Open letter to the Right Honourable Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the UK: public health and humanitarian effects of war on Iraq

The Lancet ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 361 (9354) ◽  
pp. 345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Stephens
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Open Letter ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Effects Of War

Third Ways in Europe?

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliano Bonoli ◽  
Martin Powell
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Third Way ◽  
Joint Paper ◽  
Progressive Politics ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
New Politics ◽  
The Third ◽  
British Prime Minister ◽  
The Uk

It has been claimed that there is a global Third Way (TW) debate. Giddens (2001: 1) writes that, ‘Across the world left of centre governments are attempting to institute third way programmes – whether or not they favour the term itself. ‘ He claims that there are self-declared third way parties in power in the UK, New Zealand, Korea, Taiwan, Brazil, Argentina and Chile, among many other countries. Similarly, according to Blair (2001), the ideas associated with the TW are still the wave of the future for progressive politics. From Latin America to Europe to parts of Asia, TW politics or ‘progressive government’ is exerting a huge influence on global politics. The TW is seen as a trailblazer for a new global social policy, a new model for a new millennium (e.g. McGuire, 1998/9). One of the main blueprints for the new politics (Giddens, 1998) has been translated into many languages. A number of international meetings in Paris and Florence have discussed the TW. British Prime Minister Tony Blair and German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder issued a joint paper, ‘The Third Way/Die Neue Mitte’ (Blair and Schröder, 1999) that was drafted by Peter Mandelson and Bodo Hombach. Hombach's book has been translated into English as ‘The New Centre’ (Hombach, 2000), with a preface by Tony Giddens and an introduction by Mark Leonard.

scholarly journals The United Kingdom’s Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act’s extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

A2. British Former Senior Diplomats, Open Letter to Prime Minister Tony Blair on British Policy on the Arab-Israeli Problem and Iraq, London, April 2004.

2004 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 174-175
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Open Letter ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Critical Letter ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
Right Of Return ◽  
British Policy ◽  
The Guardian

The sharply critical letter from the fifty-two former British ambassadors and senior government officials was prompted by Prime Minister Blair's support for Sharon's unilateral disengagement plan and apparent backing of President Bush's new stance on the refugee right of return (see Special Doc. B in this issue). The letter, published in the Guardian of London on 27 April 2004, inspired a similar initiative by former U.S. diplomats (see Doc. B1 below). Among the fifty-two signatories are former ambassadors to Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Syria; several former ambassadors to Iraq; and a former permanent representative to the United Nations.

scholarly journals Open letter to Prime Minister David Cameron on food poverty in the UK

The Lancet ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 383 (9929) ◽  
pp. 1631 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Ashton ◽  
John Middleton ◽  
Tim Lang
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Open Letter ◽  
David Cameron ◽  
The Uk

‘Blowback’ for Britain?: Blair, Bush, and the war in Iraq

2007 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
CAROLINE KENNEDY-PIPE ◽  
RHIANNON VICKERS
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
Suicide Bombers ◽  
Domestic Security ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Saddam Hussein ◽  
War In Iraq ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

ABSTRACTAs debate continues over the conduct, the legality and the morality of the war in Iraq, this article addresses how and why Prime Minister Blair decided on the British road to war in Iraq. The article argues that Tony Blair was working within a mindset at both the domestic and international levels that meant he was predisposed to use military force against Iraq and indeed against other perceived threats to the West. His mindset arose, we will argue, through fear rather than arrogance, through the experiences of the past two decades as much as contemporary events, and this meant that he systematically over-estimated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. We postulate that Blair was not pressured into invading Iraq by President Bush. Rather, he believed that it was the right path for Britain to take, and that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was actually the logical outcome of the ‘Doctrine of the International Community’ outlined in his Chicago speech in 1999. We go on to make the claim that by concentrating on supporting the United States in its grand strategy, Tony Blair misunderstood the pattern of politics at home and perhaps more seriously of the ‘threat’ to the domestic security of the United Kingdom. This was not a danger from Iraqi WMD or even from ‘foreign’ terrorists as had happened on 9/11 but from home-grown suicide bombers, some of whom claimed to be inspired by opposition to Blair’s wars. This was the blowback that mattered – and will continue to do so – for the UK.

scholarly journals Working with family carers: towards a partnership approach

2001 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nolan
Keyword(s):  
Government Policy ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Community Care ◽  
Informal Carer ◽  
Family Carers ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
Late Arrival ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Partnership Approach

The use of the term ‘family (informal) carer’, as it is currently conceptualized, is recent and is largely the product of increased attention in the academic and policy literature over the last two decades. Despite their fairly late arrival on the scene, family carers now occupy centre stage in UK government policy, having being described by the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, as the ‘unsung heroes’ of British life, who are essential to the fabric and character of Britain. Such recognition stems from the growing realization that family carers are the lynchpin of community care, providing 80% of all the care needed at an estimated saving to the UK government of some £40 billion annually.

The system, the virus and the law

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 134-137
Author(s):  
John Finch
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Public Health Authorities ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

As the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic progresses, with no visible end in sight, healthcare practitioners may ask whether the measures taken by public health authorities in the UK are going in the right direction. Who is legally responsible? John Finch looks at the institutional framework in which practitioners work and at the place of legal liability in healthcare delivery and management

Reform and Europe

2020 ◽  
pp. 133-200
Author(s):  
Lucy Atkinson ◽  
Andrew Blick ◽  
Matt Qvortrup
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
David Cameron ◽  
Tony Blair ◽  
The Uk

No referendums took place between 1979 and 1997. During much of the 1980s the idea of using this device failed to attract the level of interest it had in some earlier periods. But, in the following decade, the referendum began to gain currency once more. After Labour returned to office in 1997, the Tony Blair administration became the most extensive utilizer of the mechanism to date, holding five in total (though none at UK level). Reflecting the establishment of the referendum as a firmer part of the UK constitution, a more consistent framework for this practice was introduced. After 2004, the Labour governments did not use referendums again. However, the device returned from 2011. During the tenure of David Cameron, as Prime Minister in a coalition (2010–2015) and then a Conservative administration (2015–2016), four referendums were held.

scholarly journals Round table: Liberté, égalité and fraternité in public health - A Human rights approach to Public (Mental) Health

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Living Will ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Rights Based Approach

Abstract A human rights based approach to Public Health and to Public Mental health offers an opportunity to realize the right to health for all. However, a human rights-based approach to Public Health will require new inter-disciplinary approaches and an innovative frame. This frame should include the use of international human rights standards as a framework for research, policy and practice; the participation of target groups; and the enhancement of inclusion and respect for all. This workshop follows up from the Ljubljana 2018 workshop on human rights and public (mental) health and aims to test the requirements needed to ensure a human rights based approach to public health. For this, a panel of a researcher, ethicist, lawyer and a patient is set up to evaluate three practical cases. What are they advising in these specific cases and what does this mean for the international human rights framework. The outcomes of the panel discussion will be presented by the chair of the workshop. Case 1 Coerced sterilization in the UK The parents of a 21-year old woman with Down’s syndrome in the UK contacted a doctor to have their daughter sterlised our of fear that she may become pregnant. The woman did not have a bodyfriend nor expressed an interest in starting a sexual relationship. The parents stated that - as she had grown up - she had become more aware of the opposite sex and could be “overfamiliar” with people. Therefore sterilisation was needed to protect her in the future. A specialist supported the parents, but a second doctor suggested various methods of contraception as an alternative. Case 2 Euthanasia in the Netherlands A 74-year old incapacitated women with dementia stated several times that she does not want to live anymore. But she has also been heard saying that she likes her life. Under Dutch law, euthanasia is possible if the patient clearly indicates this, the so-called living-will. In this case, the doctor performed euthanasia based on her living will, which was given years earlier, before she was struck by dementia. Case 3 Rape in Northern Ireland A 12-year-old girl from Northern Ireland is raped. Abortion is not possible in this case due to the strict laws prohibiting abortion unless the woman’s life is in danger or there is a permanent or serious risk to her mental or physical health. The girl has to travel to England under police escort to have an abortion, so that a police officer could seize the ‘samples’ from the procedure for evidence. Key messages A human rights based approach to Public Health and to Public Mental health offers an opportunity to realize the right to health for all. It is critical that we do not risk losing the right to health in the rhetoric of the SDGs and ensure that we respond to the need of improving research methods on the promise of leaving no one behind. Mauro Giovanni Carta Contact: [email protected] Dineke Zeegers Paget Contact: [email protected] Els Maeckelberghe Contact: [email protected]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document