The UN says austerity has fuelled UK racial inequality. Will the Tories call THIS a lie, too?
Prepare for a new outbreak of outrage against a United Nations rapporteur.
The Tory government likes to pour scorn on UN reports, and I reckon this will be no different.
Note that Tendayi Achiume managed all her research in 11 days. The Tories pilloried Phillip Alston, the poverty rapporteur, for carrying out his own research in less than two weeks, and there’s no reason this would be different.
Of course, it turned out that the facts on which Mr Alston based his findings were accurate and the Tories rubbished his report for political reasons.
Now Ms Achiume is quoting research by the Equality and Human Rights Commission estimating that by 2022 black households will have seen a 5five per cent loss in income because of austerity – double the loss for white households.
Tory spokespeople should have a field day with this.
But the evidence is damning:
The government’s austerity programme has entrenched racial inequality in the UK, a UN expert on racism has concluded in a report that also describes the Windrush scandal as a “glaring example” of discrimination in the UK’s immigration policy.
National debates in the aftermath of the EU referendum “amplified racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance in the UK” said Tendayi Achiume, the UN’s special rapporteur on racism.
“Public and private actors have played dangerous roles in fuelling intolerance. Among them, politicians and media outlets deserve special attention given the significant influence they command in society,” she said, without naming the politicians or media outlets she had in mind.
Despite the existence of a legal framework devoted to combating racial discrimination, Achiume said race and ethnicity “continue to determine the life chances and wellbeing of people in Britain in ways that are unacceptable and, in many cases, unlawful.”
Achiume, a professor of law at the University of California, Los Angeles, said a hostile environment “ostensibly created for, and formally restricted to, irregular immigrants is in effect a hostile environment for all racial and ethnic communities and individuals in the United Kingdom.”
Source: Austerity has fuelled racial inequality in the UK, says UN expert | Politics | The Guardian
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Until they are forced into admitting it is accurate. Is anyone surprised that the MSN have ignored this.
https://skwawkbox.org/2019/06/13/video-dwp-civil-servants-admit-alstons-report-on-uk-poverty-was-factually-accurate/
I can see why it takes such a short time. The information is readily available to anyone who wishes to look; ONS, Govt reports, surveys and newspaper articles (ie the bias and attitude of them rather than specifically what they are about)
The use of ‘Hostile Environment’ is interesting, it’s the very phrase used by May.
Worse than the politicians though are the ‘news’ outlets that promulgate their racist views. I’m mostly thinking of ‘The Daily Mail’ The paper that headlined “Hurrah for the Blackshirts” hasn’t changed. This was the paper that was BANNED from Facebook’s late but unlamented ‘Trending’ section for “Fake News” Just as bad, for different reasons, is Channel 5 for it’s plethora of ‘Benefits’ programmes which carefully select participants and then carefully selects what and how it broadcasts what happens in their lives. Close up shots of tattoos, Sky Boxes and cigarettes to play to every prejudice that your average ‘Daily Mail’ reader has.
Meanwhile, fuelled by all these TV and newspaper programmes & articles your average BNP supporting moron feels able to roll back over 40 years of the Race Relations Act and act like the racist he really is, and openly. Thus bit by bit anyone who isn’t white (and English) is gradually sidelined for employment, promotion, assistance or priority in any eventuality. They (the government, newspapers, TV channels) are emboldening racism to the extent it could now be considered institutional…
Austerity and Brexit are linked. Brexit is fuelled by xenophobia, racism and misplaced notions of Nationalism. The architects of the Banking crash are the same people who made more money out of austerity, and will make more money still from Brexit. It’s all one gigantic con trick and we’ve all been had.
Not only have nasty Tories have fuelled racial inequality, they have fuelled and emboldened some dangerous right wing thugs and also the utter stupidity of Brexit. They will sneer, as they do, at anything or anyone who disagrees with their malicious and vindictive cruelty. The UN report too will be sneered at.
If you can’t prove no white person has suffered then the claim is not proven.
That’s a racist comment.
This was an examination of the effect on ethnic minorities, not a comparison of the treatment they get with that of the majority.