Austerity is a myth.

Ha-Joon Chang is the one worth listening to. I know that he and some other economists are trying to educate 'ordinary people' about economics, because there are so many myths. He's done some great videos on YouTube, if you haven't already seen them.

I'll search them out, thanks for the tip!

I really cannot take headlines like this Government austerity policy a breach of international human rights, says UN report seriously when the United Nations is failing so miserably in so many areas, notably the refugee crisis, Syria, Iraq, Chad, you name it etc etc etc
how much did that report cost to produce

Have to agree Parliament100. I do not think history will laud Thatcher in the way that she was when she was in power. The carapace is already cracking and the vote out of Europe may be seen to be more about a vote against Thatcherism, neo-capitalism and ideological austerity when time has passed and we can look back and view it dispassionately.

@Jalima

The UN is divided into all sorts of sub-divisions. Just because it's not doing well in some areas doesn't invalidate the report.

The point is that the UK is signed up to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), but is failing to deliver on some if the conditions (as, I suspect, some other countries are).

The UK doesn't have to be signed up - the US isn't. However, if the UK wants to be seen to be upholding human rights, it should be doing so in reality - and isn't.

PS. Am looking for the actual report.

if=of

Found the report...

daccess-ods.un.org/TMP/1517004.96673584.html

The recommendations are:

• ensure that the potential repeal of the Human Rights Act does not lower human rights protections, and that any new Bill of Rights enhances the status of economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR);
• only take measures in the context of economic and financial crisis that are temporary, necessary, proportionate, non-discriminatory and that and such measures do not undercut the core minimum content of any ESCR;
• conduct a comprehensive assessment of the cumulative impact of these measures on the enjoyment of ESCR;
• review the impact of reforms to the legal aid system to ensure access to justice in particular for disadvantaged and marginalised individuals and groups including employment tribunal fees;
• bring into force section 1 of the Equality Act 2010 which sets out the duty of certain public authorities to have due regard to the desirability of reducing socio-economic disadvantage when taking strategic decisions about how to exercise their functions;
• address root causes for groups disproportionately affected by unemployment, and reduce the use of temporary employment, precarious self-employment and zero-hours contracts
• reconsider reductions in protections brought about through the Welfare Reform Act 2012 and the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016 and restore the link between the rates of state benefits and the cost of living; and
• ensure the effective implementation of the duties under the Health and Social Care Act 2012 to reduce inequalities in access to healthcare and allocate sufficient resources to the mental health sector.

I don't disagree with any of those recommendations. It's not a bad thing that a third party is used to monitor human rights without party political spin.

I've only just got to this thread, a pity, because I very much agree with Parliament100.
I want to comment on the suspension of the Brighton Labour party over Corbyn supporters being elected. Before this election, the Brighton LP was so far to the right it was embarrassing. When the Greens held the Council, despite the fact that Green policies are much nearer Labour than Tory, the Labour group got into bed with the Tories to try to keep anyone else out of their cosy 2-party arrangement. It doesn't surprise me that there has been a backlash, given the popularity of Jeremy in the country as a whole.