|
|
|
Fnyx When the authorities provide social assistanc asics outlets e to those in need, it almost always comes with conditions attached. These include behavioural requirements or criteria determining who is and isnt eligible for support. Common examples include proving that youre looking for a job, are too ill to do so, or that you fall into a particular category that policymakers have decided is worthy of aid 鈥?for example, working children or single parents.This approach is problematic for at least three reasons. First, it can be ineffective, beca nike air max use targeted support like this often excludes many who desperately need it. Second, it can be inefficient, because behavioural controls are often ill-designed and inappropriate, while policing them requires expensive, unwieldy bureaucracy.Third, it is often contrary to human dignity. Evidence from many countries shows that the administrative practices associated with conditions have a tendency towards discrimination and dehumanisation.So, what is the alternative Simply put, to provide social assistance unconditionally, without behavioural requirements or targeting. In other words, to provide assistance to all and with no strings attached.Colleagues and I from joint research teams in the UK, India and Bangladesh have recently completed two large-scale policy experiments that attempted to do this in the Bangladeshi capital, Dhaka, and the Indian city of Hyderabad. In both air force 1 cases, we provided unconditional assistance to all residents of five urban communiti Xhtf The government is under pressure from the European court of human rights ECHR to take action by Friday, despite the resistance of MPs.What is the government doing Today, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling will make an oral statement in parliament. It is thought that he intends to publish draft legislation setting out stanley spain three options.These options are repor stanley cup ted to be: the retention of the ban, which was ruled illegal by the ECHR in 2005; giving the vote to prisoners serving up to six months, and allowing those serving up to four years to vote.What do MPs think Last February, the Commons voted by 234 to 22 to retain the ban. David Cameron once memorably said that contemplating votes for prisoners makes me physically ill.He told MPs last month that no-one should be in any doubt prisoners are not getting the vote under this government.If parliament and the PM are opposed, why is Chris Grayling taking action Because he has to if he wants to comply with the ECHR. But Mr Grayling has said parliament can reject the court ruling.What do the government law officers say Attorney General Dominic Grieve said on Tuesday that ignoring the ECHR would be a serious matter because it would place the UK in breach of its international obligations, to which it is a signatory.What does the Labour leadership say It wants to retain the ban. Shadow home secretary Yvette Co stanley cup oper has said that a parliamentary vote would strengthen Britain 82 |
|
發表於