Three Thousand Versts of Loneliness

If you haven't yet done so, read O'Neill's update on two of Northern Ireland's quango oligarchs.  Unionist Lite just keeps highlighting absurdities which others miss.  The little bit at the end of his piece, about the NIHRC's dissertation award took my eye.  A Katrina Killen, who won the prize, summarised her effort thus: In this dissertation it was noted that a  dichotomy exists between civil and political rights and socioeconomic issues whereby the latter are often marginalised within the field of transitional justice.   This occlusion of socioeconomic issues has the potential to lead to the reoccurrence of violence. If you speak English, as opposed to insidious gobbledygook, you may wonder what this means.  I'd translate it roughly as follows - "keep the money flowing".  I paraphrase of course.  Still it's good to know that the rights industry is self-perpetuating by encouraging the next generation to speak its absurd language.  ...

In today's Belfast Telegraph , I comment on the latest NIHRC lobbying campaign, as highlighted by O'Neill . One of the leading Northern Irish blogs, ‘A Pint of Unionist Lite’, recently highlighted a fresh bout of lobbying, designed to resuscitate the Commission’s ailing recommendations. Last month McWilliams paid a visit to the House of Commons, meeting Scottish Labour MP Michael Connarty, who subsequently raised the moribund Bill of Rights at Prime Minister’s Questions. Following his discussion with the outgoing Commissioner, Connarty remarked, it was clear that the government intends “to breach the spirit and the letter of the Good Friday Agreement” by failing to implement the NIHRC‘s advice.   That is an assertion borrowed directly from the human rights lobby and it simply doesn‘t stand up to scrutiny. If anything, it was the NIHRC which disregarded the Belfast Agreement, when it concentrated its proposals on rights already secured by existing legislation and socio-econo...

The IFA is going to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland to argue that players with no connection to the Republic of Ireland, other than their passports, should not be allowed to play for the FAI football team, rather than Northern Ireland. Now I’m sure that the Football Association has taken the finest legal advice, but in case Raymond Kennedy reads Three Thousand Versts, let me remind him what we actually need to be arguing, because it is the existing statutes that will be interpreted. If players who choose to play for Northern Ireland, but hold ROI passports, can only do so because of inferred British nationality, then the IFA will lose. Players who hold dual nationality can choose an international team which represents either nationality. If players can play for Northern Ireland by virtue of their Republic of Ireland nationality, in conjunction with other territorial requirements, then they are not entitled to play for the Republic if Ireland football team. They are...

The Shadow Justice Secretary is delivering a speech on human rights this evening in Belfast. He will criticise the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, pointing out that it has gone well beyond its remit. He will also repeat the Conservative party's commitment to include provisions, specific to Northern Ireland, within the framework of a new UK bill. And, you'll forgive the conceit, but I'm bound to point out that Mr Grieve has chosen to embellish his speech with a quotation from a leading authority on the topic. Or not. The NIHRC report, as has been widely acknowledged went a long way outside the remit that had been laid down for it. “Although I recognise its good intent, it produced a blueprint for a Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland which if implemented would represent a fundamental constitutional change. So widespread a vision of justiciable rights is contained within it that it is difficult to disagree with the verdict of Owen Polley writing in the Guardian...

In the print version of this morning's News Letter I make the argument that the human rights industry is attempting a power grab on behalf of judges and 'deliberative democrats'. The article first appeared over at Forth Magazine . Jason Walsh's webzine is always a provocative read and it's a pity that he's thinking about winding it up . Anyway, the conclusion to my argument in the News Letter runs as follows: the NIHRC has long since ceased to be a public body that simply performs the task allotted to it. It has become instead a quasi political pressure group which has devoted itself to making the case for a Bill, ranging far beyond its Good Friday remit. A great deal of money has been spent on advertising, advocacy and ’education’. The Chief Commissioner has blatantly entered into the political arena, on several occasions, to suggest that a Conservative government would “regress” in terms of rights. Monica McWilliams should remember that any tiny electoral m...

On Forth, I argue that the latest leaflet distributed by the Human Right Consortium is a nonsense and the human rights industry represents a resuscitation of 'deliberative democracy'. IF YOU cast your mind back to the 1990s when Northern Ireland was edging towards the Belfast Agreement, you might recall something called ‘deliberative democracy’ was rather in vogue. Essentially its premise ran - whatever evidence the ballot box might show to the contrary, voters are not getting the representation they want or deserve. Politicians are a sorry crowd and they should be cut out of decision making and replaced by a selection of community groups, interested parties, businessmen and plenty of nice reasonable women. For a while it was actually seriously suggested that any political deal was likely to rest upon principles of deliberative democracy. Luckily wiser heads prevailed and the Good Friday Agreement, for all its faults, handed authority largely to democratically elected politic...

I've updated my links and the 'latest' widget to include a new blog by Daphne Trimble. The Ulster Unionist nominee for Lagan Valley opens with a thoughtful critique of the human rights process. The conclusion offers a nicely condensed synopsis of the argument against socio-economic rights. If democracy means anything, it means that government is accountable directly to the electorate. The ‘effective enforcement mechanisms’ that the Consortium proposes would mean that government was accountable in court to the judiciary, at the call of the person bringing the case, who, under the current proposals could be an unaccountable body such as the Consortium. The NIHRC includes at least one sane voice. It is a pity the commission chose to ignore it, when it delivered its final report. Otherwise Northern Ireland might be on the brink of some meaningful rights' legislation.

The Director of the CAJ has reacted with predictable petulance to the government consultation on a proposed Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland. In a letter carried in today’s Belfast Telegraph, Mike Ritchie observes that the document only recommends that two rights included in the NIHRC’s advice should be implemented. The paper also published a short article containing Ritchie’s criticism on Saturday. The letter takes the usual self-righteous tone preferred by the rights’ industry, yet it is predictably oblique in terms of detail. Because the government has rejected most of the NIHRC’s report, it implies, it must therefore be against the concept of rights altogether. The truth is that, had the NIHRC operated within its remit and produced a credible set of rights, applicable to Northern Ireland’s particular circumstances, its advice might have been implemented. Instead, it chose simply to concoct a bundle of aspirations, attach the term ’rights’ and expect it to attain a spe...

Over at Comment Is Free (where Mikhail Gorbachev has also made a contribution today!) I argue that the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is a busted flush and that rights specific to the province should be incorporated in a UK wide Bill. The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) was established under the Belfast agreement to advise on the scope for implementing a bill of rights specific to the province. After a process that lasted more than 10 years, and cost millions of pounds of taxpayers' money, a government consultation has dispensed with most of the recommendations assembled by the commission. It found that the advice disregarded existing national and international rights protection, was founded on unrealistic expectations and, most damningly, strayed far beyond the remit outlined in the Good Friday accord. Unionists have called for the chief commissioner, Monica McWilliams, to resign.

After the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (or part of it) delivered its advice on a Bill of Rights for the province, the government has published a consultation paper on the subject. At Slugger O’Toole, Belfast Gonzo observes that the NIO document has dispensed with most of the NIHRC’s work. The Secretary of State previously noted that the body had strayed far beyond its remit. Gonzo asks whether Monica McWilliams, the chief commissioner, should resign her post. She has failed in her brief, she has taken a nakedly political approach to a public position - helping to turn the commission into something resembling a pressure group - and she has been paid £70,000 per annum by the tax payer. This blog has long previously contributed its voice to the campaign for resignation. The Consultation Paper notes that the British government has already discharged all the duties which were required of it, under the Belfast Agreement, in order to safeguard rights in Northern Ireland. ...

Danny Kennedy has taken the Republic’s Foreign Minister, Michéal Martin, to task for ‘megaphone diplomacy’ after he intervened in the Bill of Rights debate. In a statement to the Seanad Mr Martin claimed that the proposed bill comprises ‘unfinished work’ and he deemed its implementation a necessary and outstanding part of the Good Friday Agreement. We have revisited the original text many times on this blog and there is little point reproducing it again. The Belfast Agreement established a Commission charged with investigating the possibility of a Human Rights Act, it did not lay down a requirement that any advice should be implemented. In any case, the remit which the Agreement set out was largely ignored in the recommendations which the NIHRC eventually produced. Danny Kennedy argues that the Republic’s government cannot reasonably advocate socio economic rights in Northern Ireland which it would not be prepared to apply to its own jurisdiction. Neither is Martin entitled to ap...

Although the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s recommendations are effectively dead in the water, the resultant outflow of public monies is far from being stemmed just yet. Indeed the NIO launches a public consultation on the proposals this autumn, despite the absence of any cross party, or cross community consensus by which they might proceed. Therefore the intervention made by two Ulster Unionist MLAs, Danny Kennedy and Tom Elliott, who have put down a motion (scroll down) which should ensure that the pertinent issues are debated at Stormont, is particularly welcome. The wording they choose is instructive. It reflects the view, supported by the Secretary of State, that the NIHRC’s report falls outside the remit prescribed for it by the Good Friday Agreement. “This Assembly considers the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s advice to the Secretary of State “A Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland” as incompatible with the provisions of the Belfast Agreement; notes wi...

Opponents of the NIHRC’s project to implement its recommendations for a Bill of Rights can be assured that its efforts are going nowhere. Secretary of State, Shaun Woodward, has already observed that the commission exceeded its remit and that it produced an untenable report. The Conservative party has put on record its scepticism about the need for legislation exclusive to Northern Ireland. If it forms the next government, it favours including any rights which might be specifically relevant in a UK wide Bill of Rights and Responsibilities. On the issue of a Northern Ireland bill, reason is winning. Which is perhaps why Monica McWilliams, whose £70,000 per annum salary is dependent on the tax payer, is growing increasingly shrill. David Cameron might be intent on subjecting members of parliament to a pay cut, but public money is better spent paying representatives, mandated by the electorate and required to work on behalf of their constituents, rather than funding a quango which o...

Rather than actually penning an article about human rights, Brian Walker has simply published , verbatim, Jeff Dudgeon's account of a debate at the 'McCloskey Civil Rights Summer School', on Slugger. The result is that, unique amongst Walker's blogposts, it is actually worth reading. The NIHRC's chief quangocrat, Monica McWilliams, attended the event and, from Jeff's synopsis, it sounds like she faced a robust challenge from the floor. Given that she has presided over the human rights bill fiasco and continues to defend recommendations, expensively formulated, which comprehensively fail to fulfil the commission's remit, she deserves little sympathy. McWilliams response to criticism aimed at the NIHRC and its work typifies the fashion in which unelected bodies, purportedly constituted in order to perform a particular task impartially, often develop an entirely independent dynamic of their own. Rather than serving the public they instead start to push a s...

The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee at Westminster has questioned Lady Trimble , NI Human Rights Commissioner, on her note of dissent which was entered after the NIHRC submitted its final report. Lady Trimble describes herself as ‘personally committed to human rights’ and ‘a loyal member’ of the Commission, but remains convinced that the body did not stick to its remit, outlined in the Northern Ireland Act 1998 which implemented the Belfast Agreement. Her opinion is in accordance with comments which the Secretary of State made when he was interrogated by the same committee. Shaun Woodward expressed the view that the NIHRC’s advice went ‘well beyond’ the brief which it was given, a factor which, he implied, compromised the usefulness of its recommendations to the government. Under questioning Lady Trimble reiterated her stance, clearly referencing the relevant legislation. Section 69 (7) of the Act prescribes the Commission’s role in drafting a report on a prospective bill of hu...

Newton Emerson has a typically caustic take on the Alliance party’s recent tribunal wrangle with the Equality Commission. David Ford’s former PA had made a series on unfounded allegations of discrimination against her employers. “Things became messier and murkier as a tribunal panel stepped down rather than hear a medical witness, the Alliance barrister accused the tribunal of bias and Ms Hawkins made demonstrably inaccurate statements. Finally, the case collapsed when the Equality Commission withdrew its financial support, citing an “irretrievable breakdown” with the plaintiff.” Newt cuts to the quick of the tribunal resignations. “All three panel members resigned because the chair had “difficulty” with a doctor testifying that Ms Hawkins had exaggerated her claim of disability. This was not because there was any doubt over the doctor’s testimony. It was because the panel did not think anyone claiming to be disabled should be doubted.” A key point to be determined in the case was w...

It is interesting to read Burke’s Corner’s piece about Sonia Sotamayor, Barack Obama’s nominee for the US Supreme Court, in conjunction with the ‘dissenting note’ which Northern Ireland Human Rights’ Commissioner, Lady Trimble, submitted to the Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs (H/T O’Neill ). The article about Sotamayor emphasises the liberal inclination to rely on ‘judicial activism’ to affect social and economic policy, rather than seeking change through normal legislative process. Obama’s nominee, in the past, has eschewed that approach, and her appointment, whilst disappointing some liberals, would be healthy both for politics and democracy in the US. Although the NIHRC has sought to affect legislation in Northern Ireland, by ignoring the terms of reference set down in the Belfast Agreement, it also seeks, by stealth, to smuggle a package of economic and social policy through a Bill of Rights, for which there is no political consensus. And furthermore, it aspires ...

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland recently intimated that no Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland, based on the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s advice, is likely to be drafted. David Cameron has reiterated his party’s commitment not to advance rights legislation specifically for this part of the United Kingdom. Instead he foresees any special provision being included in a subsection of a UK wide bill, which the Conservatives will draft during their first term in government. The problems with the NIHRC’s recommendations are clear. The Commission did not stick to its remit and it made an enormous and undeliverable set of proposals. Indeed, under Monica McWilliams chairmanship, and despite the best intentions of its unionist members, the body has assumed the worst characteristics of Quango-tude. It has become an autonomous pressure group, advancing its own agenda with scant regard for elected political opinion, and far too mindful of a host of unelected NGOs. E...

When the NIHRC published its report on a possible ‘Bill of Rights’ for Northern Ireland, unionists, and others, pointed out that the Commission had gone far beyond its remit in the recommendations which it outlined. Rather than framing a set of rights, required because of circumstances peculiar to Northern Ireland, the Commission preferred to outline a set of aspirational social and economic rights, none of which bore any special relevance to this region of the United Kingdom. Now, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Shaun Woodward, has confirmed to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee that the NIHRC went “well beyond the brief they were given”. Indeed, whilst he refuses to explicitly criticise the document, he additionally refers to it as ‘unwieldy’, strongly implies that it might lead, if implemented, to cases in European Courts, pursued by litigants in the rest of the United Kingdom, demanding equal treatment with Northern Ireland, and admits that consultation on a Bil...

I enjoyed David Peace’s novel ‘The Damned United’ tremendously. Indeed I was so enthusiastic that I indulged in wild hyperbole on this weblog , likening it to Hamlet, with Brian Clough cast as the prince and Elland Road substituted for Elsinore. Naturally I’ve been looking forward to the release of a film, based on the novel. But today, after searching local cinema websites for a showing this evening, I learned that in Northern Ireland the movie is not yet available . The rest of the UK can watch the film, but its distributors have decided to deny us the pleasure. Now, I understand fully that demand to watch Michael Sheen play Clough has exceeded expectation. However with 200 prints available you might expect that one could have found its way to Belfast, given that it is a regional capital. Perhaps Monica McWilliams could graft something for poor deprived cinema goers on to the recommendations for a Northern Ireland Bill of Rights.