Are You Taking the Human Rights?

From being set up with good intentions, the Human Rights Act is now constantly in the news about how it is being used as a loophole for criminals.  This is a shame, as such a bill of rights in theory is beneficial for everyone.  The problem is, in reality, (and I agree there is a large overemphasis by the press), that many do not actually care about the Human Rights they are claiming, it is just a way of getting around the law – they would claim whatever article of the Human Right Act which gives them the desired result.

This causes two outcomes:  Firstly, it completely undermines the rule of law.  Secondly, it stigmatises those genuine cases where the Human Rights Act is used by those it was meant to protect.

This week Vali Chapti an Indian national, and his wife Rashia Chapti a British national, are using Article 8, (the right to family life), Article 12, (the right to marry) and Article 14, (to be free from discrimination) of the Human Rights Act, in an attempt to revoke the decision that Mr Chapti cannot stay in the UK.

Under new immigration rules announced by the Home Secretary Theresa May in June 2010, English is now a basic requirement for all immigrants coming into the United Kingdom, and unfortunately for Mr Chapti he can neither speak, write, or read English, and thus cannot move permanently to the country.

While it may seem to contradict David Cameron’s view of marriage as an important institute, and his push to recognise it in places such as the tax system, this ultimately is a fair and coherent decision.  This is once again another example of abuse of the Human Rights Act.  Most likely not personally by Mr and Mrs Chapti, it is in fact quite understandable that they have challenged the decision, but by the Human Rights lawyers.  These lawyers do not protect Human Rights like some institutions and charities, rather they specialise in how to use the Human Rights Act to win cases and line their pockets.

It is not unfair for an English speaking country, where everything from shopping, to going to the doctors is done in the English language, to insist that those who wish to come and live and be part of the society speak the language.  The most basic requirement for good integration is the ability for everyone to be able to communicate with each other.  Recently, the London Evening Standard has been highlighting how many children in London cannot read and write, and how detrimental it is for them in life.  Take this further, and imagine being unable to read, write and even speak, and the serious limitations this puts on your ability to do achieve your best.

This decision is also completely coherent with other countries such as Australia, where unless a passport from an English speaking country is held, an English test must be taken to prove a certain level of English language competence.  Many non English speaking European countries have the same requirement, the Netherlands for example requires a basic level of the Dutch language, and France has had a basic level language requirement since 2007.  Many countries such as Australia and Canada take this further, and will not allow immigration into the country unless certain skills are held and immigrants are below a certain age, even if the basic English requirement is met.

It is sad fact that many racialise such arguments as these when they have absolutely no interest in the colour of ones skin.  The point of immigration policies such as these, whatever the language, is to allow both parties involved (immigrant and country) to achieve the best from the situation.  The simple fact is, language is the basis of good integration, and good integration benefits everyone.

David Cameron in his many election promises said he would bring immigration levels down into “the tens of thousands”, and reassess the Human Rights Act, with the view of implementing a British Bill of Rights.  It is becoming increasingly clear that to achieve his promise on immigration, Cameron must carry out his promise of a reassessment of the Human Rights Act, for the former relies heavily on the latter.

The EU’s Impending Immigration Crisis?

The consequences of the Greek mess are huge, not just to the EU and its beloved single currency, but to the world as a whole.

However, there is one issue that I don’t believe has been touched upon, and that is of Greek migration.

Currently immigration in the UK, and in many countries across Europe is top on the political agenda and for good reason, controlled immigration is good for all parties involved, uncontrolled immigration on the other hand is detrimental to all involved.

Being in the EU allows free movement of labour from one country to another, in other words, uncontrolled immigration.  It would be quite understandable therefore if large amounts of  the Greek labour force due to no jobs and the dire economic situation left in their droves.

For the EU countries, this means there is potential for mass migration from Greece to countries such as, Germany and France, as well as the UK.  There are jobs in these countries, but whether there are enough to sustain a large uncontrolled influx is another question.  The other more delicate issue is the perception amongst the population in countries such as Germany and France of this influx.  Germany for example, has given a lot of its tax payers’ money to Greece to prop it up, if, or more precisely when they default this will be lost.  Having given the Greeks money which they will never see again, and then having competition from Greeks in the already tough job market could potentially cause friction.  You can imagine the headlines in some publications in Germany, “They took our money and lost it, now they’re coming to take our jobs!”

For Greece, if this did happen, the migration would mainly be those of working age.  The obvious problem here is it would leave Greece with a work force deficit, and therefore unable to rebuild and grow its economy.

This is not anti-immigration, scaremongering, or in anyway stigmatising Greeks.  Ignored however, those would be the least of one’s worries – Just look at the recent argument between Italy and France over migration due to the Arab Spring.