Is poverty in the UK a denial of people's human rights?

Is poverty in the UK a denial of people's human rights?

Being poor in the United Kingdom can mean being subjected to discrimination on the grounds of poverty. Both poverty and discrimination are contrary to the spirit and the terms of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Damian Killeen argues that the refusal of successive governments to incorporate the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights into UK law has compounded common social attitudes that denigrate people who experience poverty and that undermine popular support for policies to eradicate poverty.

Key points

• Discrimination against people on the grounds of their poverty is a common but relatively unacknowledged feature of life in the UK.
• Such discrimination is sometimes based on views that people living in poverty are inferior or of lesser value. Such attitudes can become embedded as 'povertyism' – a phenomenon akin to racism or sexism
• There are deeply held views amongst the public about the 'deserving' and the 'undeserving' poor in the UK. This is reflected in governments' resistance to highlighting wealth redistribution as a means of combating poverty.
• In terms of legislation:
  • The Government has consistently resisted UN pressure to incorporate the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights into UK law 1998, contrary to a recommendation from the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords and the House of Commons.
  • In 2007, the Government rejected EU proposals which would have incorporated the European Charter of Fundamental Rights into UK law. This Charter builds on the rights protected by the European Convention on Human Rights to create more comprehensive protection for economic, social and cultural rights.
  • The new Equality and Human Rights Commission is required to prioritise the rights protected by the UK's Human Rights Act, which generally excludes economic, social and cultural rights, in its human rights work. Moreover UK equality law does not specifically cover poverty, which means the Commission cannot take anti-discrimination cases on poverty, as it can where discrimination is based on sex, race, disability, religion or belief, age or sexual orientation.
• UK governments have tended to confuse the adoption of internationally recognised human rights standards with the abdication to international courts of their right to govern. Rather than rejecting these aspects of international and European agreements, this paper recommends that:
  • Discussion on combating poverty should be based on the human rights values and principles that should underpin the shared lives of people in the UK.
  • The UK Government should fully incorporate international human rights standards into UK legislation; and that
  • Discrimination on the grounds of poverty should be outlawed in UK legislation.

The experience of discrimination

Discrimination against people on the grounds of their poverty is a common but relatively unacknowledged feature of life in the UK. This discrimination can range from subtle differences in treatment by service providers and the general public to the failure to provide basic necessities, such as adequate incomes and shelter, that are regarded as fundamental human rights by the world community.

Those who discriminate can be entirely unaware of their behaviour, of the attitudes and assumptions that underlie it and of its impact. Those who are discriminated against can feel that they are being judged and found wanting as individuals, that their right to belong in society is under question and that they are destined to be excluded from the benefits of increasing prosperity experienced by the majority.

As part of the research for this paper a group of people living in poverty came together to explore their experiences of discrimination and the effects these had on them. Participants described a range of experiences at the hands of the public and public services, including health, education and the police, where they were convinced that perceptions of their poverty had led to them being treated differently from others. In some cases this had led to them feeling shame and guilt for seeking help. One person described being made to feel 'invisible' as the rules were imposed without any apparent regard to her needs. Asylum-seekers, in particular, said that they felt dehumanised by the treatment and different level of support they received.

People said that their expressions of distress and their desperation at failing to get fair treatment were too easily interpreted as aggression by service staff and could lead to assistance being denied. These people with direct experience of living in poverty were convinced that the treatment they received was different from what people with higher social status would expect.

Much public policy on poverty in the UK assumes a relationship between 'rights' and 'responsibilities'; any entitlements to assistance are conditional on the fulfilment of a range of criteria. Some criteria are objective and universally applied, such as age and family composition. However, in some areas professionals have scope for using individual discretion. The experiences of people living in poverty shows the use of discretion can easily become or be perceived as being discrimination.

What is 'povertyism'?

Negative attitudes towards people who experience poverty can take many forms, including stigmatisation, prejudice and discrimination. Such attitudes are sometimes based on the view that people living in poverty are inferior or of lesser value. Discrimination of this kind can then become embedded as 'povertyism' – a phenomenon akin to racism or sexism. 'Postcode discrimination', for example – in which people are refused access to services, such as insurance or credit, or are treated differently on the basis of their postal address – has long been recognised as a form of discrimination.

Povertyism can also become institutionalised in the culture of organisations, including those whose remit is to help people cope. One report (Wright, 2003) of an ethnographic study of the operations of a job centre demonstrates the ease with which potentially benign policies can be translated into discriminatory services by the intervention of the personal prejudices of staff. In this example, the informal division of clients into 'Good ' and 'Bad' and the Bad into 'wasters', 'unemployables', 'nutters', 'hoity-toity' (unemployed professionals who could be more trouble than they were worth) and those who are 'at it', led to unofficial differentiations in the quality of service provided and to self-fulfilling prophecies in terms of outcomes. The study also recorded the ways in which clients would sometimes counter the stereotype imposed upon them but would more often conform to their label as a means of both them and the staff maintaining a comfortable form of status quo.

Povertyism is embedded in class and other social relations in Britain. Public attitude surveys express some of the ambivalent views on poverty (Castell, 2007). They reveal a widespread resentment of people living in poverty. Better-off people may often disapprove of the fact that many poor people share the same tastes and consumerist aspirations as they do. This can extend to a denial that poverty exists and hostility towards the costs of providing people with opportunities to escape their poverty.

One explanation proposed for such resentment is the precariousness of existence for many: in a very unequal society, people feel highly protective of any advantage they have (Young, 2003). As a result, people who experience poverty may be portrayed, in the media and in general public discussion, as not sharing society's common values and not worthy of equality of respect (Sayer, 2005).

Whilst the Government has introduced a range of measures since 1996 to improve the conditions and opportunities of people living in poverty, popular attitudes reflected and amplified by much of the media have made them reluctant to promote fully redistributive approaches to combating poverty.

Poverty and human rights

The concept of human rights is under attack in the UK. It has become associated with controversy over the freeing of potential terrorists or illegal immigrants. Attempts to vilify human rights for short-term political purposes undermine many decades of humanitarian progress in which the world community has come together around some core ideas of what our basic obligations to each other should be – beginning with respect for each others' lives. These ideas have been codified through the agency of the United Nations into a range of Declarations and Conventions which provide the possibility of recourse to justice for people who feel that their human rights have been ignored or taken from them.

The UK Government ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1976, but with several reservations. This Covenant reflects an international agreement that poverty – both absolute and relative, in developed as well as in developing countries – is an offence against human rights. Despite ratifying the Covenant, the Government resists UN pressure to incorporate Covenant rights into UK law, despite a recommendation for incorporation from the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the Houses of Lords and Commons. The Government argues that the Covenant's statements of social and economic rights represents "aspirational policy objectives which do not impose precise legal obligations on states". The Committee noted that this view understates the obligations which the Covenant imposes on the State (Joint Committee, 2004).

The Government also treats the adoption of measures linked to supra-national structures such as the European Union or the UN as a loss of the UK's right to govern. This has to be balanced against the benefits of ensuring that the UK is bound to the same set of principles as other countries and of providing UK citizens with access to final arbitration by a grouping of peers where individuals believe that their human rights have been breached by the state.

The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights produces five-yearly reports on the implementation of the Covenant by member states. The Committee has criticised the UK Government on poverty-related issues, including:

• the failure to ensure that Income Support levels are 'adequate';
• the level of the National Minimum Wage and the discriminatory lower minimum wage for 18- to 22- year-olds;
• the increasing gap between the richest and poorest people; and
• concerns about fuel poverty, homelessness and student tuition fees.

Whilst welcoming the introduction of the Human Rights Act, the Committee has also criticised the UK Government for failing to fully incorporate human rights standards into UK law.

What needs to happen?

In recent years, discussion of the ethical basis for combating poverty has become submerged in debate about the Government's efficiency and effectiveness in achieving its poverty eradication targets. This trend needs to be reversed, with discussion returning to the values and principles that should underpin the shared lives of people in the UK. The value of the human rights framework should be reasserted by government as an inclusive basis for conducting this debate. Leadership in taking this debate to the public should be exercised by the Equality and Human Rights Commission and human rights and poverty bodies working together to ensure that the perspectives of those who experience poverty in the UK are at the centre of the discussion about what values constitute 'Britishness'.

In 2004, the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords and the House of Commons reviewed the Government's implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Committee argued that the Government should accept the Covenant rights and said: "In our view a rights-based approach can assist government in addressing poverty and Parliament and civil society in scrutinising its success in doing so". This proposal was rejected by the Government.

If the new UK Equality and Human Rights Commission is to establish itself as an independent and objective defender of rights, it could begin by revisiting this debate and by conducting a comprehensive review of the relevance of poverty and poverty-related policies to the full achievement of a UK society based on the principles of equality and the upholding of all peoples' human rights. Indicators of real change in approach from government would be the amendment of the Human Rights Act 1998 to incorporate the terms of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the outlawing of discrimination based on poverty.

About this paper

This discussion paper is part of the JRF's programme on Public Interest in Poverty Issues (PIPI). This aims to further understanding on how to build support for poverty eradication in the UK; to deepen understanding of attitudes to poverty and explore their implications for effective communication and change.

The paper was written by Damian Killeen. Damian Killeen is an independent consultant on social justice and sustainable development; he is a past Director of The Poverty Alliance in Scotland 1990-2003, was awarded the OBE in 2004 for his contribution to social inclusion and is a member of the advisory group to JRF's PIPI Programme. This paper is an outcome of research undertaken for the advisory group on the experience of discrimination related to poverty in the UK.

Useful reading

• Fairness and Freedom, final report of the Equalities Review, HMSO, 2007
• Get Heard, UK Coalition Against Poverty, 2006
• Poverty, Ruth Lister, Polity Press 2007
• Unequal Britain: human rights as a route to social justice, Stuart Weir (Ed), Politico's Publishing Ltd 2006

References

Castell, Sarah and Julian Thompson (2007), Understanding Attitudes to Poverty in the UK, Joseph Rowntree Foundation

Equalities Review (2007), 'Fairness and Freedom: the final report of the Equalities Review', HMSO

Joint Committee (2004), 'The Implementation of the International Convention on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights', Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords and the House of Commons

Sayer, Andrew (2005), 'Class, moral worth and recognition' in Sociology, Vol. 39, Sage Publications

Sen, Amartya (1999), Development As Freedom, Oxford University Press, New Delhi

Wright, Sharon (2003), 'The street level implementation of unemployment policy' in Understanding Social Security, Jane Millar ed., The Policy Press

Young, Jock (2003), 'Merton with energy, Katz with structure; the sociology of vindictiveness….' in Theoretical criminology, Vol. 7. (3) Sage Publications