Commonwealth Summit Meeting April 2018

Lord Hylton

I warmly welcome the emphasis for the meeting on a Rules-Based World. This is particularly needed at a time when Presidents Trump and Putin behave erratically and sometimes illegally.

The commitment to human rights is very necessary. Nevertheless, much remains to be done, especially as regards organized crime, human trafficking, money laundering, cyber-crime and political violence. These points were underlined by the House of Lords Select Committee on International Relations (HL Paper 74), and the debate of 22 March 2018.

I urge the Heads of Government and the Commonwealth Peoples Forum to secure effective joint action on these issues – also on environmental needs such as the growing pollution of the oceans and de-carbonizing of the atmosphere.

Much detailed work is required on personal issues, for example, abolishing capital punishment, ending discrimination and persecution of religious and ethnic groups, or limiting forced marriages and female genital mutilation.

Personal freedom and democracy go hand in hand, but individual and collective liberty require constant vigilance. Better protection is needed for journalists and lawyers who defend human rights, of which the most important is the right to life.

3 comments for “Commonwealth Summit Meeting April 2018

  1. 27/03/2018 at 7:51 pm

    Why do we still avoid establishing a “Needs-Priorities Based World” ?

    What’s the point of putting a “Rights”-based and/or “Rules-Based”
    before we have Balancedly-&-Balancingly detailed the Essential-Needs-Based Real World we still both have. and need to be forwardly-sustaining –
    qua “sustainworthying” ?

    Rights need to be granted to legally permit and “best efficiently-possible” meet Needs
    [not profiteer from Delusions, Fantasies, Greeds, and Covetings]

    After all, ‘Rights’ have never yet been rightly, fairly and sustainworthily drawn-up and distributed;
    they are still being, even increasingly so, corruptly decided
    and wastefully-enforced.

    And “Rights” should only be granted for the legal-&-sustainworthy satisfaction of Basic and Essential Needs –
    in the most ecolonomicly-efficient way possible.
    The vitally essential and Positivisingly Peaceful Revolution that our Humankind World Civilisation most importantly and urgently needs is the one that makes our personal-human-bodies and our various kinds of Peoples, sustainworthy –
    which essentially involves getting every individual human-being
    numericly and “shopping-listingly”
    [rising already to 8 (eight) billion fully-individual persons -]
    onto a new constitutional foundation of
    “one human-being needs just one-human-living”.

    How will The Commonwealth tackle that essential –
    Key-Core-Factor ?

    Or has it already decided the Matter is “none-of-our-business” ?

  2. maude elwes
    11/04/2018 at 2:19 pm

    Here is food for thought on the issue of world poverty and what we, the people of tiny islanders known as UK dwellers, should be doing to relieve this dilemma.

  3. maude elwes
    30/04/2018 at 2:47 pm

    In order to pick up on the last line of the opening thread, ‘touching on Commonwealth and personal matters.’

    The Windrush scandal for example. My family was discussing this over the weekend and my elder relatives found it very bizarre reading some of the details in the papers and hearing on the TV news. First of all, it wasn’t generally known by the public in those days that the Home Office, or, PR people of the day, here in our own government were advertising in Commonwealth countries, particularly the ‘West Indies,’ for people to come and work here. Especially as friends, who, at the time, applied for jobs on the buses, etc. were turned down for no apparent reason at all. Each one applying was well versed in the English language, able to read, write and do maths and look clean, tidy, well washed and generally acceptable as citizens. It was irksome and humiliating to them. Couldn’t even get a job on the buses, was one remark. Any compensation coming for their distress and victimisation?

    The conversation went on again to the older set remembering, in their particular borough, the people who came from those Commonwealth countries in the fifties and sixties, finding they were unable to get work. They said then it was racial discrimination or because they were brown, work was unavailable to them. As, they claimed, was housing in the rental market. So, huge groups of these Windrush immigrants lined up at the then called National Assistance Board offices to collect their dole money, given as cash in an envelope every week. The majority, especially males, on the dole until the day they died. Amber Rudd should have looked up the files in Hackney which would have told all, just to see how productive they all were. In fact one of the reminiscers remembers his friend, dead now, from Jamaica, deliberately untruthful about his previous employment ‘back home’ as a way to continue to receive weekly money. When he was asked what experience he had, it was, ‘climbing coconut tree.’ The other one, frequently used was ‘shepherd for goat.’

    Then there is the added scandal of so many of these hard working victims, going ‘back home,’ whilst still able to receive their, by this time, Giro, so they could live comfortably on British tax payers money, amongst those they were born with.

    I heard a man on TV this morning, on skype from the West Indies, who claims he has the right to return here, as an old man, to receive, what are his benefits, even though he went ‘home’ 35 years ago, not having worked here at all. But, he said, he had a British passport which gave him this perk. Yet, strangely, no one is allowed to speak of these peculiar events. Why is that? The old PC brigade only wanting a one side story. The elfin one talking to Ms Rudd as if she was her cleaner. Her stance clearly had the most ardent feelings of sainthood. Never mind she despises the thought of that manipulative ‘Christian Church’ who exploits people by following the practices of that unearthly teaching.

    I have an English friend who has lived in the USA for 20 years. She is from English family heritage, married an American. Never took American citizenship, still has her ‘British passport,’ but, she is not allowed to come ‘home’ and stay, she can only get a visitors visa. Worked all the years in the US, with whom the British apparently have an arrangement regarding pension rights, and so on. Or, is this again, only an issue of race? This friend is from Worcester, her family all live and worked and were born in Worcester, yet, she’s denied the right to return to her particular, back home. However, those who came here from elsewhere must be able to keep a right to be pensioned off by the hard pressed British tax payer. Yet, this perk is not to include those whose ‘back home,’ is right here. Her skin being a little on the pale side to warrant those sacred rights. Of course, she too worked and paid taxes here before she married the yank.

    Odd that isn’t it?

Comments are closed.