Defence Minister refuses to grant Afghan pilot who helped UK right to stay in UK and is being threatened with deportation to Rwanda, no way to treat an Afghan veteran

Defense Minister James Heappey MP is wrong and no matter how the Afghan war hero pilot got to the UK he should be allowed to stay in the UK.

Not his fault there was no legal way for him to enter the UK that is the fault of this Tory government of which the Defence Minister James Heappey MP is a member of.

More legal ways are needed and this should be a priority for the Home Secretary Suella Braverman MP and this would go a long way to reduce the illegal ways and the number of small boats arriving. The other is to target the persons arranging these passages for it is them that need punishing not the boat people who are at the mercy of these criminals. The media seem to find out who they are, so why can’t the authorities in charge of policing and security.

Why not use some of the money being given to France to reduce the boats coming to the UK, to set UK immigration centres in France. Now that would be good use of the money and would further reduce the use of small boats.

Suella Braverman retoric about people in the UK should be trained to do the jobs beingt done by some immigrants, is not the way, yes, they should be employed, but in ways beter with the skills they have. To force someone to do jobs they are not qualified for, even with some training could well means the jobs are not done well and that could be much worse. Suella Braverman ploy is to ready herself for any future areas for promotions, such as a future prime Minister, so that will be her task not reducing any immigration. Before she could qualify as a future Prime Minister she has to not just talk, but show results in her current job as Home Secretary, otherwise she will not be qualified for any other jobs, perhaps she needs retraining or perhaps training.

Immigration has to be used as a means to cover employment areas where there are deficiencies and also help people who have aided the UK in many ways, as well as keeping to our international obligations.

This is what is expected of the UK as a country of freedom, sanctuary and tolerance.

Yes, we do need to control our borders but with decency, trust and respecting human rights.

The UK is based on various forms of immigration and conquests over centuries and in the main the UK is better for it all.

We embrace and accept many cultures which is for the good of everyone within the UK, even the few racists among us.

I did vote for Brexit, but immigration was not part of my agenda, I just didn’t want to be ruled by the EU. We have enough problems with the UK government in London, so I didn’t want more control from a Europen government.

I was happy being in the old European Economic Community, (EEC), while it was supposed to be just a trade agreement, but when it became clear political union was to come, then I wanted out.

So this Tory government do your duty and respect those who have put their own safety at risk to help the UK where and when it needed. Please resect Human Rights.

Please, Defense Minister James Heappey MP show this Afghan pilot the respect he has earned and allow him to stay in the UK and all others who have similarly done so. If you don’t then you are guilty of having no respect for anyone.


Rose Ayling Ellis Shocked By Stage Show Rant

I thank Rose Ayling Ellis for posting this on Instagram and yourself for sharing.

We all have a right to object, but the way or ways it is done is so important, for this man to do as he did, is also so discriminating to others and could have well spoiled the performance for the others attending.

Always be respectful and in doing so respect the Rights of others.

Same Difference

View original post

Disabled Airport Travellers Given ‘Unacceptable’ Support

In the UK we are supposed to champion equality for we had the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Disabilty Discrimination Act 2005 aand the Euality Act 2010 but there is still too much in-equality as these Acts didn’t go far enough and there were too many ways included in the Acts to ensure that compliance was not totally required.

Here we have the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) agreeing that there is discrimination but then considering whether or not to  about it. What more needs to be said.

The CAA should be doing something about it, otherwise why have the legistlation.

In-equalities should be countered in all instances for no one should be feeling they are not being considered, for we should all be equal, but to achieve equality some people will need more help than others, to not provide it and in good time is no way good enough and any organisation who fails equality should be ashamed and thereby possiblely prosecuted to the full extent available.

This inequality is far more than unacceptible, it is a total disgrace and there should be many more prosecutions on a criminal basis and not leave it to civil actions.

This is in no way respecting the Human Rights of persons with disabilities.

Same Difference

    Disabled passengers are suffering from “unacceptable” levels of support at many UK airports.

    The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) said that many disabled and less mobile passengers missed summer flights at London Heathrow due to poor accessibility performance.

    Bristol, Leeds Bradford and Luton Airports also had an “unacceptable level of service to disabled people”.

    The CAA said Heathrow’s Terminal 5 had “particularly poor performance”.

    Its report said that “many passengers” did not make connecting departures in the terminal.

    Some disabled and less mobile passengers at its Terminal 3 were also forced to wait for more than an hour to be transferred from one piece of equipment to another, it said.

    This contravened the CAA’s own guidance.

    Aberdeen, Belfast International, East Midlands, Edinburgh, Glasgow and London City Airports were rated as “very good” for their accessibility performance during the whole period analysed, which was between the start of April and the end…

    View original post 124 more words

    ‘They just want parents to go away’: complaints soar as special needs schooling crisis spirals | Special educational needs | The Guardian

    Chronic underfunding of the Send system in England blamed for failure to offer children adequate support


    Yes, there is chronic underfunding for special needs in the Uk, but that is one of many for another is Social care and while the immediate funding rests with the respective Local Authorities, (LAs), who themsleves are short of finance also. So, who is directly to blame, well this is the Government, this current oned and many, if not all previous Governments, for LAs receive a bulk of their fun ding in grants from the Government but from 2020 the Governments subjected LAs to drastic cuts through the austerity programme, none of which has been repaid back to LAs.

    So, lets put the blame where it really is and that is on the Government, who are not respecting human rights and totally lacking in ‘Duty of Care’.

    Source: ‘They just want parents to go away’: complaints soar as special needs schooling crisis spirals | Special educational needs | The Guardian

    Why live-in care staff are at high risk of modern slavery – Community Care

    By Dr Caroline Emberson Over the past 18 months, I have been collaborating with other researchers to investigate the vulnerability of paid, migrant, live-in care workers in London to modern slavery. Most live-in care workers in the UK are migrants, and a high proportion travel to and from their home countries between client placements. Understanding […]



    Many believe that slavery was abolished in the late 18th and early 19th century,  and in effect that concept was, but slavery is still around. Now it is known a modern slavery,  and is more common than people would expect.

    Modern slavery includes but are not limited to:

    sexual exploitation
    domestic servitude
    forced labour
    criminal exploitation
    other forms of exploitation: organ removal; forced begging; forced benefit fraud; forced marriage and illegal adoption.

    In the UK there is the Modern Slavery Act 2015, but persons affected by Modern Slavery are trafficked, so it is essential that everybody associated with areas where Modern Slavery could be need to ensure all aspects are monitored to minimise modern slavery being there.

    Even when the legitimate employments are known there are no or very little employment rights and this needs addressing, with a register of every known employment and employee being included. But, even then more needs to be done, more inspections with a sufficiently resourced team of investigators. Each employee needs to be reassured that their rights will be respected and this means if there are terminations for any reasons, then other suitable employments need to be found and their immigration status will not be affected.

    Local Authorities need to be fully finance to undertake these responsibilities and the Government and Ministers need to be made accountable and transparent in the dealings with these employments and combatting Modern Slavery.


    Source: Why live-in care staff are at high risk of modern slavery – Community Care

    Person-Centred Care, What is it and is it being Practiced

    More and more we are hearing about person-centred care, but, what is it?

    What is person-centred care and why is it important?

    So, ‘person-centred care is a way of thinking and doing things that sees the people using health and social services as equal partners in planning, developing and monitoring care to make sure it meets their needs.’

    But, as a means of expediency systems are created and we are all expected to fit in with these systems, but fitting in for the sake of the system and expediency is not person-centred care for it is following the old way of institutional care.

    One Definition institutional care

    ‘Institutional care’ is a type of residential care for large groups of children. It is characterised by a one-size-fits-all approach according to which the same service is provided to all children irrespective of their age, gender, abilities, needs and reasons for separation from parents.

    But, it is not just for children as it can and is for everyone, so another definition is

    Institutional care Definition – Law Insider, which states ‘Institutional care means care provided in a hospital, skilled or intermediate nursing home, or other facility certified or licensed by the state primarily affording diagnostic, preventive, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance or personal care services. Such a facility provides twenty-four-hour nursing services on its premises or in facilities available to the institution on a formal prearranged basis.’

    In other words, institutional care, is following the way of ‘one fits all’, but we are not objects, we are human beings and as such, we are all individuals and we should be seen as individuals wherever we are.

    But, to allow everyone, all the time, to receive person-centred care, may not , while right, may not be cost effective and could considerably increase the cost of care. In the UK we have the NHS for health care, which in many instances is ‘standardised’ for the ease of running a large organisation, especially when one is in hospital, as it is ‘free at the point of delivery’. If, we are looking for more individualism and priority then we could always choose private funded care, where some forms of person-centred care could be available, but not always.

    However, private care is expensive to the individual and many of us don’t have the financial means to have that choice.

    But, that should not mean that some forms of person-centred care should not be available. Being more informed of the care could be one area. On admission we will be advised on some aspects, such as, meal times, but, perhaps, not when a doctor may be available to enable a conversation about the care to be given, even down to your medication, if any, will be dealt with. One of my own objections is not being consulted on any changes to my current medications and only aware of any changes when medications are given, which will follow the hospital ward routine and not how I usually administer my own medication. Much is said about a persons capacity, but when in hospital ones capacity to administer their own medication is ignored, even though no test of capacity has been conducted. Surely, any changes should be discussed with the patient and not, just changed by a doctor, who at the time, may not even have seen the patient, let alone talked with them about anything.

    But, the same is also done for DNR’s (Do Not Resuscitate) which can and are placed on a patients record with no discussion and that is a ruling on life and death, when we are advised that doctors are not allowed to do euthanasia, but have done in the past and currently do. some years ago there was the ‘Liverpool Pathway‘,

    However, there were methods before LCP and more than likely even now, hence the question about DNRs

    So, even in dying there was a lack of person-centred care, and with all this there could certainly arise a question of trust in care.

    But, in home care what is stopping person-centred care, well for one finance another an insufficiency of carers and maybe a lack of quality training, understanding and commitment in some instances.

    The lack of funding is by far a major reason, followed by lack of quantity of care staff, which could lead to poor quality care being delivered. But, really good quality care should be there at all times and the majority of carers will provide good quality care, but good quality means differently to carers and those being cared for. Arriving on time and providing care to the care plan could be one definition of good quality care. But, in the care plan should be respecting choices of the person receiving care and what may have been so yesterday, may not be today, as when receiving care our ability to change is not withdrawn and our mood or preference may change from day to day and the delivery of care should reflect this be it in the care plan or not. A care plan should not be ‘written in stone’ and while reviewed at regular intervals say, 6 months, should also reflect choices on a day to day basis, which would be recorded in the daily record sheets.

    Much more needs to be done and seen to be done around person-centred care for this is how care should be.

    First Bus Apology After Driver Refuses Disabled Woman’s Walking Bike

    While it was good to receive an apology that does not go anyway to really negate the bus drivers action for they are there to provide a service and in this instance a service was not given, ignorance is and should never be an excuse. Until people are fully trained and correctly follow the training these instances will continue to occur.

    More actions need to be taken against persons who discriminate otherwise discrimination will continue and more than likely increase. People have to be made aware that there are consequences for their actions, even, if criminal punishments are given.

    For people who suffer discrimination, the discrimination is only part of their suffering, as there will be, more than likely, health problems to arise, certainly mental and may be others. There are also equality and Human Rights issues which need to be addressed.

    Same Difference

    A disabled student left in tears when a bus driver refused let her bring a mobility aid on board has won an apology.

    Sam Cleasby, 40, from Sheffield, was attempting to get to university when she was told she could not bring her walking bike on the bus.

    Ms Cleasby, who has ulcerative colitis, said she was “devastated”.

    First Bus Midlands managing director Nigel Eggleton apologised and said what happened “was quite wrong”.

    Ms Cleasby said she was told her walking bike was too big for the bus, and claimed the driver said space at the front was reserved for “real disabled people”.

    “It was a bit of a shock. I was in tears, I was angry, I was telling him that it was illegal discrimination of a disabled person,” she said.

    “Not every person is going to know about every single mobility aid, but what you don’t do is…

    View original post 120 more words

    Spain’s Supreme Court Rejects Precautionary Annulment of Pardons for Catalan leaders

    I feel for all Catalonians and hope they will receive the right Justice, in that they will not be imprisoned not now or ever for their actions in rightly proclaiming the Independence of Catalonia from Spain.

    The total injustice was that they were even charged or let alone imprisoned for their beliefs. For the actions of the Spanish Government and their agents have proved once and for all, that Spain is not the Democratic country it proports to be,

    Lets hope Democracy wins and that the former leaders of Catalonia not made completely free persons for now and forever and maybe duly compensated for their illegal charging and imprisonment by the Spanish Authorities.

    If I had my way then it would be the Spanish authorities and their Agents who should be charged and be found guilty of actions against democracy and be sentenced accordingly.

    Josep Goded

    On Tuesday, the Spanish Supreme Court rejected the request from the far-right party Vox and the neoliberal party Ciudadanos (C’s) to annul the pardons for nine Catalan leaders as a precautionary measure while their appeals are assessed. Thus, the contentious administrative chamber ruled out for now ordering the reimprisonment of the nine pro-independence leaders.

    The court believes that annulling the pardons as a precautionary measure could lead to “harmful and irreversible situations that could potentially violate the rights of the Catalan leaders,” arguing that the court could end up endorsing the pardons. Therefore, the court concluded that, “in assessing the conflict of interests, the request to suspend the pardons as a precaution pending a final decision is not acceptable.”

    The court, however, has not ruled yet on the legitimacy of Ciudadanos (C’s) and Vox’s appeals against the pardons because this issue is not part of the resolution of precautionary measures…

    View original post 50 more words

    Subnormal: The Black Children Wrongly Sent To Special Schools

    Years ago many mistakes were made, but am I being too kind in saying they were mistakes for where there other ulterior motives. Like in the article, stating ‘to keep ethnic numbers low’.

    But, no matter the reason or reasons it was completely wrong and should never have occurred. But, is this or something similar still happening now, I hope not, but who knows.

    Health over the years and also education have a lot to answer for, fror everyone should be equal, in that they are treated the same.

    While it may not be proved, but I feel there was a large degtree of racism in the outlined practice and racism of any degree should not be practiced and be illegal to do so.

    While it will not make up for the damage and hurt caused the persons concerned should be entitled to substancial compensation.

    England and really the whole of the UK needs to relook at many issues to ensure the pest possible can be done and what is being done is equal to all sections of the community. To focus on any assumed or seen differences is totally wrong, for being a ‘human being’ should be the only focus, not, age, ethnicity, gender, sexuality or anyothers. We all need to learn to live with each other and for those you will not then the full force of the Law should be brought down on them. There should also be regular reviews to ensure full equality is being precticed everywhere within the UK, with no exceptions.

    Same Difference

    In 1960s and 70s Britain, hundreds of black children were labelled as “educationally subnormal”, and wrongly sent to schools for pupils who were deemed to have low intelligence. For the first time, some former pupils have spoken about their experiences for a new BBC documentary.

    In the 1970s, at the age of six, Noel Gordon was sent to what was known at the time as an “educationally subnormal” (ESN) boarding school, 15 miles (24km) from his home.

    “That school was hell,” says Noel. “I spent 10 years there, and when I left at 16, I couldn’t even get a job because I couldn’t spell or fill out a job application.”

    About a year before joining the ESN school, Noel went into hospital to have a tooth removed. He was given an anaesthetic, but it transpired that Noel had undiagnosed sickle cell anaemia, and the anaesthetic triggered a serious reaction.


    View original post 2,325 more words

    Family Facing Deportation From Australia Because Of Son’s CP

    I agree with you.

    This is disgraceful that residency can be judged on the disability of a child and the related cost to Australia.

    Yes, this is how it is in Australia today.

    This is blatant disability discrimination, which I  would not have thought possible in such a progressive country as Australia. For this means it does not matter, what people have been doing in Australia, working there and producing wealth, not just for themselves, but also Australia, for when they have children and if they dared to have a child with disabilities, this could affect the decision whether they could stay in Australia. It shows that these parents have not been really valued by Australia, perhaps these parents should be able to claim from Australia a cost related to their time in Australia and the benefit Australia has had from them.

    This is not what should be expected from, a so called, civilised country, as Australia, appears, to take what they want and then discard, when they feel there will be additional costs to Australia.

    For this is totally disgraceful and Australia should be ashamed of themselves. This is a form of abuse, disability abuse.

    Same Difference

    I can’t describe how sad and angry I am after reading this. I have Cerebral Palsy and am a British Asian. I have grown up in the UK. I can’t imagine anything like this happening here. The fact that this child was actually born in Australia just makes the situation 1000 times worse in my eyes.

    Australia’s disability discrimination commissioner has called on the immigration minister, Alex Hawke, to intervene “in a humane way” in a case in which a family is facing deportation because their six-year-old son has a disability.

    On Tuesday night Ben Gauntlett was quizzed at Senate estimates about the plight of Australian-born Kayaan Katyal, and his parents, Varun and Priyanka, who are facing deportation after being rejected for permanent residency last month.

    The ABC, which revealed the case on Sunday, reported that the family had been told in a rejection letter that Kayaan would cost…

    View original post 459 more words