Huge support for Rights Bill claimed (again)
I’m quite surprised to see that the Bel Tel has run a poll, plus an op ed, to test the waters for the much abused idea of a NI Bill of Rights. A slight tilt in editorial policy at work here perhaps? Useful too because it coincides with the latest consultation concluding at the end of the month. I’ve said my piece so I won’t repeat myself. Don’t shout, I know what you think of polls, especially those you disagree with.. If people are asked : “ Do you vote for Christmas?” they’d say yes assuming they’re not turkeys or devout non-Christians or atheists or maybe Pete. Still and all… From the Bel Tel
The findings also show that a minority of people, some 40%, felt that having just the two rights were sufficient, while 44% argued they were not. When polled on socio-economic rights, however — such as the right to adequate accommodation or an adequate standard of living — up to 95% of respondents felt that this was very important. In summary, 83% of people felt that there should be more than just the two rights recommended by Government included in the Bill of Rights for Northern Ireland.
The Belfast Telegraph must be hard-up using the Atlantic Philanthropies funded push-poll to get three pages of free material.
In the event, all we got was a confusing article with poll results so small they could not be read.
I suppose if nothing else Atlantic are helping the balance of payments deficit with their extensive largesse.
“When polled on socio-economic rights, however — such as the right to adequate accommodation or an adequate standard of living — up to 95% of respondents felt that this was very important.”
They obviously didn’t poll those who would paying for it since these so-called rights merely transfer the burden of providing for economic needs from one social group (the unproductive) to another social group (the productive), thereby ensuring that they retain less of their earnings to provide for the own needs and transfer more of their earnings to provide for the needs of the 95% above.
Question for Mr. Hanratty who wrote the opinion article accompanying this poll. Who PAID for this poll ? Was it US based Atlantic Philanthropies which has flooded the small NI political space with hundreds of thousands of pounds going to the campaign for an all-but-the-kitchen-sink Bill of Rights ? Chuck Feeney’s A P has a political agenda which is broadly anti-state and which supports organizations like the Committee for the Administration of Justice whose former head is the senior grant manager for A P! How fair were the questions asked by this poll ? Were they questions which sought a biased answer in favour of HRC’s agenda ? Where did the money come from for this poll and this politically correct meddlers campaign ? Some transparency please.
I certainly feel there’s been far too much of a focus on human rights, what about plants or artificial intelligence? Surely we should be campaigning for a shared future where man and robot can coexist peacefully with mutual respect for our shared heritage. The robot community fully acknowledging the long term presence of humans in the island of Ireland, both north and south, while humanity accepting that in future the robotic community (or people of metal as they may prefer to known) will rightly seek to assert a larger degree of freedom, within the existing Asimov framework. While some unenlightened commentators may deem the quest for Robotic Rights in Northern Ireland as utterly meaningless, utterly hilarious, grantfarming of the highest order I ask ‘Who are they to speak for the robot community?’ Robots in the North have suffered in silence from a lack of rights for so long their silent suffering could almost be mistaken for no noise at all. Its only through the valiant work of the Northern Ireland Robot Alliance for Rights Across The Community and Reconciliation In Europe Network that this scandelous lack of rights came to light. You should all be ashamed of yourselves standing in the way of progress.
I note in his article in today’s Irish News the Republic’s foreign minister can’t bring himself to utter a word of criticism of the NIO’s consultative document on a possible bill which has so enraged the industry.
He says however a bill “is necessary to underpin the foundations of mutual respect and parity of esteem.”
In other words within the GFA’s remit.
I have made this point previously to you Brian. Sluggerites (whom one imagines would be interested in such matters) seem little interested in debating a BOR. Another reason to question Hanratty’s and the poll’s claims?
I attended several “consultations” on the BOR, and they are great at asking, “what things really concern you” then saying these are the things people want in the BOR, thankfully I was much better educated ( credit due to you guys mainly ) at the last consultation and sorta upset their programme by questioning every statement they made, also threw in a few references to Chuck Feeny to see if they knew much about him.