UI Systems
F.A.Q. Foot Notes Background

 

Home
Environment
Human Rights
Poverty
Networks
Violence
Links
Economics
Resources
UI Systems

 

Universal Income 
Systems Explained

 

AKAKITEANGA KI TE KATOATOA I TE AU TIKAANGA TANGATA Atikara 25

1. E tikaanga to tetai uatu tangata ki tetai turanga oraanga tau ma te meitaki nona e no tona puna, kapiti ia te kai, kakau, ngutuare e te paruruanga maki ma tetai au angaanga tau tei anoano ia no te oraanga meitaki; e te tikaanga ki tetai paruruanga i te tuatau angaanga kore, maki, paruparu kopapa, takaua, ruaine me kore ra tetai uatu tu ngere i vao ake i tona mana akaaere.

2. E tikaanga to te au metua vaine utuutu tamariki e, to te au tamariki, ki tetai tiaki anga takake e te tauturu. Ko te tamariki katoatoa noatu e kua anau ia ki roto me kore ki vao ake i te noo anga akaipoipo o nga metua, kia oronga ia kia ratou tetai paruru anga aiteite.

 

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN  RIGHTS Article 25

1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of ...[oneself] and of...[one's] family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond...[ones] control.

2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

 

Table Of Contents

 

bullet

Universal Income Systems: Defined

bullet

Human Rights Parameters 

bullet

Understanding Democratic "Sovereignty" as a Job and Legal Mandate for Universal Income Systems from International Bill of Human Rights.

bullet

Human Rights Laws Supercede National Statute Laws 

bullet

Principles of Horizontal and Vertical Equity

bullet

Synopsis: what recent legal developments have for UI systems

bullet

Some key precedents for a UI in Aotearoa NZ

bullet

Appendix: Key Human Rights Laws

bullet

Footnotes

 

 

Universal Income  
Systems Defined

Universal Income Systems are those economic systems that are compliant with the International Bill of Human Rights (1). They have two parts: an economic and an education component.

1.     Economic component

These systems need to provide the equivalent of at least an unconditional minimum waged or above income for every adult citizen and permanent resident in addition to their present income level. The level for the minimum wage should be such that one person's income is sufficient to provide for a household (ICSECR Art.7). The income or wage is payment for everyone’s existing job responsibilities--as a citizen or permanent resident--in the role of the shared sovereignty over that democratic society (See  Understanding Democratic Sovereignty as a Job  for legal proofs of the people's role and rights to this income). The responsibilities include:

                 

bulletmonitoring and securing human rights for everyone,
bulletworking in harmony with our natural environment and protecting it for future generations,
bulletsupporting a healthy environmentally sustainable economy,
bulletand supporting the expense, education, and well-being of the sovereign people.

 

As the income is a right, it cannot be taken away.

2        Education Component

UI systems include the upgrading of the education system, where appropriate, to the provision of learning about human rights, sustainability, and the democratic responsibilities of the people in their role of the shared sovereignty over that society.

 

Justifications

"If all people are to be rulers, which is what democracy means, then all people must be educated as rulers; nine tenths of them cannot continue to be trained as slaves….we are operating our schools as if most people were fit only for servile occupations, not for the obligations of free citizenship." 
Robert Hutchins, PhD, prominent 20th century education leader and philosopher The Conflict in Education, 1952

The education of human rights is mandated into law in New Zealand. This component ensures that everyone will have the necessary knowledge and skills to understand the nature of the income and will be able to use the income in the most appropriate and effective way possible. 

When people graduate from school they will not only be educated to appreciate, respect, and support the unique qualities of all people and the diversities that all cultures bring to a society but they themselves will be treated with the same appreciation and respect by their own government and the rest of society. They will be welcomed into their role of the shared sovereignty when they graduate or come of voting age with the resources to live and engage as equals in the governance of their country.

Once people are treated inclusively as equal partners, sovereigns or stewards of the land--not just in word but in deed--they will naturally want to learn through education and modelling the skills, knowledge and behaviours that will allow them to be as effective as possible to create a sustainable future for all. This education aspect of a UI system meets the sustainability requirements of “poverty eradication” and “empowerment” necessary to address the "participatory requirements" of its entire people to be able to have the time and resources to engage in shaping the future that the people of a country would most want to live in. See the submissions to the Johannesburg summit as well as the findings in all of the conventions on the environment and sustainability from the Rio Earth summit back though to the Stockholm convention as it relates to poverty and participation. (see Environment Page).

 The symbiotic relationship of an enhanced education system, where necessary, to reduce its emphasis on training people to “fit” into a system of servile occupations--that won’t be waiting for most when they get out--to that of emphasizing the provision of the knowledge, skills, and responsibilities of free citizenship and the people in their paid role of the shared sovereignty over their society is requisite for a full UI system to be effective. Combined, these two aspects of education and income will provide the necessary social, psychological, economic, skill and empowerment shift required to address the critical sustainability issues facing our society and world.

 

 

What the recent legal developments in human rights laws have to offer to the  evolution of the economic rights movements characterised by Universal Income Systems.

A Synopsis

The recent changes in economic rights laws for common law countries have allowed UI systems to bridge the gap between the long standing debates. That is the debates between the dichotomies of Basic Income models allocating the money for “nothing” versus allocating it for conditional work requirements, such as the “work for the dole type models”. Allocating the money for nothing is an almost impossible sell in a country like NZ that has a deeply entrenched work ethic and a long standing work requirement for even the “unemployment benefit”. Allocating the income for some conditional work requirement--or for unpaid work--is an argument for targeting and defeats the purpose for the universality of the income. However, allocating the income for a wage for a job that we all already legally share in a democratic society, that of it’s sovereigns (see UDHR Preamble for a summary), implies that the money is legally earned, a right—that can’t be taken away, and won’t be stigmatized by being labelled a handout. It also doesn’t fall into the category of compulsory labour since we all already have the job (with or without the money); further as everyone shares the legal responsibility of being the “boss” there is no one that has the authority to tell people how to perform their responsibilities. Everyone shares the equality of status attributed to the highest position possible in a democratic society: the paid sovereigns of a free and democratic society. 

With a Universal Income the concept of “full-employment” will be re-established in NZ or any other country implementing it. Full-employment is a very deep seated part of the heritage of Aotearoa NZ and it is quite easy for the average person to relate to. People will still be able to work normally in their present jobs of choice; they will simply have more money, freedom, skills, knowledge, and resources to act on their best sensibilities.

The minimum wage standard, according to the International Bill of Human Rights, should be to the amount that one person's income is sufficient to provide for a household/family.  The income or wage is for every individual's role or job responsibilities as the acting sovereign of that democratic society (See  Understanding Democratic Sovereignty as a Job  for legal proofs of the people's role and rights to this income).

As of 1993 with the ratification of the Bangalore principles via the Bloemfontein colloquium, NZ along with other ratifying common law countries have a mandate by law to make their statute laws compliant with international human rights conventions.

It is the people who pay the salaries of and are ultimately responsible for the actions of their elected government officials and therefore the governance of their country. In a monarchic system the role of the sovereign, in British colonies such as NZ for example, were held by families of so-called "privilege". The job was a paid position. We are now no longer a colony; but rather, a  democratic sovereign state. (See Understanding Democratic Sovereignty as a Job for more information.)

This same position which is now occupied by the "common" people is no less deserving of similar compensation according to law [1] [2]. The job responsibilities of the sovereignty have not diminished over time; but rather, the scope has vastly grown in depth and breadth. Human rights violations have been found to be at the core of all global sustainability issues; indeed according to The World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993,  

 “... three quarters of the violators of human rights guaranteed in international documents are the State Parties themselves”. 

The NZ government is not exempt from these violations. According to the I.B.H.R. it is the people who have the legal job responsibility to monitor, promote, and secure human rights nationally and internationally.


In order for anyone to perform a job responsibly they must have the necessary resources (money), time and education.  Therefore in accordance with I.C.E.S.C.R. art.13 the universal income must be paired with the upgrading of the education system, where required, to emphasize the people's fore mentioned role, rights, and responsibilities as the boss, citizens, or sovereigns of society's institutions as opposed to just being its servants.  (See Universal Income Systems for a Sustainable Future (2))

  Democracy= "Demos--people + Krates--rulers (sovereigns)"

 

 

Universal Income Systems: 
Basic Parameters 

Universal income systems are income schemes that fulfill the minimum basic requirements inherent in the International Bill of Human Rights.  Some of the “key” requirements are as follows:

  1.           the unconditional “right to life and security of person”.1  2

  2.             the basic right to be free from the fear of poverty. 1  2

                the right to be able to earn enough income to adequately care for one’s family or household  without other members having to enter the labour market to sustain the household. 1

         The minimum wage standard according to international law should be such that one person's income is sufficient enough to provide for a household. This would mean that fewer people would have to be in the work-force and would therefore create more jobs for those who really want and need them.

  3.       the right to equal pay for equal work, and the minimum requirements for the defining of a legal job. 1   2

  4.          the right to be free from forced or compulsory labour programmes.

  5.          the right to self-determination. 1

  6.          the right to experience the equality of status that we all share living in a democratic society. 1

  7.           the right to be compensated in the event of unemployment. 1

  8.      the right to freely participate in the cultural activities of one’s community. 1

  9.      the right to compensation for each person’s responsibilities in a 
       democratic society.
        In a democratic society every person has the job and 
       responsibilities of that nations acting sovereign. 1
        
    (Democracy = Gk. Demos [people]+ kratos [ruler]) whose primary job 
        responsibilities  include: 
    bulletmonitoring and securing human rights for everyone,
    bulletworking in harmony with our natural environment and protecting it for future generations,
    bullet and supporting the expense, education, and well-being of the sovereignty:
    the people. These responsibilities have been traditionally recognised by 
    monarchic societies as responsibilities of the monarch (e.g. see 
    Adam Smith "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" 
    as well as James Fraser's The Golden Bough). In a democracy these 
    responsibilities of the monarch transfer over to the people.   

      

In a monarchic system the monarch receives taxes, in part, for the payment of his/her job as that nation's sovereign. So likewise in a democratic society, taxes are paid, in part, as rent payments to the proprietors of the "public domain": the sovereignty or the people to whom also falls the above job responsibilities.  See Understanding Democratic Sovereignty as a Job.

The concept of "unemployment" in a democratic society, therefore, is a contradiction in terms. How can the acting boss or "Sovereign" [the people] of a society be considered unemployed, i.e. have no job or be in need of meaningful work?

In conjunction with the foregoing rights, which help to form the parameters of a given income system’s legitimacy, the system must also accommodate the mandate to move towards a free education system for all, along with an equal access health system--which by definition would probably also have to be free for everyone (For additional parameters, see the International Bill of Human Rights. Contact the Universal Income Trust for more information.). This Means that UI systems cannot be implemented at the cost of dismantling a society’s social security infra-structure, but rather they are there to enhance and expand it to meet--at the very least--the minimum legal requirements enshrined within the International Bill of Human Rights: the law. 

 

 

 

Understanding Democratic 
"Sovereignty" as a Job

In common law countries (like NZ) that ratified the Bangalore Principles, as well as other countries that have already acknowledged the supremacy of human rights laws, International Human Rights Laws supersede national statute laws.

What are the Legal “Job” Responsibilities of the People in Their Role as Sovereigns of a Democratic Society?

According to international human rights laws, every individual person is under responsibility to secure, monitor and promote human rights to their best ability for everyone. They are to use whatever educational means they have available to promote local, national and international human rights standards. These include the areas of social, economic, cultural and political rights.  We are also under responsibility to protect and care for our natural environment. Without a healthy and dynamic natural environment there can be no human life at all (see Agenda 21 from the Earth Summit).
 

The job description and responsibilities can therefore be found throughout the International Bill of Human Rights and can be summarised by the following quote from the Preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

"NOW, THEREFORE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims This Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction." 

(For further research into the "Job" descriptions of individuals or their roles and responsibilities see also the "Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms" - General Assembly resolution 53/144d.)

How a Global Crisis has Developed as a Result of Human Rights Violations by Governments of Almost All Nations.

The foundation of an international curriculum for Peace and World Order studies has been established in universities around the world to address the impending problems of peace and global sustainability. Human rights violations have been found to be the central core of  the problems.

As a result of these violations, three principle threats to the world’s future have been identified:

a. Poverty (including unemployment and low-paid work)

b. Socio-political violence (Including compulsory or slave labour, and    nuclear war),

c. Environmental degradation

The linking of these problems to Human Rights violations via economic policies has been well established, as verified by a consensus of world expert opinion expressed through International Human Rights laws, as well as other "recognised" international Instruments.

1.  Poverty is both an economic and human rights issue (see the International Bill of Human Rights specifically the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights articles 7-12 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights art. 8.). The following rights are legally binding on all countries that have ratified these documents.

·ICESCR Article7 sets a minimum wage such that one person's income should be sufficient to raise a family..

·ICESCR Article 5 does not allow any state, group, or person, to engage in any activity that would be aimed at the destruction or limitation of these rights.

·ICCPR Article 8 guarantees freedom from slavery and compulsory labour  (servitude).

      · ICESCR Article. 11 and ICCPR (preamble) guarantees the right to be free from the fear of poverty regardless of whether one is “employed”.

2.  Socio-political violence as it relates to economics, power, and poverty was one of the principle motivations for the establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (see U.D.H.R. Preamble).

The European Social Charter states: 

"Civil and political rights and socio-economic rights must not constitute two distinct groups, for it must not be forgotten that it was their antagonism which gave rise to violently opposing doctrines. All these rights are equal and indivisible. It is impossible to choose between them. If a single right is abolished, the others are suppressed at the same time. Democracy cannot be based on half measures."

3.  The relationship of environmental degradation to poverty and economics, hence human rights, was reaffirmed in Agenda 21 from the "Earth Summit" which was attended by government officials and experts from 178 different countries. They produced the document the RIO DECLARATION ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT. In article 5 it says

"All States and all people shall cooperate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world."

At present an overwhelmingly high percentage of governments are pursuing economic policies promoting so-called competitive “job market” models within the context of a “deregulated economy“. The very basis of this relies on the “fear of want” or poverty. Those models are illegal. One of the many advantages of a universal income system is that it places a legally acceptable baseline ensuring that people will not have to experience the fear of poverty. Hence, in a free market economy with a universal income, competition for jobs would not be based on the fear of poverty, but rather, on working conditions, salaries, and the overall contributions that service or job has for society as a whole.

How the Implementation of a Universal Income is an Essential Requirement Empowering People to be Able to work through Our Present Global Crisis Effectively.

For people to perform their job responsibilities effectively they need the required time, resources, skills and knowledge.  The strategy  presently employed to address this global crisis has been for governments to claim the resources and responsibilities as exclusively theirs and “under control”. They will assess, action and resolve the issues as they see fit according to the parameters they set up for themselves. They will determine the required levels of public involvement. Unfortunately, according to the findings recorded by The World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993,   

“... three quarters of the violators of human rights guaranteed in international documents are the State Parties themselves”. 

Hence, it is the operational processes of governments that is the primary cause of  our present global crisis. The ultimate responsibility, then,  for the actions of governments and their officials rests with those who hire and fire them, pay their salaries, and experience the consequences of their actions:  the people or the “Sovereignty”.  

According to the I.C.E.S.C.R article 7, everyone has the right to a minimum wage for any job that they have such that one person’s income is sufficient to raise a household. Since it is the people’s job to supervise their governmental representatives or employees, they must according to law, have at the minimum a minimum wage in order to carry out their responsibilities effectively. Everyone in a democratic society has the job of that nations sovereign. In a monarchy, the monarch had the right to get paid for his/her job. In a democracy, the job of the monarch rightfully falls on the people (Democracy = Demos + kratos = people + rulers or sovereigns ). The people’s legal responsibilities are defined in the cited human rights documents. Therefore, universal income systems, must at the least, be inclusive of a legally required minimum wage standard paid to every individual of  voting age, unconditionally, for that given democratic country.  This accommodates the people's necessity for time and resources to perform their job. It  must also be paired with the move to revamping, where required, the education system such that  it complies with human rights standards (I.C.E.S.C.R  article13). For example, this would mean educating people about their  roles and responsibilities as that nations acting sovereign and how a democratic society actually works as opposed to an emphasis on “servitude“ and employment.  It would also emphasize issues like the need for a democratic society to have free education, and an equal access or free health care system.  This is the aspect of a “universal income system” that ensures that people will have the requisite skills and knowledge to perform their job well.

The job responsibilities of a citizen are staggering. As a society we are presently failing to meet the minimal acceptable standards for sustainability. We cannot afford to hesitate to meet the challenge of this global crisis. A Universal Income is an essential requirement for the people of all democratic nations to be able to work successfully through these impending threats to the future of life on our planet.

It is time to do away with concepts such as “unemployment” and reinstate everyone into their rightful heritage: The paid sovereigns of a free and democratic society.

For more historical and background information on democratic sovereignty  and Universal Income Systems see Background Page  

 

 

Human Rights
Supersede Statute Laws

(Researched and Prepared by Patrick Danahey M.Ed. on behalf of C.E.R.E.S. for UIT NZ.)  

[Note, the example written for this article though written during the "Work for the Dole" era 1998 to 2001 is still relevant in that there are several political parties promoting this illegal programme as part of their platforms for 2004. The "Jobs Jolt" programme of 2003, though it hasn't modified the Social Security act at the time of writing, is in practice a compulsory labour scheme. It threatens the withdrawing of benefits, and forced relocation for non-compliance and unsatisfactory work achievements respectively. See poverty page for more information.]

This article provides legal proofs of individual rights  (as specified under international conventions) taking precedence over statute laws of countries that have ratified the International Bill of Human Rights. This includes, as of 1993, common law countries such as Aotearoa NZ. Many government agencies as well as the judiciary are still unaware of these recent law changes (E.g. See the 1998 law changes to the Social Security Act in NZ which have sanctioned the implementation of compulsory labour programmes and the 2003 "Jobs Jolt" remote area policies).  It is up to individuals and groups to see to it that we educate our lawyers and government agencies about these changes.

NZ Statute Laws do not supersede basic universally recognised rights even in emergency situations (“Work for the dole” was initiated under “urgency through all stages”. For additional information on the process read, Alliance Report by MP, Rod Donald.). According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Report, Fact Sheet No. 2, (Rev.1), the International Bill of Human Rights, pages 6-7, “Certain rights, therefore, may never be suspended or limited, even in emergency situations. These [include] the rights to life …[and] freedom from enslavement or servitude….”  The Auckland District Law Society’s report Human Rights Law from Domestic and International Sources, Section 5.37, states that under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention of Treaties, “…the national law of the State may not be relied on as a justification for failure to perform its obligations under an international treaty.” 

Under the Bangalore Principles, principles no. 7-9, “It is within the proper nature of the judicial process and well-established judicial functions for national courts to have regard to international obligations which a country undertakes whether or not they have been incorporated into domestic law… However, where national law is clear and inconsistent with the international obligations of the State concerned, in ‘common law’ countries the national court is obliged to give effect to national law.  In such cases the court should draw such inconsistencies to the attention of the appropriate authorities since the supremacy of national law in no way mitigates a breach of an international legal obligation, which is undertaken, by a country. …It is essential to redress a situation where, by reason of traditional dimension, judges and practicing lawyers are often unaware of the remarkable and comprehensive developments of statements of international human rights norms.”  

The Bangalore Principles have been reaffirmed by the 1993 High Level Judicial Colloquium in Bloemfontein, South Africa. New Zealand was represented by Rt Hon Sir Robin Cooke, KBE, President of the Court of Appeal.  Further, in the Bloemfontein statement, it was stated, “that it is during the times of public emergency that fundamental rights are most at risk and when courts must be vigilant in their protection…. In democratic societies fundamental human rights are more than just paper aspirations. They form part of the law. In a society ruled by law… all branches of government—the legislature and the executive, as well as the judiciary itself… must act in accordance with the law”.

The World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993, acknowledged that "three quarters of the violators of human rights guaranteed in international documents are the State Parties themselves".  The NZ government has implemented a compulsory labour regime as a solution to an economic/unemployment crisis that has been created by it's own policies. (Prior to the implementation of a heavily privatised and deregulated national economy, NZ enjoyed a state of full-employment with one the best social welfare systems in the world.)  In the process it has greatly undermined fundamental human rights and international laws in its adoption of this programme through the recent systematic modifications of the Social Security Act 1964 culminating in the Proposal of Bill No.5.

In 1978 the Prime Minister of NZ, in his speech to ratify the two Human Rights Covenants said,

  “We have regarded the two international covenants as legal documents of substantial value and importance…” “human rights has had a central place in our traditions… We have now completed a comprehensive review of our legislation and are satisfied that our laws are in compliance with the requirements of the two international covenants.”

The NZ Bill of Rights as well as the NZ Human Rights Act of 1993, both refer to these covenants in their introduction as the basis of their existence. 

The New Zealand Courts have also upheld international human rights laws.

1.       Ankers v Attorney-General. [1995] NZFLR 193

2.       Elika v Minister of Immigration [1996]1 NZLR 741

3.       Simpson v Attornery-General (Baigent’s Case) [1994] 3 NZLR 677

4.       Noort [1992] 3 NZLR 260 “In approaching the Bill of Rights Act it must be of cardinal importance to bear in mind the antecedents.  The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights speaks of inalienable rights derived from the inherent dignity of the human person.  Internationally there is now general recognition that some human rights are fundamental and anterior to any municipal law…”(see Mabo v Queensland (1988) 166 CLR 186, 217-218) Source:  Human Rights Law From Domestic and International Sources, Auckland District Law Society, F Joychild and M Roche, 13 February 1997.

At present the NZ Human Rights Act, due to government exemptions, does not adequately cover the unemployed against government violations. People must therefore rely on their international rights.

For additional information on the social, economic, and political abuses as well as the legal violations of NZ's "Work for the Dole" schemes see the following:

Submissions by the NZ Trade Union Federation on work for the dole

Submissions by UUI Action NZ

 

 

Principle of Horizontal
and Vertical Equity

For an economic system to comply with international human rights standards it must meet both principles of horizontal and vertical equity.

Simply put, horizontal equity, in terms of a universal income system, is the equal cash payment that everyone receives for his/her shared job as that nations acting sovereign; the vertical equity is the funding of a society's social welfare system such that it can accommodate the differing individual and groups needs that exists amongst the people of that society (e.g. health care/ accident insurance, child care benefits, education benefits, housing subsidies, and so forth.). Universal income systems do not advocate that all of a society's social welfare system should be paid out with one single untargeted income to each individual. Every individual does not need private funds for a personal kidney dialysis machine, this would be completely impractical and wasteful of resources. A society only needs to provide the funds that assures that one is available for whoever needs it, whenever they need it, without discriminative practices.

 

 

Some precedents for a 
Universal Income in Aoteaoa NZ

Aotearoa NZ has in the past been a leading country on this planet in the areas of social justice and sustainability.

bullet

It was the first modern western country to recognise women's right to vote.

bullet

The Maori Women's Welfare League played an instrumental role in expanding the breadth of international cultural rights to recognise the dynamics of group rights.

bullet

It was an original founder of the United Nations.

bullet

Aotearoa NZ was a recognised egalitarian country that had approximately 50 years of full employment with well-paid jobs between 1939 and the beginning of the 1980's.

bullet

During those years it had a minimum wage which level was such that one person's income was sufficient to provide for a household.

bullet

It was one of the recognised leading countries in the world as it relates to social justice and social progress--especially during the years between 1939 to the beginning of the 1980's. See the Weighted Index for Social Progress WISP studies, and early United Nations Human Development Reports. The years after the selling of the assets, from 1990 to present 2003, New Zealand's rank dropped from an average of the 9th highest in the world to that of the 20th. It didn't even turn in its required reports to the U.N.'s ECOSOC committee during the latter half of the 1990's in order to answer the admonishments of its policies about how the poor and children's rights were being violated here.

bullet

It provided government built low-rent housing and cheap loan financing for those who wished to buy their house (3).

bullet

It had an equal access health system and free tertiary education (4). 

bullet

It had an unemployment benefit sufficient for people to participate in their society and live with some sense of dignity.

bullet

New Zealand use to have a universal child benefit.

bullet

It use to have an unconditional 50+ income for those 50 years and older.

bullet

It still has a superannuation scheme.

bullet

Wealthy people in NZ--as well as in most other countries--already have a progressively unequal universal income. Those who have the highest incomes have a progressively higher benefit. See Economics Page who really pays?

bullet

Between the ends of the 1980's until the beginning of the 1990's NZ had an undeclared unconditional unemployment benefit throughout most of the country. Unemployment was no worse then--in real terms--than it was with all of the compulsory labour requirements since.

bullet

Kiwis have, rightfully, always had an aversion to the oppressive values of servitude. They considered it an insult to offer a "tip" for their work. New Zealand service type workers have always in the past had a reputation for pragmatic friendly service without being superficially "sweet". This is unlike many other countries around the world where service workers are required to play the ever smiling-prancing-dancing-hyper monkey routine.

bullet

In spite of its tumultuous internal history of struggling to work though the barriers of cultural differences--with all its failings and successes--those successes have far outstripped the successes of most other countries struggling with those same issues. 

The fundamental values of inclusion, providing a "children friendly" society, respect and appreciation for the differences of others, desire to live in a society that respects the basic dignity of all people, and to be able to live in harmony with the natural environment were all defining characteristics making the above achievements possible. It still had a long way to go in helping to extend those values to all people but its achievements were remarkable.

 

 

Appendix: Key Human Rights Laws supporting UI systems

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 

[NZ Ratified June 3rd 1983 in Force June3 1984]

Article1 (Discrimination)

bullet

" For the purposes of this convention the term "discrimination" includes:

  1. any distinction, exclusion or preference made on the basis of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion,, national extraction or social origin, which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation.

 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 


[NZ Ratified 28  Dec. 1978 put into force 1993 with the reaffirmation of the Bangalore Principles via the 1993 High Level Judicial Colloquium in Bloemfontein, South Africa. 
New Zealand was represented by Rt. Hon Sir Robin Cooke KBE, President 
of the Court of Appeal.]

Preamble (Freedom from the fear of poverty)

bullet

Recognising that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights,

Article 1 (Self Determination)

bullet1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

Article 2 (Governments must have in place effective procedures for the enforcement of Discrimination laws, esp. when it is the government that is violating the law.)

bullet

Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognised in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

bullet

Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take the necessary steps, in accordance with its constitutional processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt such laws or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognised in the present Covenant.

bullet

Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:

  1. To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognised are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;

  1. To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy;

  1. To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.

Article 4 (No Discrimination Even in an Emergency)

bullet

1. In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.

bullet

2. No derogation from articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs 1 and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 may be made under this provision.

bullet

3. Any State Party to the present Covenant availing itself of the right of derogation shall immediately inform the other States Parties to the present Covenant, through the intermediary of the Secretary General of the United Nations, of the provisions from which it has derogated and of the reasons by which it was actuated. A further communication shall be made, through the same intermediary, on the date on which it terminates such derogation.

Article 5 (Illegal to destroy, limit-- such as minimizing interpretation, or ignore any of these rights)

bullet1. Nothing in the present Covenant maybe interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognised herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.

 Article 6 (Right to life)

bullet

1. Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.

Article 8 (compulsory labour and "wage slavery" -- servitude--are illegal)

bullet

No one shall be held in slavery; slavery and the slave-trade in all their forms
shall be prohibited.

bullet

No one shall be held in servitude.

bullet

No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour"

Article 12 (Right to free choice of movement and residence)

bullet

Everyone lawfully within the territory of the state shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his/her residence.

bullet

Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

bullet

The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognised in the present Covenant.

bullet

No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.

Article 17 (Protection of honour, reputation, and unlawful interference with one's home and family)

bullet

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his 
privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.

bullet

2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference
or attacks.

Article 18 (freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief of one's choice)

bullet

Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. 
This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his 
choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in 
public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, 
practice and teaching.

bullet

No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or 
to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

bullet

Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such 
limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the 
liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.

Article 25 ( All people have the freedom, without any discrimination of status, and right to participate directly in the management of public affairs)

Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:
bullet

(a) To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives;

bullet

(b) To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors;

bullet

(c) To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his
[her] country.

Article 26 (Law must protect all people equally against any form of  discrimination)

bullet

All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Article 27 (Protection of ethnic and cultural groups rights to their own religion, customs, association and language)

bullet

In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language.

 

International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights


[NZ ratified 28 Dec.1978, put into force 1993 with the reaffirmation of the Bangalore Principles 
via the 1993 High Level Judicial Colloquium in Bloemfontein, South Africa. 
New Zealand was represented by Rt. Hon Sir Robin Cooke XBE, President 
of the Court of Appeal.]

Preamble (Freedom from the fear of poverty and the use of other fear tactics to control and suppress people is fundamental to establishing freedom, justice, and world peace)

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant,

bullet

Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of 
the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

bullet

Recognising that these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human 
person,

bullet

Recognising that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
the ideal of free human beings enjoying freedom from fear and want can only 
be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his 
economic, social and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights,

bullet

Considering the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms,

bullet

Realising that the individual, having duties to other individuals and to the 
community to which he belongs, is under a responsibility to strive for the 
promotion and observance of the rights recognised in the present Covenant,

bullet

Agree upon the following articles:

Article 2 (Each country agrees to take steps especially economically and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, to achieving the full realisation of these rights without discrimination)

bullet

Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take steps, individually
and through international assistance and cooperation, especially economic and technical, to the maximum of its available resources, with a view to achieving progressively the full realisation of the rights recognised in the present 
Covenant by all appropriate means, including particularly the adoption of 
legislative measures.

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the 
rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without 
discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or
other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Article 5 (Illegal to undermine or destroy these rights)

bullet

Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights or freedoms recognised herein, or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.

Article 6 (Right to free choice of employment)

bullet

1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his/her living by work which he/she freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right.

Article 7 (Right to equal pay for equal work without any distinction
of any kind as well as a minimum wage set at a level such that one person's income is sufficient to raise a family/household.)

bullet

"ensure[s] in particular: Remuneration, which provides all workers, as a minimum, with:  

  1. Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction of any kind…  

  2. A decent living for themselves and their families in accordance with the provisions of the present Covenant;"

  3. Safe and healthy working conditions;

  4. Equal opportunity for everyone to be promoted in his employment to an appropriate higher level, subject to no considerations other than those of seniority and competence;

  5. Rest, leisure and reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay, as well as remuneration for public holidays.

Article 9 (Right to social security and social insurance)

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance.

Article 11 (Right of everyone--it cannot be taken away "unconditional", without distinction of any kind--"universal", to an adequate standard of living for him/herself and his\her family--"income")

bullet

"The State Parties to the present covenant recognises the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself [herself] and his [her] family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The State Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realisation of this right, recognising to this effect the essential importance of international co-operation based on free consent."

Article 12 (Right to health services See also UDHR Art 25

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

bullet

2. The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achievethe full realization of this right shall include those necessary for: 
bullet

(a) The provision for the reduction of the stillbirth-rate and of infant mortality and for the healthy development of the child; 

bullet

(b) The improvement of all aspects of environmental and industrial hygiene; 

bullet

(c) The prevention, treatment and control of epidemic, endemic, occupational and other diseases; 

bullet

(d) The creation of conditions which would assure to all medical service and medical attention in the event of sickness.

Article 13 (Education: Legal mandate for governments to move to free education at all levels. Emphasis on human rights and "effective participation" or governance by the people of their "free"/democratic society.)

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of everyone to education. They agree that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise that, with a view to achieving the full realisation of this right:

  1. Primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all;

  2. Secondary education in its different forms, including technical and vocational secondary education, shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;

  3. Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;  

Article 15 (Cultural participation rights)

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognise the right of everyone:

  1. To take part in cultural life;  

  1. To enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications;

  2. To benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.  

bullet

The steps to be taken by the States Parties to the present Covenant to achieve the full realisation of this right shall include those necessary for the conservation, the development and the diffusion of science and culture.

bullet

The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.

bulletThe States Parties to the present Covenant recognise the benefits to be derived from the encouragement and development of international contacts and co-operation in the scientific and cultural fields.

 

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Preamble (violations of human rights including economic rights are recognised internationally as being a core cause of all wars, tyrannical injustices, poverty and threats to the stability of  peaceful co-existing societies. Ultimately it is the people's responsibility according to law to see to it that there governments are acting in accordance with human rights laws)

bullet

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

bullet

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

bullet

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law, Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations, Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

bullet

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

bullet

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realisation of this pledge,

bulletNow, therefore, The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 3 (Unconditional right to life, liberty and security of person for everyone)

bulletEveryone has the right to life, liberty and security of person

Article 13 (Right to freedom of movement and residence anywhere within a given state)

bulletEveryone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State. Everyone has the right to leave

Article 25 (Right to an adequate standard of living: unemployment)  

bulletEveryone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.  

 

ANNEX

Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

Article 7 (Right to develop new human rights principles)

bullet

Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to develop and discuss new human rights ideas and principles and to advocate their acceptance.

Article 8 (Right to non-discriminatory access to participate in the governance of society)

bullet

1. Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to have effective access, on a non-discriminatory basis, to participation in the government of his or her country and in the conduct of public affairs.

bullet

2. This includes, inter alia, the right, individually and in association with others, to submit to governmental bodies and agencies and organizations concerned with public affairs criticism and proposals for improving their functioning and to draw attention to any aspect of their work that may hinder or impede the promotion, protection and realization of  humanrights and fundamental freedoms.

 

Convention on the Rights of the Child  1989 

[NZ Ratified 6 April, 1993; in force 6 May 1993 with Reservation. Note the NZ Government has received official censuring for its human rights abuses against children]

Article 1 (Legal age of Child)

bullet

For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being
below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.

(At the time of writing the NZ government is forcing low-income sole parents as well as both parents of low-income families of children thirteen and over into the “job market” while their children are compelled to be brought up by other care givers.)

Article 5 (Governments have a legal mandate to allow and support parents, principle care givers, and extended families as based on the cultural values of a given ethnic/ cultural group to act accordingly as the principle caregivers for their children. Governments should not stand in the way or hinder them, economically or otherwise, from this right and responsibility) 

bullet

States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as 
provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally 
responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the
child of the rights recognized in the present Convention
.

Article 9 (Governments shall not separate children from their parents or primary care givers e.g. governments do not have a right to compel low income parents to send their children to childcare centres while they take on under paid jobs against their choosing at the expense of tending to their child's welfare.)

bullet

1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination 
may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of
the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.

Article 14 (Freed to teach or impart thought, conscience, religion and/or belief to one's child)

bullet

1. States Parties shall respect the right of the child to freedom of thought, 
conscience and religion.

bullet

2. States Parties shall respect the rights and duties of the parents and, when applicable, legal guardians, to provide direction to the child in the exercise of 
his or her right in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child.

bullet

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others

(Parents have the right to teach their, values, beliefs, and religions to their child as opposed to the state or a day-care centre via state compulsion imposing theirs.)

Article 16 (Child has a right to protection from unlawful interference, with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, and his or her honour and reputation.)

bullet

1. No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or 
her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or 
her honour and reputation.

bullet

2. The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference
or attacks.

(Compelling both parents of low income families away from their children, publicly implying that they are non-working, non-contributors to a healthy society, abusers of taxpayers money  and are subsequently the principle causes of human rights violations to workers and the children of NZ society because of their "irresponsible" abuse of everyone else's "hard earned income" is illegal.   This all happened in NZ with the commercialisation of the 1998 nation-wide survey entitled "The Code of Social and Family Responsibility" followed by the implementation of the "work for the Dole" scheme. Not once in the document did it mention that low-income earners are tax-payers, as well as workers i.e. their income is legally earned, and in addition to this work, they are also major contributors to the volunteer sector of society. Almost all of the solutions offered for the misrepresented problems, to which the government's own policies can be identified as the actual source, involved separating low-income parents from their children, limiting their rights, resources, and income. In the final analysis it is the children of the poor who are and were hurt the most by these unprovoked acts of violence. These parents who have the legal right and responsibility to raise their own children are now having to go to soup kitchens, and food banks after work to feed their children. They are being held responsible for their children's conduct and educational performance, yet they are being deprived of being able to stay home and raise their child as well as provide the resources that are necessary to facilitate and reinforce their child's health and learning. They have been victimised by policies that have reduced the availability of real jobs complying with human rights standards, reduced income, reduced opportunities and resources with a disproportionate increase in expense for the funding of societies social structures via "user pay schemes" and so forth. 

The "Head Start" studies which have provided some of the most extensive longitudinal studies performed on children in pre-schools, have shown that children are far better--across the board--at home with the stability of a healthy family than they are unattended by their parents at an average preschool. These are major ongoing human rights violations aimed against low-income parents and their children as well as all other low-income people in NZ. It is also designed to keep workers "in line" via the "fear of poverty". It is difficult to imagine how the children of low-income families feel and felt like when everywhere from television, radio, newspapers, school, and into every household of NZ, these documents, issued by the government, concerning the so-called  "irresponsibility of their parents simply because they have low incomes" was being discussed. They had to cope with their parents being accused of being singularly responsible for all the principle human rights violations against children, and the mismanaging of the nations resources. The nation wide discussions of how to make low-income people be more responsible parents was based completely on  misrepresented information. The abuse, violations, and damage these children and their families are and have been experiencing as a result from our government's ignorance is staggering.) 

Article 18 (Parents and legal guardians have principle rights and responsibilities to raising their children, therefore it is the states responsibility to assist them financially and with resources to meet these ends.)

bullet

1. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the 
principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing 
and development of the child. Parents or, as the case maybe, legal guardians, 
have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the 
child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern.

bullet

2. For the purpose of guaranteeing and promoting the rights set forth in the 
present Convention, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to 
parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child-rearing 
responsibilities and shall ensure the development of institutions, facilities and services for the care of children.

bullet

3. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that children of working parents have the right to benefit from child-care services and facilities for which they are eligible.

(This article ensures that it is the parent’s responsibility and right to raise their child, that they should receive assistance to that end. If parents decide to both work in paid employment it is their freely chosen decision, not something imposed on them and they too can receive assistance.)

Article 27 (governments have the responsibility to assist low-income families not separate them)

bullet

1. States Parties recognize the right of every child to a standard of living 
adequate for the child's physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social 
development.

bullet

2. The parent(s) or others responsible for the child have the primary 
responsibility to secure, within their abilities and financial capacities, the 
conditions of living necessary for the child's development.

bullet

3. States Parties, in accordance with national conditions and within their means,
shall take appropriate measures to assist parents and others responsible for 
the child to implement this right and shall in case of need provide material 
assistance and support programmes, particularly with regard to nutrition, 
clothing and housing.

Article 30 (Freedom of cultural and religious development.)

bullet

In those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities or persons of indigenous origin exist, a child belonging to such a minority or who is 
indigenous shall not be denied the right, in community with other members of 
his or her group, to enjoy his or her own culture, to profess and practice his or
her own religion, or to use his or her own language.

 

Foot Notes

  1. The International Bill of Human Rights consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its two Optional Protocols.

  2. Universal Income Systems for a Sustainable Future by Patrick Danahey 2003 
  3. Note, "free" traditionally means after everyone pays their taxes, as an equal percentage of their income or resources, that they are able to freely participate in the use of the government service or resource. See economics page "Who really Pays?". Free has never meant a handout. The only real handouts given are to the rich in the form of lowering the tax levels such that they do not have to pay their percentage or share of public expenditures by passing their costs on to the rest of society in the form of exercising their influence to force society to adopt schemes such as fixed rates including GST type systems and userpay type schemes. This is the backbone of the corporatisation/privatisation model being forced onto democratic states. See Roger Kerr's Corporatisation and Privatisation of Water Supply from the AIC CONFERENCES 6TH ANNUAL NZ WATER SUMMIT 26 February 1998. The underlying objective of turning public resources into private resources via  privately owned corporations compelling governments to adopt userpay rates on public resources paid to private corporations is spelled out very clearly.