Declan’s last two postings in the JREF Forum

Declan has posted two new postings in the JREF Forum. The one yesterday is in answer to why Declan doesn’t get a job and the second, well, it is really a general statement about what NAC’s mission is. (There was actually a comment in relation to the assault on me yesterday to the effect that it was strange that the attack continued while Declan's arm was on me – Declan wouldn’t know how to respond to that.)

Anyway, these are the two postings:

                         (1)  Why don’t you get a job?

Lola was severely assaulted last night – it has just been put in the NAC blog. Her statement was taken by the police this morning, a copy of which I have sent off to the European Court of Human Rights in my case against the UK (with particular regard to the reasons cited for the necessity of expedition), which is summarised as follows:

1. This application concerns a serious violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life arising from the refusal of his local jobcentre to accept his wife’s proposed jobseeker’s agreement for referral to an adjudication officer in accordance with section 9(6)(a) of the Jobseekers Act 1995. As a result of the refusal, the applicant’s and his wife’s entitlement to JSA was twice suspended and then ceased, and they are currently sleeping rough on the streets of London. The applicant invokes Articles 8 and 13.
2. The applicant submits that the interference with his rights under Article 8 was not prescribed by law, that it did not pursue any of the legitimate aims in Article 8(2), and that the interference was not necessary in a democratic society. He also submits that there was no effective remedy available in respect of the interference, in violation of Article 13.

[we have not requested permission to publish the question asked]

The issue of gainful employment has been addressed in my application of 8 September to the Court under the heading “Sleeping rough in London”, paras 22-31:

22. Since 3 November 2006 the applicant and his wife have been sleeping rough in the porch of an office building in the heart of London’s business district. On 22 November 2006, the Dellow Centre recorded on the applicant’s wife’s registration form that St Mungo’s, London’s largest homelessness organisation, had informed the Centre that neither the applicant nor his wife could be referred to a hostel “due to not being on any benefits”. The last ten months have been physically, mentally and emotionally draining for the applicant and his wife. Throughout this time, they have had to cope with a severe and unnecessary strain upon their lives.
23. On 18 November 2006 a stocky man in his thirties sat on the right hand side of the applicant’s wife’s face while she was sleeping. On 4 May 2007 the applicant’s wife was asleep in her sleeping bag when a passer-by grabbed her hard by the ankles, dragged her in an arc down the two marble steps of the porch and, having turned her a full 180 degrees, dragged her a further three or so metres down the pavement before releasing her and walking off. Later that night, with her back to the street and her head inside her sleeping bag, she was kicked in the back by a passer-by with the sole of his shoe. The first of these two assaults left the applicant’s wife with severe bruising on her left thigh and forearm that lasted two weeks, as well as with a sore left wrist and little finger. On 1 July 2007 the applicant was woken by a well-dressed passer-by that lent over his wife and hit him in the thigh. On 27 July a passer-by threw two unopened plastic bottles of mustard at an unused door the applicant uses to prop his pillow rest against, each one narrowly missing the applicant’s head on its fall. On 26 August a passer-by threw a metal Metropolitan Police A-board (for traffic redirection) onto the steps of the porch, the handle end of which hit the applicant’s wife on the back while she was sleeping. On 7 September a passer-by threw a glass of beer over the applicant and his wife while they were sleeping.
24. On 26 and 28 February 2007 the alarm on the wall of the porch they sleep in sounded and flashed all night. Frequently the applicant and his wife have to endure the sounding and/or flashing alarm (most recently on 13 August), people going in and out of the office building through the porch door at all hours of the night (most recently on 6 September) and noisy and intrusive passers-by (most recently on 7 September). There are some nights the applicant and his wife only get a few hours sleep.
25. On 17 February 2007 the applicant was punched twice in the face in an unprovoked attack by a homeless man in the canteen of the Whitechapel Mission (Crime Reference No. 4204886/07). On 21 May the applicant applied under the Data Protection Act 1998, as advised by the Metropolitan Police Service, for a copy of the witness statement that the Metropolitan Police took from him at Bethnal Green Police Station on 27 April 2007 in respect of the assault, but the statement was never provided to him (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 25 July 2007 to the European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services in Supporting Documents, pp. 27-43). On 18 June the applicant’s wife was assaulted by a homeless woman in the canteen of the Whitechapel Mission (Crime Reference No. 4217341/07). Later that morning the manager of the Mission barred the applicant and his wife due to concerns about their safety. On 19 June the applicant lodged a complaint with the Charity Commission in respect of the bar (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 17 August 2007 to the President of the European Commission in Supporting Documents, pp. 64-78).
26. According to the website “Whitechapel Mission” (whitechapel.org.uk), the Methodist Church-run Whitechapel Mission is “often the only place open weekends, Bank Holidays, Christmas and Easter” and “the only place to obtain a cooked breakfast in the City or the East End”. The barring of the applicant and his wife from the Whitechapel Mission has had a very detrimental and disruptive impact on their lives, not least because they have been reduced to washing in public toilets.
27. On 18 December 2006 the applicant was admitted to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital for interstitial pneumonia. In the Discharge Summary Report dated 20 December 2006 (see Supporting Documents, p. 26), the applicant’s doctor, Dr M Feher, recorded that the applicant was admitted feeling feverish with cough, shortness of breath, and a chest pain that was worse on breathing, worse on inspiration. Dr Feher also noted that the applicant had not been eating due to lack of finance and had an episode of loss of consciousness, witnessed by his wife. Since then, the applicant’s physical health has deteriorated significantly. He has lost a lot of weight, and on 2 August 2007 attended the Accident & Emergency department at the Royal London Hospital. The Certificate of Attendance (see Supporting Documents, p. 52) records that he attended with an upper respiratory tract infection, for which he was prescribed a course of antibiotics to follow for five days (to prevent the infection travelling to the lung tissue to cause pneumonia).
28. The applicant and his wife have been surviving on the streets of London by selling The Big Issue magazine, which is sold on the streets by homeless people. Frequently of late the applicant and his wife have had to walk off their pitches in order to avoid confrontation with other street traders. The applicant has lodged complaints with The Big Issue in respect of the intrusion onto his and/or his wife’s pitch of other Big Issue vendors and distributors of, inter alia, London Lite, The London Paper, City AM and Sport (see copy of the applicant’s letter and enclosures of 30 August 2007 to the founder and editor-in-chief of The Big Issue in Supporting Documents, pp. 79-87).
29. Since 20 July 2007 and as a consequence of not being able to sell enough Big Issues, the applicant and his wife have been unable to afford transport (for the last seven weeks they have been walking everywhere with all their belongings), clothes or other basic necessities, and have been eating very poorly. On 6 August the applicant had to withdraw £200 from his Yorkshire Building Society account (see Supporting Documents, p. 53), the last of the money he and his wife had been saving to put down a deposit on a flat. (The Big Issue had told the applicant that if he had £350 for a deposit they would be able to find him and his wife somewhere to live.) The applicant and his wife are extremely concerned that they will be further reduced to begging – a criminal offence in England.
30. On 1 September 2007 the applicant made a statement to the City of London Police at Bishopsgate Police Station following the arrest of a beggar for the racist and discriminative abuse of the applicant while he was selling The Big Issue the day previous, and a subsequent threat to kill (see copy of the applicant’s witness statement of 1 September 2007, with attachment, in Supporting Documents, pp. 88-94).
31. The applicant submits that neither he nor his wife have been able to obtain any kind of gainful employment as a result of their particular circumstances. The City of London Police has visited them at the porch they sleep in on twelve occasions to date. On 10 August they were each issued a stop and search ticket stating that the reason for the stop was “welfare”, and that the outcome was “satisfactory”.

Such is our case to the Court. Hopefully, the UK government will have to reply. Thank you everyone.

                                  (2)  NAC mission

I regret that it has not been possible to answer so many important questions in one place.

My wife and I are deeply concerned with the resurgence of Protestant and Catholic right-wing groups, and their alliance with political-ideological movements to block public policies that are at variance with religious doctrine. Together with the Vatican, these fundamentalist forces are thwarting intellectual and social progress through their unflinching and tenacious commitment to dogma.

It is because of it that NAC (Network of those Abused by Church) champions public policies that are based on secular principles, not religious doctrine; works for the separation church and state; and calls for the scientific, rational examination of religion to protect future generations from the ignorance so often fostered by religion hiding behind doctrinal smoke screens.

NAC has been set up to bring together organisations, groups and individuals from across the globe who advocate liberal reforms strongly rejected by the Vatican and the Christian Right, with a view to supporting them and promoting their views. We achieve this mission by:

1.  Committing to campaigns and initiatives that attract, welcome and support advocates.

2.  Producing action alerts which can help advocates who need the public to send emails or faxes to decision-makers on critical issues.

3.  Bringing together the latest news and views from advocates.

4.  Issuing a newsletter, "NacNet". Sent monthly to email subscribers, it will highlight the campaigns and projects of NAC and advocates.

5.  Producing a forum where members can discuss issues, make announcements or share views.

Thank you everyone.