Sunny Hundal website

  • Family

    • Liberal Conspiracy
    • Sunny Hundal
  • Comrades

    • Andy Worthington
    • Angela Saini
    • Bartholomew’s notes
    • Bleeding Heart Show
    • Bloggerheads
    • Blood & Treasure
    • Campaign against Honour Killings
    • Cath Elliott
    • Chicken Yoghurt
    • Daily Mail Watch
    • Dave Hill
    • Dr. Mitu Khurana
    • Europhobia
    • Faith in Society
    • Feminism for non-lefties
    • Feministing
    • Gender Bytes
    • Harry’s Place
    • IKWRO
    • MediaWatchWatch
    • Ministry of Truth
    • Natalie Bennett
    • New Statesman blogs
    • Operation Black Vote
    • Our Kingdom
    • Robert Sharp
    • Rupa Huq
    • Shiraz Socialist
    • Shuggy’s Blog
    • Stumbling and Mumbling
    • Ta-Nehisi Coates
    • The F Word
    • Though Cowards Flinch
    • Tory Troll
    • UK Polling Report
  • In-laws

    • Aaron Heath
    • Douglas Clark's saloon
    • Earwicga
    • Get There Steppin’
    • Incurable Hippie
    • Neha Viswanathan
    • Power of Choice
    • Rita Banerji
    • Sarah
    • Sepia Mutiny
    • Sonia Faleiro
    • Southall Black Sisters
    • The Langar Hall
    • Turban Head

  • 16th November, 2009

    Spectator mag’s confusion on challenging the BNP

    by Sunny at 8:47 am    

    David Blackburn writes for the Spectator’s CoffeeHouse blog that the BNP is, No longer a racist party, but a party of racists, in response to the news that BNP membership looks to vote overwhelmingly in favour of allowing non-whites to join the party.
    David is highly confused. This is because he says:

    The Spectator has maintained that the party’s domestic policies are inspired by racial supremacist ideology and that its economic policies are like Dagenham – that is, three stops beyond Barking.

    Yes, I’ll agree with that. The party’s domestic policies are indeed inspired by a racial supremacist ideology. Which is why people should avoid following those policies right? Except, he does on to say centrist parties “must engage with (and I mean engage with, not shout down)” BNP policies. What a muddle. ‘Engage’ is a mealy-mouthed word that usually means ‘follow’.

    Earlier this year Tim Montgomerie at ConHome said:

    but I do think part of any anti-BNP strategy means addressing popular concerns about immigration, access to housing and championing people’s patriotic instincts… while ALWAYS attacking their racism.

    Continue Reading...
    15th November, 2009

    Sharia Finance still matters

    by guest at 6:33 pm    

    This is a guest post by Persephone.

    Islamic finance (based on Sharia Law) is reinforcing London as a financial centre and supporting Britain’s property and financial sectors. Two of the largest property deals in Britain have been funded on the basis of Islamic finance:

    1) The £1 billion Chelsea Barracks development is the most expensive property deal in Britain. Sold by the MoD to the Candy brothers and the Qatari government who plan to develop it into a housing estate of 638 market rate and affordable homes.

    2) The Shard, a new landmark 310m tower above London Bridge Station will go ahead despite the withdrawal of lenders, such as Credit Suisse, during the credit crunch. It was saved by the financial backing of four Qatari banks and UK developers Sellar. The Tower is to become the home of Transport for London.

    (The world of football may also benefit since Qatar is bidding to stage the 2022 World Cup.)

    The principles of Islamic finance show Sharia to have an ethical side:

    - Fairness: all make informed decisions, are not misled.
    - Social justice: economic health of the majority - not wealth in the hands of the few.
    - No usury or interest.
    - Risk and profit is shared: profit distribution is based on effort not capital ownership.
    - Contractual certainty and avoidance of ambiguity.
    The advent of sharia law in the UK is wrongly perceived as being in the last 5-10 years and thereby linked as a by product of mass immigration brought about in the tenure of a Labour Government. In fact it has been used on commercial deals since the 80′s - at the height of the Conservatives.

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Economics,Muslim

    Thoughts on Dynamic Labour Markets and the Welfare State - Flexicurity Anyone?

    by Shariq at 12:00 pm    

    One of the most interesting things about the healthcare debate in America is how people who in theory support labour market flexibility, are opposed to having a healthcare safety net.

    Especially in America, but also in Britain, a feature of the modern economy is that it is easy to fire people. This may seem like a bad thing, but it also has advantages – for instance that it encourages nascent firms to hire people without worrying that if things don’t go as planned, they will be tied down by surplus employees. This can promote more competition and lead to more dynamism in the economy, as younger more efficient firms are able to compete with more established, but less innovative ones.

    The flip side to this is that as opposed to say thirty years ago, people don’t enter a job, or at least shouldn’t enter a job, with the expectation that they will be there for life.

    This makes the social security safety net even more important than it might be in a more rigid labour market. So for instance, if like in the American system your healthcare is tied to your job, then it can wreck a family’s ability to get healthcare if they are out of employment and secondly, may also serve as a disincentive to work for a new firm which may be innovative and exciting, but also risky. If the firm goes bust, then not only do you have to relocate and find a new job, but also go without healthcare.

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Economics
    14th November, 2009

    You can only be a moderate Muslim if…

    by Sunny at 11:07 pm    

    A reader sends in this article by Melanie Phillips in the Jewish Chronicle:

    Among the many jibes Ed Husain threw my way when I criticised Bunglawala was that I supposedly deemed any Muslim who did not support Israeli Likud policy to be an Islamist.

    Interestingly, this absurd caricature was not dissimilar to a charge once made to my face by the Hamas-promoting Dr Azzam Tamimi, who declared disgustedly that I would only consider a Muslim to be a moderate if he supported Israel.

    While Ed Husain was wrong, for once Tamimi was spot on. I do indeed think that the issue that defines true Muslim moderation is the absence of hostility towards Israel and, by extension, the Jewish people.

    This is so laughable that I shouldn’t even have to state why that is. But what’s interesting is that MP now defines Israel so closely with ‘the Jewish people’ - hereby ignoring all the non-Jews who live there. That is basically a statement saying if you ever criticise Israel then by extension you’re criticising all Jews and by extension you are anti-semitic.

    By the same extension, why can’t Muslims say that any criticism of Middle Eastern countries is criticism of all Muslims and also thereby racist? I should also send a memo to the Indian PM. From now on any criticism of the state of India is an explicit slur against all Hindus and by extension racist. Since India is also home to a majority of Sikhs, it would be amusing to watch Hindus and Sikhs accuse each other of racism if either criticises India.

    Or we could just assume M Phillips is chatting out of her arse again. Incidentally, she is also saying that Ed Husain of the Quilliam Foundation, because he does not support Israel in everything, is therefore an extremist Muslim. She’s off her trolley.

    Ex-soldier to be jailed for handing in gun

    by Rumbold at 8:02 pm    

    Paul Clarke, an ex-soldier, is likely to be jailed for at least five years after he found a shotgun and handed it into the police. The jury found him guilty and the judge pointed out that anyone in possession of a gun, even if they had rung up the police station and told them they were bringing it in, as happened in this case, would face the same sentence.

    If all the facts have been revealed, then this is a chilling failure of the common sense principle of the law. Laws should not be discarded on a whim, but a functioning society recognises that in some cases there is a technical breach of the law, but clearly not a breach of the spirit. To deal with such cases, society puts in place various systems. The Crown Prosecution Service isn’t obliged to prosecute, and juries are not obliged to convict. This system failed in this case. As an ex-soldier, Mr. Clark would have had extensive firearms training, and so would have been able to handle the weapon safely. There was no account of him using the weapon to threaten anyone, and he alerted the police to his intentions. He also removed the weapon from a place where others could have stumbled upon it. In short, he exercised his common sense, and is now likely to go to jail for years.

    (Via: Devil’s Kitchen)

    Sunny update: Jack of Kent has a very measured and interesting response to this.

    But on the narrow point as to whether that possessing a shotgun - and taking that shotgun through the streets (even if to a police station) - should be unlawful, then I think it should be.

    It was not his civic duty to take a shotgun and ammunition through the streets of a Surrey town.

    Filed under: Civil liberties
    13th November, 2009

    Disability and sex

    by Rumbold at 8:01 am    

    In 2008 a survey came out claiming that 70% of people would never have sex with someone with disabilities. With that in mind, it is good to see that there is now starting to be much more discussion about the sexual needs (and requirements) of some people with disabilities:

    [There is to be a] conference entitled “Disability: sex, relationships and pleasure”, which is being hosted by the Royal Society of Medicine in Central London. It aims to educate carers about the sexual needs of patients and to introduce disabled people to available support networks. It is backed by the Sexual Health and Disability Alliance (SHADA) and the Tender Loving Care Trust (TLC), which help to put disabled people in touch with appropriate sexual and therapeutic services, and offer confidential support and advice on sexual matters…

    The TLC has helped hundreds of people with disabilities ranging from loss of limb to wasting diseases to learning difficulties. It has 55 sex workers registered on its site, all of whom have been vetted by the trust’s staff. The patients pay for the services themselves, although many sex workers offer a concession to disabled clients who genuinely cannot afford what they offer.

    Hopefully the TLC has ensured that the sex workers are not in any way forced. And if it has, I don’t see anything wrong in this, especially given many people’s prejudices against finding disabled people attractive. No one is saying that people have to find all disabled people attractive, but to reject the possibility when there are so many different looking people out there is just bizarre.

    Filed under: Disability
    12th November, 2009

    How many people has multiculturalism killed??????

    by Sunny at 8:22 pm    

    I was going to make a joke the other day, going by some of our more rabid commenters, asking how many people will right-wingers attribute to being killed by the evil ideology of multiculturalism. Already, socialism has killed millions upon trillions of people by virtue of the fact Hitler called his ideology ‘national socialism’ (they share words see! guilty!).

    I thought surely some of our readers could come up with a figure. Sure it was a silly joke but… Oh wait. I just spotted this on Melanie Phillips’ blog: ‘Multiculturalism kills‘. It’s nice that sometimes other people do my work for me.

    Filed under: Humour,Media,Religion

    “German courtroom killer gets life”

    by guest at 4:30 pm    

    guest post by regular reader Halima

    This is the BBC headline on the story that shocked me this morning.

    It was apparently Muslims who were outraged about the murder in a German court of Marwa Sherbini, a pregnant Egyptian woman. It was apparently Muslims who were outraged that Ms Sherbini’s husband was shot by the police while trying to defend his wife from the knife-wielding attacker.

    I am outraged that such a murder could take place in a courtroom, with police present, and that the attacker was only apprehended 16 knife stabs later. This was not a shooting, which could happen before the police could react – clearly the husband did react, but the police shot him after mistaking him for the attacker.

    What has happened to the public mindset? Have we reached a stage where the murder of this woman doesn’t press the same humane instincts, and where only Muslims are outraged by this violence?

    Event: What is radical politics today?

    by Sunny at 9:35 am    

    What is Radical Politics Today?

    A crisis makes you re-think your life. The recent economic crisis is no exception. All of us are now thinking how the world could be run differently. Despite this, a radical alternative has hardly emerged to mobilise the masses, which begs the question: What is radical politics today?

    In this book, leading academics, politicians, journalists and activists attempt to pinpoint an answer, debating the issues facing radical politics in the 21st Century. Rarely united in their opinions, they collectively interrogate the character and spirit of being radical in our times.

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: British Identity,Media

    Asian caste discrimination still rife in UK

    by Sunny at 9:34 am    

    Asian caste discrimination rife in UK, says a report according to the Guardian.

    A number of respondents also reported being asked – directly or indirectly – about their caste background by their family doctor, nurse or a community nurse. One elderly woman felt her care worker had discriminated against her on caste grounds, while a physiotherapist was also alleged to have refused to treat someone of low caste.

    The report says that the significant number of doctors from the Indian subcontinent now indicated “a potential for caste discrimination occurring in the healthcare sector”. The Acda hopes its findings will persuade the government to amend the equality bill to make caste discrimination illegal.

    Sounds like a good idea to me. If discriminating against someone on the basis of race is illegal, why not caste? The problem is that the mainstream Hindu orgs in the UK keep denying this is a problem. I’ve read various press releases over the years where they also claim that because Hinduism does not endorse the caste system (while some revivalist movements (Swami Vivekananda, Arya Samaj most notably) rejected it, many orthodox Hindu sects embrace it). So this is a welcome report.

    11th November, 2009

    Mutiny at the Spectator?

    by Sunny at 6:43 pm    

    Clive Davis was, until recently, a blogger at The Spectator magazine’s website. Last week he finally wrote about his reasons for leaving. He cited, among others, a general difficulty in talking about immigration and race at the website:

    There’s no question, either, that the political establishment has been mealy-mouthed about the side-effects of mass immigration. (Half my family is white working-class, so I’m allowed to say that too.)

    But as I discovered when I had my own blog at the Speccie, most of the noise comes from people who are, frankly, not worth talking to, a small but energetic brigade of green-inkers who would never normally be allowed house-room on a letters page. As well as repeating the same lines over and over, they express a degree of contempt for non-white faces in general, and Muslims in particular, that is downright scary. Shoot illegal immigrants? Why not?

    That’s the main reason why I switched off my comments facility early on. To be blunt about it, if I were a BNP apparatchik I’d be pleased with the way Coffee House has become a sounding board for the party.

    Continue Reading...

    Lefties should stop cutting their noses to spite the face

    by Sunny at 9:39 am    

    Lefties make this argument all the time: that if we only have some small incremental change then it kills off the prospect for more revolutionary change. Therefore many, especially on issues like climate change, oppose progress on the basis it does not go far enough. I oppose this stance for various reasons, principally that while I’d like to see much more change in our society - incremental steps are usually the best way forward.

    Ezra Klein, who writes about healthcare in the USA, confronts the question of whether a watered down bill is worse than no bill at all. This should be required reading for every leftie.

    This is, I think, a misreading of not only the politics of this issue going forward, and also the history of health-care reform going backward. Failure does not bring with it a better chance for future success. It brings a trimming of future ambitions.

    Failure does not breed success. Obama’s defeat will not mean that more ambitious reforms have “a better chance of trying again.” It will mean that less ambitious reformers have a better chance of trying next time.

    Conversely, success does breed success. Medicare and Medicaid began as fairly limited programs. Medicaid was pretty much limited to extremely poor children and their caregivers. Medicare didn’t cover prescription drugs, or individuals with disabilities, or home health services.

    As any scientist will tell you, it’s much easier to encourage something to evolve in a certain direction than it is to create it anew. The idea that a high-profile failure in a moment where a liberal Democrat occupies the White House and Democrats hold 60 seats in the Senate for the first time since the 1970s will encourage a more ambitious success later does not track with the history of this issue, nor with the political incentives that future actors are likely to face. If even Obama’s modest effort proves too ambitious for the political system, the result is likely to be a retreat towards even more modest efforts in the future, as has happened in the past.

    This is spot on. The left should not lose the stomach for revolutionary change or radical ideas. But it must also have the pragmatism to find ways to push for them, perhaps even incrementally, rather than constantly throw toys out of the pram when change does not go far enough quickly.

    10th November, 2009

    Breaking the law without breaking the law

    by Rumbold at 1:49 pm    

    Holocaust denial is idiotic. It is contrary to a massive weight of evidence, and you will find no respectable historians holding such a position. It is usually a view held by those who think Jews are subhuman, or evil, or involved in some sort of conspiracy (and usually all three). In short, it is nasty and ridiculous. Yet it is not a crime in this country, and for good reason, because it is a view; an opinion. People cannot be tried in this country for denying the Holocaust, since Holocaust denial is not a crime. However, this is likely to change soon, when the Transfer of Criminal Proceedings is implemented.

    This will allow a person to be tried in an EU country if they have broken the law in another EU country, even if they have not visited that country themselves. So a Briton who has never left this island could be tried (and convicted) for Holocaust denial in a British court, even though the offence was committed in Britain where it is not a crime:

    As the European scrutiny committee of the House of Commons noted in its report on the proposed reform: “[This] is both novel and far-reaching: it gives national courts competence to try a criminal offence that is not prescribed by UK law or, put another way, that the Government has not proposed nor Parliament agreed should be a crime. Instead, jurisdiction comes from the EU Member State that is transferring the proceedings.” For instance, someone accused of holocaust denial, a crime in Germany and Austria, could be tried for it in an English court even though it is not an offence here.

    It means more work for lawyers, who will now have to ensure that companies and individuals comply with twenty seven different law codes, and it means more work for bureaucrats. People often ask me why I am a eurosceptic, and it is laws like this that make me so. A completely unnecessary, costly and vastly illiberal piece of legislation for the sole purpose of ‘harmonisation’. What good does it serve?

    Obama commits another 40,000 troops to Afghanistan

    by Sunny at 1:29 am    

    CBS News has the exclusive:

    Tonight, after months of conferences with top advisors, President Obama has settled on a new strategy for Afghanistan. CBS News correspondent David Martin reports that the president will send a lot more troops and plans to keep a large force there, long term.

    The president still has more meetings scheduled on Afghanistan, but informed sources tell CBS News he intends to give Gen. Stanley McChrystal most, if not all, the additional troops he is asking for.

    I support the decision - either there had to be many more troops to stabilise the country, or NATO had to get out. I’m glad Obama went for the second option. This will put the total number of troops there to over 100,000. I now wish the rest of NATO would get its act together and also commit some serious resources to stabilise Afghanistan.
    [hat-tip plutoniumpage]

    Update: It’s now being denied by the administration. Hmmm…

    9th November, 2009

    Racist mob attack: who to blame?

    by Sunny at 11:48 pm    

    The Indy reports:

    Police were today investigating a racist attack in which a mob armed with metal poles, bricks and sticks ambushed a group of Asian students. Four people suffered stab wounds when they were attacked close to City University in Islington, north London.

    Witnesses said two other men were also beaten in the violence, which involved up to 30 youths in St John Street last Friday evening. Officers were also investigating an incident earlier in the day when a gang of white and black youths shouted racist abuse at a group of Asian students. One Islamic student group said the mob incident was the culmination of a series of attacks. The Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS) said Islamophobic and racist abuse had been shouted at students.

    Who is to blame? Now it obviously can’t be the racists because… well it’s just not their fault. According to a few commenters who trolls this blog now, the blame must clearly lie with ZaNuLabour and their conspiracy to turn Britain into an Islamic state. Yes, they must be to blame.

    The daily echo of BNP ideology in the mainstream media and blogs must not ever be blamed. What these youths really wanted to do was stop ‘The Islamification of Britain’. For that, sometimes you need metal poles and bricks and a bit of abuse.

    Filed under: Race politics,Religion

    The kind of people who want to stop ‘Islamification’ of Britain

    by Sunny at 10:06 am    

    There’s a Facebook group a reader sent in titled: ‘BRITAIN WILL NEVER BE A MUSLIM COUNTRY‘. As one of the Sikh posters on the group sarcastically writes: Britain will never be a Sikh country either.

    But what kind of people does such a group attract? What’s their mindset like?

    Continue Reading...

    Event: 20 years of Women Against Fundamentalism

    by Sunny at 8:16 am    

    Is the iconic (but short-lived) ‘Women Against Fundamentalism’ back?? I hope so

    Today, the need to challenge the rise of religious fundamentalism in all religions is more critical than ever. At the same time we need to safeguard secular spaces (both physical and intellectual) where people of all religions and none can participate in public life and express themselves on equal terms.

    Struggle not submission; 20 Years of Women Against Fundamentalism
    A public meeting organised by Women Against Fundamentalism

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Events,Religion

    New comments system

    by Sunny at 2:35 am    

    I’m testing out a new comments system which is threaded and a bit more fancy. But it’s also a plugin by another company - so it means the old comments are temporarily unavailable. They should soon be imported on to the new system hopefully. Then let’s see how it goes…
    Please email or leave a comment below if you spot any problems.

    Filed under: Blog
    8th November, 2009

    Using forced marriages for your own agenda

    by Sunny at 11:56 pm    

    Ash from MixTogether writes a typically misinformed article for Harry’s Place. It’s full of so many holes I’m surprised the editors published it. Apparently, ‘Free Choice In Marriage Will Help Prevent Extremism‘ - this is about the stupidest assertion I’ve ever heard. He argues:

    One of the 5 key objectives of the Prevent agenda is to ‘Increase the resilience of communities to violent extremism’, but discussion of marriage practices has been conspicuously absent from the implementation of Prevent.

    What? The government should also dictate to people who they should marry or not?

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Race politics

    Event: discussion on media and Pakistan’s stability

    by Sunny at 9:02 pm    

    An event this week by the: Institute for War & Peace Reporting

    Is the increasingly media-savvy violent extremist movement in Pakistan a threat to the stability of the state?

    The discussion will be moderated by author and BBC journalist Owen Bennett Jones in conversation with:

    Continue Reading...

    Should Baby RB Live or Die?

    by guest at 11:55 am    

    This is a guest post by Sarah Ismail. Sarah blogs here.

    A one year old baby boy, who can be known only as Baby RB for legal reasons, was born with a rare genetic condition called congenital myasthenic syndrome and has been in hospital since birth.

    Now, the hospital wants to withdraw Baby RB’s life support, because they claim that his quality of life is so low that it would not be in his best interests to try to save him. So his parents are going to the High Court- with his mother reported to be supporting the hospital’s bid. The parents are ‘amicably separated’ but both are reported to have spent long periods of time at their son’s bedside.

    The father’s lawyers argue that Baby RB’s brain is not affected. He can see, hear and interact, and enjoys listening to music and being read to. They are submitting footage to the court, which they say show’s Baby RB playing with his toys. Christopher Cuddihee, a solicitor acting for the father, told The Sunday Telegraph: “This is a tragic case. The father feels very strongly that Baby RB has a quality of life that demands the trust should continue to provide life-sustaining treatment. “The father clearly adores his son and hopes to demonstrate to the court that the trust’s application should be rejected.”

    Now for my reactions to this case. I just can’t believe that the hospital would even consider withdrawing the life support, especially when you consider that people with Baby RB’s condition ‘can expect to live a relatively normal life with medication,’ according to BBC News. Yes, Baby RB appears to be severely affected by his condition, but the most important thing to remember is that this is not his fault. He did not ask to be born with his condition, and I certainly don’t think he deserves to die as a result of it.

    Continue Reading...
    Filed under: Disability,Science
    6th November, 2009

    Double standards over Fort Hood attack

    by Sunny at 8:35 pm    

    This Washington Independent blog post highlights the hypocrisy of the American right. To recap: a deranged lone gunman at a US military base, who happened to be a soldier there and a Muslim, shot several army soldiers and wounded others. Apparently, before he started shooting he shouted ‘Allah Hu Akbar’ (God is great). But there is no proof that he was influenced by al-Qaeda or any other terrorist groups.
    And yet:

    A top Republican congressional recruit said on Friday that the shooting at Ft. Hood, Texas yesterday by a solider allegedly sympathetic to suicide bombers shows that the “enemy is infiltrating our military.”

    “This enemy preys on downtrodden soldiers and teaches them extremism will lift them up,” West said in a statement. “Our soldiers are being brainwashed.”

    And more:

    You might think that that commentary about a deranged lone gunman ought to await the facts, but you’re not going to get a job at Fox News with that attitude. Raw Story catches Fox’s Brian Kilmeade asking a guest, “Do you think it’s time for the military to have special debriefings of Muslim Army officers — anybody enlisted?” And with that, hundreds, if not thousands, of servicemembers with Muslim heritage are slandered.

    Not all right-wingers are that stupid and reactionary in the US, but it comes as no surprise that as soon as a Muslim guy guys goes nuts then all Muslims are placed under suspicion by these people.

    As Spencer Ackerman points out:

    To make a point no one should have to make: earlier this year, a deranged Army sergeant named John Russell opened fire near a combat stress clinic — sound familiar? — at Baghdad’s Camp Liberty and killed five of his fellow soldiers. No one speculated about any religious motivations. No one suggested he was part of an enemy “infiltration,” or suggested that U.S. troops have been “brainwashed.” Everyone understood that Russell was a deranged lunatic, not an advance scout for a conspiracy to subvert the military internally. It’s funny how double standards work.

    Funny, this point also seems to have been missed out by this blog post at Harry’s Place by ‘Lucy Lips’ who seems convinced there is a “religious motivation” to the attack, and by extension also putting all Muslims under suspicion. It’s sad how these minds work. There are several people who have died: that is bad enough. It’s more disgusting these attacks are used by bigots for their own political agenda.

    Filed under: Islamists,Terrorism

    Now IKWRO is under threat

    by Rumbold at 12:23 pm    

    After the news that the state refuses to continue to fund the Honour Network helpline, comes other blow. Now the state is to stop funding The Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKWRO). A £29,000 grant, which was allocated to pay for a full-time professional Kurdish outreach worker, will no longer be available. A specialist Kurdish worker was needed because 56% of IKWRO’s cases involved Kurds. Diana Nammi, the head of IKWRO, said:

    The Forced Marriage Unit has been excellent but it needs grass roots organisations like us because we are closer to the front line and come face to face with the victims. Forced marriages and honour killings have not stopped. They are still happening all the time. And yet the funding has dried up.

    IKWRO is an unusual organisation because of the groups (Iranian and Kurdish women) it caters for, and so its work and experience (420 women helped last year) isn’t easy to replicate. But the IKWRO and Honour Network funding cuts are merely representative of a wider trend in government cuts. The problem, as Ken Livingstone pointed out, is the civil service. They are the ones that implement (and in some case decide) policy.

    As a result of the financial crisis and the gross overspend of the state, spending has to be cut. But the ones doing the cutting are the bureaucrats, so they (understandably) are not inclined to reduce their own areas. Instead they cut grants to charities and frontline services, because they themselves are not directly affected by those cuts. Until politicians are willing to oversee and implement spending reductions amongst bureaucrats, it will be the weakest in society who will continue to suffer as they are not the ones in Whitehall.

    Continue Reading...
    more recent posts » — « previous posts

    Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
    With the help of PHP and Wordpress.