate for groups that wish to be classified as humanitarian. This point is made because of the evidence that while some of the passengers were solely interested in delivering supplies to the people in Gaza, for others the main purpose was raising awareness of the blockade with a view to its removal, as the only way to solve the crisis. An examination should be made to clearly define humanitarianism as distinct from humanitarian action, so that there can be an agreed form of intervention and jurisdiction when humanitarian crises occur.
278 The Mission sincerely hopes that no impediment will be put in the way of those who suffered loss as a result of the unlawful actions of the Israeli military to be compensated adequately and promptly. It is hoped that there will be swift action by the Government of Israel. This will go a long way to reversing the regrettable reputation which that country has for impunity and intransigence in international affairs. It will also assist those who genuinely sympathise with their situation to support them without being stigmatised.
.
The Following Earlier Text in the Report Should Also be Noted …
(Section III) E. Consequences for Israeli Citizens of Participation in the Flotilla
Factual Description and Findings
250 The Mission found the following facts to have been established to its satisfaction.
(a) Detention and criminal prosecution of Israeli citizens
251 Passengers with Israeli citizenship were separated from other passengers on arrival in Ashdod. After interrogation, they were informed that they would be detained and face charges under Israeli law, including attempting to kill a soldier, seizing arms, shooting from a soldier’s gun, organizing violence and being present in a military zone. Although taken to a different prison, they had similar experiences as the other passengers including sleep deprivation and denial of access to a lawyer.
252 On 1 June 2010, the Ashkelon Magistrate’s Court remanded in custody four Palestinian Israelis: Mr. Muhammed Zeidan, Chairman of the High Follow-up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel; Sheikh Raed Salah, the Head of the Islamic Movement of Israel (northern branch); Sheikh Hamad Abu Daabe, Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel (southern branch) and Ms. Lubna Masarwa of the Free Gaza Movement. On 3 June 2010, the same court decided to release the group with certain conditions, including a period of house arrest until 8 June, prohibition from leaving the country for 45 days and the posting of a bond of 150,000 Shekels by a third party.
253 The four people have not since been indicted, but the file is still open and the charges have not been withdrawn.
(b) Reprisals against an elected member of the Knesset
254 One member of the Israeli Knesset, Ms Haneen Zouabi, was a passenger on the Mavi Marmara. Ms. Zouabi was not detained, but was extensively interrogated.
255 As a result of her participation in the flotilla, the Knesset voted on 7 June 2010 to remove three of the parliamentary privileges available to Ms. Zouabi as a Member of the Knesset: her privileges in overseas travel; her diplomatic passport; payment of any legal fees in case of removal of her parliamentary immunity from criminal prosecution. The Knesset held several sessions on the issue of her participation in the Flotilla during which there were racist and sexist remarks and physical threats made against her. Some parliamentarians have also called for her to face criminal prosecution and measures, such as revoking her membership in the Knesset, were discussed. The Israeli Minister of Interior accused Ms. Zouabi of treason and requested authorization from the Attorney General to revoke her citizenship. To date, no criminal proceedings have been initiated against Ms. Zouabi. Since her participation in the Gaza Flotilla, Ms. Zouabi has received many death threats.
256 The Inter-Parliamentary Union’s Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians adopted a confidential decision at its 130th session in July 2010, holding the punishment of Ms. Zouabi for exercising her freedom of speech by expressing her political position to be unacceptable and calling on the Knesset to reconsider its decision.
257 The Mission refrains from any comment on any domestic legal proceedings which may be sub-judice. However, the Mission notes that these actions against Israeli citizens could give rise to certain violations of Israel’s international human rights obligations, including freedom of expression, political participation rights and rights to due process.
.
.
END
New York 9-11 WTC Incident – Any Societal Lessons Learned ?
We have a very large Page on our Corporate WebSite devoted to some of the more important technical aspects of the World Trade Center Incident (9-11) … which occurred on Tuesday morning (local time in New York), 11th September 2001. This Incident resulted in a major and unprecedented Collapse Level Event (CLE) for Iconic Buildings … in an Iconic City with a highly developed Economic Environment.
A long time ago … and yes, you really do have to pinch yourself to remember that it was way back then. As a reliable reflection of the continued popular dismay and concern about 9-11 … once again, the number of visitors to our WebPage went through the roof on the 11th September just passed.
.
New York … any City … is a geographical region, with open and flexible boundaries, consisting of :
(a) An interwoven, densely constructed core (built environment) ;
(b) A large resident population of more than 500,000 people (social environment) … in this case … as of 1st July 2009, according to the United States Census Bureau, the City of New York had a population of 8,391,881 people … an increase of 383,603, or 4.8%, since April 2000 ;
(c) A supporting hinterland of lands, waters and other natural resources (cultivated landscape) ;
together functioning as …
- A Complex Living System (analogous to, yet different from, other living systems such as ecosystems and organisms). and
- A Synergetic Community capable of providing a high level of individual welfare and social wellbeing for all of its inhabitants.
.
Within a few short hours in 2001 … the entire Fabric of New York’s Social Environment, south of Canal Street, had been shredded into tiny unidentifiable pieces.
Just 5 weeks after 9-11 … in the middle of October 2001 … I was staying in my cousin’s apartment within the WTC Security Zone. The reason for my visit was to present a Paper at a Conference being held in Mid-Town Manhattan. Many participants did not attend. Some of the people I met there, however, were so emotionally traumatized by 9-11 that they could barely bring themselves to speak about what had happened. On a few occasions, I had also witnessed racial harassment … one nasty case involving a policeman … of those individuals, e.g. taxi drivers, having a non-WASP Profile ! You can guess what I mean.
Fast forward to events surrounding the recent 9-11 Anniversary in 2010 … and what do we see on our television screens ?? Protests against a project to refurbish and enlarge an existing Islamic Community Centre, located not too far from the 9-11 Incident Site … and a crazy proposal, emanating from a ‘mickey mouse’ Christian Fundamentalist Pastor in Florida State, to hold a Public Burning of the Qur’an.
Dismal, Depressing and Shameful Societal Responses to the World Trade Center Incident (9-11) !!!
Having suffered … intelligent people are supposed to … and usually do … learn valuable lessons about life and living.
But … what lessons have actually been learned, in the United States of America, from 9-11 ???
.
.
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