DOCSLIB.ORG

CCPR/C/95/Add.3 Political Rights 19 December 1994

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CCPR/C/95/Add.3 Political Rights 19 December 1994 UNITED NATIONS CCP International covenant Distr. GENERAL on civil and CCPR/C/95/Add.3 political rights 19 December 1994 Original: ENGLISH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT Fourth periodic reports of States parties due in 1994 Addendum UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND 1/ [14 October 1994] 1/ For the initial report submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/1/Add.17, Add.35, Add.37 and Add.39; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.67, SR.69 and SR.70; SR.147-SR.149; and SR.161, SR.162 and SR.164, and Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-third session, Supplement No. 40 (A/33/40), paras. 184-226, as well as Thirty-fourth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/34/40), paras. 228-247 and paras. 300-371, respectively. For the second periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/32/Add.5, Add.14 and Add.15; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.593-598 and SR.855-SR.857 and Official Records of the General Assembly, Fortieth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/40/40), paras. 518-580, and Forty-fourth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/44/40), paras. 140-189, respectively. For the third periodic report submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/58/Add.6, Add.11 and Add.12; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.1045-SR.1050 and Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-sixth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/46/40), paras. 351-414. GE.94-70475 (E) CCPR/C/95/Add.3 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page I. GENERAL ...................... 1- 9 4 II. INFORMATION IN RELATION TO EACH OF THE ARTICLES IN PARTS I, II AND III OF THE COVENANT ....... 10-497 5 Introduction.................... 10- 11 5 Article 1 ..................... 12- 17 6 Article 2 ..................... 18- 56 7 Article 3 ..................... 57- 76 16 Article 4 ..................... 77- 80 20 Article 5 ..................... 81- 83 21 Article 6 ..................... 84-112 21 Article 7 ..................... 113-170 27 Article 8 ..................... 171 38 Article 9 ..................... 172-193 38 Article 10..................... 194-282 44 Article 11..................... 283 61 Article 12..................... 284-288 62 Article 13..................... 289-304 63 Article 14..................... 305-340 66 Article 15..................... 341-344 73 Article 16..................... 345 74 Article 17..................... 346-358 74 Article 18..................... 359-364 77 Article 19..................... 365-379 78 Article 20..................... 380-381 81 Article 21..................... 382-387 81 CCPR/C/95/Add.3 page 3 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page Article 22..................... 388-400 82 Article 23..................... 401-404 85 Article 24..................... 405-440 85 Article 25..................... 441-482 93 Article 26..................... 483 99 Article 27..................... 484-497 99 Appendices I. List of documents referred to in the report .......... 102 II. List of annexes ........................ 107 CCPR/C/95/Add.3 page 4 I. GENERAL 1. The general framework within which the rights recognized in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are protected in the United Kingdom was explained in the Introduction to the United Kingdom’s initial report of August 1977 and in Part I of the United Kingdom’s third periodic report of October 1989. 2. In the past five years, the question of the best means of providing for the human rights recognized in the Covenant and those other international instruments to which the United Kingdom is party has been a subject of debate. This reflects, in part, the way in which interest in human rights issues has been stimulated by the United Kingdom’s extensive participation in work in this area. 3. The United Kingdom has given close attention to meeting the reporting requirements under those international instruments and to assisting and responding to the work of any visiting committee. The United Kingdom has also played a leading role in recent work to reform the institutions and procedures established under the European Convention on Human Rights. The revised arrangements are contained in the Eleventh Protocol to the Convention, which also makes mandatory and permanent the right of individual petition to the European Court of Human Rights. The United Kingdom signed the Eleventh Protocol in May 1994 and hopes to ratify it by the end of the year. 4. In the debates on human rights issues that have occurred in Parliament and elsewhere in recent years, the Government has maintained the long-established principle that the rights and freedoms recognized in international instruments and in the constitutions of those countries that have enacted a comprehensive Bill of Rights are inherent in the United Kingdom’s legal system and are protected by it and by Parliament unless they are removed or restricted by statute. The Government does not consider that it is properly the role of the legislature to confer rights and freedoms which are naturally possessed by all members of society. It also believes that Parliament should retain the supreme responsibility for enacting or changing the law, including that affecting individual rights and freedoms, while it is properly the role of the judiciary to interpret specific legislation. 5. The incorporation of an international human rights instrument into domestic law is not necessary to ensure that the United Kingdom’s obligations under such instruments are reflected in the deliberations of government and of the courts. The United Kingdom’s human rights obligations are routinely considered by Ministers and their officials in the formulation and application of Government policy, while judgements of the House of Lords have made clear that such obligations are part of the legal context in which the judges consider themselves to operate: "There is a prima facie presumption that Parliament does not intend to act in breach of international law, including therein specific treaty obligations; and if one of the meanings which can reasonably be ascribed to the legislation is consonant with the treaty obligations and another or others are not, the meaning which is consonant is to be preferred." (Salomon v. the Commissioners of Customs and Excise [1967] 2 QB 116.) CCPR/C/95/Add.3 page 5 The application of this principle (extended to the common law) in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights may be seen in Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspapers Limited [1992] 3 WLR 28. (The decision was upheld on different grounds in the House of Lords, where their Lordships found no ambiguity in the common law, [1993] AC 534.) 6. Nor is the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant allowing the right of individual petition to the Human Rights Committee necessary to ensure the protection of individual rights in this country. Whether in civil or criminal proceedings or in the developing field of judicial review of executive decision-making, the domestic courts continue to play an effective role as protectors of individual rights, while since 1966 individuals in the United Kingdom have had access to an additional means of redress through the procedures and institutions established under the European Convention on Human Rights. That machinery provides protection which is now familiar and well used and the Government does not believe that ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant would significantly enhance the protection of individuals under the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction. 7. The United Kingdom is a unitary State and comprises England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland; references in this report to "Great Britain" refer to England and Wales and Scotland taken together. Scotland and, to some extent, Northern Ireland have different legal systems from that which applies in England and Wales, but similar principles apply throughout the United Kingdom. 8. As with previous reports, the Government intends to make the text of this report and of the summary record of the oral examination by the Human Rights Committee widely available throughout the United Kingdom. Copies of the report and, in due course, of the text of the oral examination will be placed in the Library of both Houses of Parliament and made freely available to those outside Parliament, including in non-governmental organizations, who wish to receive a copy. The text of the oral examination will be circulated widely and studied closely within government as part of the ongoing process by which the Government seeks to ensure that the rights and freedoms of individuals within the United Kingdom and subject to its jurisdiction are fully in accordance with the United Kingdom’s international obligations. 9. A supplementary report describing the position in the United Kingdom’s Crown dependencies and dependent territories, including Hong Kong, is being submitted separately. II. INFORMATION IN RELATION TO EACH OF THE ARTICLES IN PARTS I, II AND III OF THE COVENANT Introduction 10. The following information is supplementary to that provided in the United Kingdom’s initial, second and third periodic reports of August 1977 (CCPR/C/1/Add.17), August 1984 (CCPR/C/32/Add.5) and October 1989 (CCPR/C/58/Add.6) and supplementary report to the third periodic report of March 1991 (CCPR/C/58/Add.12). It is also supplementary to that given by the CCPR/C/95/Add.3 page 6 United Kingdom delegation at the meetings of the Human Rights Committee which discussed those reports, most recently in April 1991 (CCPR/C/SR.1045-1050). Account has been taken in the preparation of the report of the general guidelines for periodic reports and of the general comments on particular articles adopted by the Human Rights Committee.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The North/South Language Body Annual Report and Accounts for the Year Ended 31 December
    The North/South Language Body Annual Report and Accounts For the year ended 31 December 2015 An Foras Teanga Tuarascáil Bhliantúil agus Cuntais An bhliain dar chríoch 31 Nollaig 2015 Tha Boord o Leid An Accoont o the Darg For the year hinmaist 31 Decemmer 2015 Foras na Gaeilge The Ulster-Scots Agency 7 Cearnóg Mhuirfean The Corn Exchange Baile Átha Cliath 2 31 Gordon Street +353 (0)1 6398400 Belfast BT1 2LG +44 (0)28 9023 1113 www.forasnagaeilge.ie www.ulsterscotsagency.com [email protected] [email protected] Foras na Gaeilge The Ulster-Scots Agency Teach an Gheata Thiar William Street 2-4 Sráid na Banríona Raphoe Béal Feirste Co. Donegal BT1 6ED +353 (0)74 9173876 +44 (0)28 9089 0970 North/South Language Body Annual Report and Accounts For the year ended 31 December 2015 Laid before the Northern Ireland Assembly under North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 Schedule 1, Annex 2, Part 7, paragraphs 1.3 and 2.6 by the Department for Communities 18 5 2017 The Language Body is a North/South Implementation Body sponsored by the Department of Arts, Heritage, Regional, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (DAHRRGA) and the Department for Communities (DfC). It was established on the 2nd of December 1999 under the British-Irish Agreement which set up the implementation bodies and which was underpinned by the British-Irish Agreement Act 1999 and the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999. It reports to the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC). The Language Body comprises Foras na Gaeilge and the Ulster-Scots Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • A Top Secret Program Hidden in Plain Sight
    Follow the links – read the articles, pdf’s. Find out what’s really happening in your world… Why Microwave Auditory Effect Crowd-Control Gun Won't Work By Monica Heger First Published July 2008 Experts say you'd fry before you heard anything PHOTO: FRANCO VOGT/CORBIS 22 July 2008—New Scientist magazine recently reported that Sierra Nevada Corp., based in Sparks, Nevada, plans to build what it calls a nonlethal microwave ray gun with the ability to beam irritating sounds into people’s heads. But experts in the underlying biophysics say it cannot work: the device would kill you well before you were bothered by the noise. The gun, which is being built by Lev Sadovnik at Sierra Nevada, would take advantage of a phenomenon known as the microwave auditory effect. When microwaves are delivered in short pulses, the cochlear tissue in the ear expands. That expansion is heard as an audible click to anyone receiving the radiation, a sound much like that of two rocks being hit together underwater. The company says that the device, called MEDUSA (for “mob excess deterrent using silent audio”), could be used for crowd control. However, experts say the gun wouldn’t work as advertised. There is no way the ray gun could deliver sound loud enough to be annoying at nonfatal power levels, says Kenneth Foster, a bioengineering professor at the University of Pennsylvania who first published research on the microwave auditory effect in 1974. “Any kind of exposure you could give to someone that wouldn’t burn them to a crisp would produce a sound too weak to have any effect,” Foster says.
    [Show full text]
  • Study on Children's Involvement in Judicial Proceedings – Contextual
    Study on children’s involvement in judicial proceedings – contextual overview for administrative justice – UK (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) November 2014 (Research carried out between July 2013 and January 2014) Justice Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). Study on children’s involvement in judicial proceedings – contextual overview for administrative justice – UK (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) * A separate report has been drawn up on UK Scotland. July 2014 (Research carried out between July 2013 and January 2014) This National Report has been prepared by Gavin McBride for Milieu Ltd in partnership with ICF under Contract No JUST/2011/CHIL/PR/0147/A4 with the European Commission, DG Justice and Consumers. The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. European Commission – Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu). Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, 2015 PDF ISBN 978-92-79-47533-7 doi:10.2838/454909 DS-04-15-220-EN-N © European Union, 2015 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
    [Show full text]
  • CCPR/C/95/Add.3 Political Rights 19 December 1994
    UNITED NATIONS CCP International covenant Distr. GENERAL on civil and CCPR/C/95/Add.3 political rights 19 December 1994 Original: ENGLISH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 40 OF THE COVENANT Fourth periodic reports of States parties due in 1994 Addendum UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND 1/ [14 October 1994] 1/ For the initial report submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/1/Add.17, Add.35, Add.37 and Add.39; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.67, SR.69 and SR.70; SR.147-SR.149; and SR.161, SR.162 and SR.164, and Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-third session, Supplement No. 40 (A/33/40), paras. 184-226, as well as Thirty-fourth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/34/40), paras. 228-247 and paras. 300-371, respectively. For the second periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/32/Add.5, Add.14 and Add.15; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.593-598 and SR.855-SR.857 and Official Records of the General Assembly, Fortieth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/40/40), paras. 518-580, and Forty-fourth session, Supplement No. 40 (A/44/40), paras. 140-189, respectively. For the third periodic report submitted by the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, see CCPR/C/58/Add.6, Add.11 and Add.12; for its consideration by the Committee, see CCPR/C/SR.1045-SR.1050 and Official Records of the General Assembly, Forty-sixth session, Supplement No.
    [Show full text]
  • Differences Between Immigrants and Natives in Germany and the UK
    Employment, Wage Structure, and the Economic Cycle: Differences between Immigrants and Natives in Germany and the UK Christian Dustmann (UCL, CReAM), Albrecht Glitz (Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CReAM) and Thorsten Vogel (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, CReAM)1 June 2008 Abstract: Differences in the cyclical pattern of employment and wages of immigrants relative to natives have largely gone unnoticed in the migration literature. In this paper, we address this issue. Based on over two decades of micro data, our investigation covers two of the largest immigrant receiving countries in Europe, Germany and the UK. We show that despite the heterogeneity in their immigrant populations, there are similar differences in cyclical responses between both countries’ immigrant and native populations, even conditional on skills, age, and other background characteristics. To obtain a summary measure for these differences across and within education groups, we estimate a factor type model that, using regional variation in economic conditions, separates responses to economic shocks from secular trends. We then provide a number of possible explanations for our findings. Keywords : Immigration, Wage Structure, Business Cycle JEL : E32, F22, J31 1 Corresponding author: Christian Dustmann, Department of Economics, University College London, Drayton House, 30 Gordon Street, London, WC1H 0AX, UK. Email: [email protected] . Tel: +44-20-7679- 5832. Fax: +44-20-7916-2775. This project has been supported by a grant from the Anglo-German Foundation. We also thank the Barcelona Economics Program of CREA for its support. We are grateful to Stefan Bender and Johannes Ludsteck for assistance with the German data, and to Nikos Theodoropoulos for assistance with the UK data.
    [Show full text]
  • Document Title: Justice – Lessons from Northern Ireland? Author(S
    Document Title: Justice – Lessons From Northern Ireland? Author(s): Noel Mc Guirk Document No.: 208013 Date Received: December 2004 This paper appears in Policing in Central and Eastern Europe: Dilemmas of Contemporary Criminal Justice, edited by Gorazd Mesko, Milan Pagon, and Bojan Dobovsek, and published by the Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor, Slovenia. This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this final report available electronically in addition to NCJRS Library hard-copy format. Opinions and/or reference to any specific commercial products, processes, or services by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise do not constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government. Translation and editing were the responsibility of the source of the reports, and not of the U.S. Department of Justice, NCJRS, or any other affiliated bodies. NOEL MC GUIRK JUSTICE – LESSONS FROM NORTHERN IRELAND? The most basic assumption in human rights is that Governments should remain re- sponsible for the loss of life of its citizens who have been killed at the hands of law enforcement agents. The ability of citizens to live free from fear and intimidation by law enforcement agents are prerequisites in any democracy; as it is commonly viewed that the very central pillar in a democracy is that the security forces will be the upholders of law and order through which fundamental rights for all will be secured. In Northern Ireland, however, the level of deaths occasioned by the use of lethal force is higher than any other part of the UK and it is the arbitrary taking of life by the state, in particular the level of extra-judicial killings that merits particu- lar scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • VOLUME II Summary Comparative Tables by Indicator
    EMCDDA SCIENTIFIC REPORT Drug seizures, drug offences, drug offenders, drug use among criminal populations ___ Information systems based on law enforcement agencies and the criminal justice system VOLUME II Summary comparative tables by indicator EMCDDA / 2002 2 EMCDDA SCIENTIFIC REPORT Drug seizures, drug offences, drug offenders, drug use among criminal populations ___ Information systems based on law enforcement agencies and the criminal justice system VOLUME II Summary comparative tables by indicator EMCDDA / P1 / P4 / 2002 3 This report was prepared by: Chloé Carpentier, EMCDDA, Lisbon (volumes I, II, III) Cécile Martel, EMCDDA, Lisbon (volumes I, II) © European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2002 Quotation is authorised providing the source is acknowledged. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction Rua da Cruz de Santa Apolónia 23-25 PT - 1149-045 Lisboa Portugal Tel: + 351 21 811 30 00 Fax: + 351 21 813 17 11 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.emcdda.org 4 Table of Contents VOLUME II – SUMMARY COMPARATIVE TABLES INTRODUCTION 6 DRUG SEIZURES 7 POLICE/CUSTOMS INTERVENTIONS 27 PROSECUTION STATISTICS 49 CONVICTION STATISTICS 56 PENAL STATISTICS 67 DRUG USE AMONG ARRESTEES 81 DRUG USE AMONG PRISONERS 84 5 Introduction The Comparative Summary Tables that follow have been made on the basis of the forms submitted by the National Focal Points within Part II of Information Map 2000-2001. These tables are organised around seven indicators: - Drug seizures (drug seizures made by law enforcement agencies) - Police/Customs
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Potter
    Michael Potter Year of Call: 1988 Call Clerk on 020 7827 4000 PRACTICE AREAS Discrimination & Equality | Employment | Human Rights | Professional Discipline OVERVIEW Michael Potter's primary area of practice is employment, including employment law and employment-related civil litigation. He also specialises in the fields of health and social care law. In October 2013 he was called to the Bar of England and Wales. Educated at Queen's University Belfast (QUB), he graduated in 1986, and was called to the Northern Ireland Bar in September 1988. In 1991, following post-graduate study at QUB, he graduated with an LLM by thesis in Public Law. From 1994-1996, he worked as the Employment Caseworker in the Law Centre (NI). When he returned to private practice in 1997, he specialised in employment. Michael has represented both employers and employees in many leading and complex employment and discrimination cases. In 2005 he was appointed to the Government Legal Service Civil Panel, and has since advised and litigated for public authorities on matters relating to employment and other areas. He also has been instructed in employment and discrimination cases by trade unions and their members, as well as the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. His practice has included employer liability litigation, including harassment, stress at work and accidents at work. In the Chancery Division he has acted in cases relating to employment contract and industrial relation disputes. In addition, Michael has played an influential role in the development of mental health and social care jurisprudence in Northern Ireland; having been involved in most of the jurisdiction's leading public law mental health litigation in the last fifteen years.
    [Show full text]
  • Magdalene Laundries NI Briefing May 2013
    AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL BRIEFING MAGDALENE LAUNDRY-TYPE INSTITUTIONS IN NORTHERN IRELAND The case for a human rights response by the Northern Ireland Executive INTRODUCTION The Irish Government’s Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee 1 to establish the facts of State involvement with the Magdalene Laundries, published on 5 February 2013 (hereafter, the McAleese Report), made clear that the women and girls in these laundry institutions experienced a range of serious human rights abuses including inhuman and degrading treatment, arbitrary deprivation of liberty and forced labour. Publicity around the report prompted a number of women who were in similar institutions in Northern Ireland to approach Amnesty International with their stories. These women feel that their experiences were the same or similar to those found in the Republic of Ireland, yet believe that their situation is being ignored by the Northern Ireland authorities, in contrast to the response, albeit belated, from the Irish Government. This briefing document forms part of Amnesty International’s response to their call for justice and sets out the case for the Northern Ireland Executive to accept and meet its obligations to provide justice for any abuses suffered by women and girls within this jurisdiction. States are bound to protect the human rights, lives, and physical security of all women and girls under their jurisdiction. States have an obligation to respect, protect and fulfil the right of victims of human rights violations to an effective remedy. This obligation includes three elements: • Truth: establishing the facts about violations of human rights that occurred in the past; • Justice: investigating past violations and, if enough admissible evidence is gathered, prosecuting the suspected perpetrators; • Reparation: providing full and effective reparation to the victims and their families, in its five forms: restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Literature Since 1990 Examines the Diversity and Energy of Writing in a Period Marked by the Unparalleled Global Prominence of Irish Culture
    BREW0009 15/5/09 11:17 am Page 1 Irish literature since 1990 Irish literature since 1990 examines the diversity and energy of writing in a period marked by the unparalleled global prominence of Irish culture. The book is distinctive in bringing together scholars from across Europe and the United States, whose work explores Irish literary culture from a rich variety of critical perspectives. This collection provides a wide-ranging survey of fiction, poetry and drama over the last two decades, considering both well-established figures and newer writers who have received relatively little critical attention before. It also considers creative work in cinema, visual culture and the performing arts. Contributors explore the central developments within Irish culture and society that have transformed the writing and reading of identity, sexuality, history and gender. The volume examines the contexts from which the literature emerges, including the impact of Mary Robinson’s presidency in the Irish Republic; the new buoyancy of the Irish diaspora, and growing cultural confidence ‘back home’; legislative reform on sexual and moral issues; the uneven effects generated by the resurgence of the Irish economy (the ‘Celtic Tiger’ myth); Ireland’s increasingly prominent role in Europe; the declining reputation of established institutions and authorities in the Republic (corruption trials and Church scandals); the Northern Ireland Peace Process, and the changing relationships it has made possible. In its breadth and critical currency, this book will be of particular BREWSTER interest to academics and students working in the fields of literature, drama and cultural studies. Scott Brewster is Director of English at the University of Salford Michael Parker is Professor of English Literature at the University of Central Lancashire AND Cover image: ‘Collecting Meteorites at Knowth, IRELANTIS’.
    [Show full text]
  • Differences Between Immigrants and Natives
    IZA DP No. 4432 Employment, Wages, and the Economic Cycle: Differences between Immigrants and Natives Christian Dustmann Albrecht Glitz Thorsten Vogel September 2009 DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor Employment, Wages, and the Economic Cycle: Differences between Immigrants and Natives Christian Dustmann University College London, CReAM and IZA Albrecht Glitz Universitat Pompeu Fabra and IZA Thorsten Vogel Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Discussion Paper No. 4432 September 2009 IZA P.O. Box 7240 53072 Bonn Germany Phone: +49-228-3894-0 Fax: +49-228-3894-180 E-mail: [email protected] Any opinions expressed here are those of the author(s) and not those of IZA. Research published in this series may include views on policy, but the institute itself takes no institutional policy positions. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Bonn is a local and virtual international research center and a place of communication between science, politics and business. IZA is an independent nonprofit organization supported by Deutsche Post Foundation. The center is associated with the University of Bonn and offers a stimulating research environment through its international network, workshops and conferences, data service, project support, research visits and doctoral program. IZA engages in (i) original and internationally competitive research in all fields of labor economics, (ii) development of policy concepts, and (iii) dissemination of research results and concepts to the interested public. IZA Discussion Papers often represent preliminary work and are circulated to encourage discussion. Citation of such a paper should account for its provisional character. A revised version may be available directly from the author.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Our 2016-17 Annual Report
    Annual Report and Financial Statements 2 Annual Report and Financial Statements 2016–17 Deafness affects us all Janine first started losing her hearing when she was 18 and now has a severe to profound hearing loss. “It can’t be emphasised enough that deafness isn’t just about old people. It affects one in six of us, and if it’s not you, then it’s going to be somebody you live with or know. So, we have to be well informed, we have to be kind and we have to be considerate. “We all need somebody to point us in the right direction, and that’s what Action on Hearing Loss is dedicated to doing. “When I think about the possibility of one day having 100% hearing again, I get very emotional. I would be able to communicate with everyone again.” We are Action on Hearing Loss In the UK, one in six of us We help people who are has hearing loss. That’s confronting deafness, more than 11 million people, a number that will tinnitus and hearing loss to increase as the population live the life they choose. We ages. We estimate that, by 2035, more than 15.6 enable them to take control million people will have of their lives and remove hearing loss.. the barriers in their way. We provide people with People who are severely or support and care, develop profoundly deaf are four technology and treatments, times more likely to be Over 6 million people and campaign for equality. unemployed than the general – that’s one in 10 of us – population.
    [Show full text]