Luvvies forget to budget

Not having an open cheque book is a real annoyance – as the Australian Human Rights Commission has just discovered.

Tim Wilson’s appointment as human rights commissioner could lead to cuts to a program on school bullying as the Australian Human Rights Commission accommodates his six-figure salary without any extra funding from the government.
The incoming human rights commissioner, who is due to take up his position in February, will be paid about $320,000 – a sum equal to that of his fellow commissioners, though less than the commission’s president, Gillian Triggs.
On Sunday, Professor Triggs said Mr Wilson’s salary would have to come out of the commission’s annual budget of about $25 million.
”This really does squeeze the commission,” she said.

Somehow the article seems to place the blame on Tim Wilson – like it is Tim’s problem that he has been appointed to a job of work and the employing organisation has the find the salary to pay him.

Here is the problem – the AHRC doesn’t generate any income at all and survives only due to an appropriation from government. So there is no incentive to budget wisely. The Commission has already spent the money that would have and should have provided for Tim’s salary.

This entry was posted in Economics and economy. Bookmark the permalink.

85 Responses to Luvvies forget to budget

  1. Jazza

    Did we hear any such a wailing and crying poormouths when the Tim before OUR Tim was appointed?

  2. Gab

    The HR Commissioners still throwing a tanty becuase one appointee is of the Right. You’d be forgiven for thinking the Commissioners think the Right have no right to a voice in this country. I’m willing to bet had a new appointee been of the Left there’d be no wailing and tantrums from the AHRC and the money for a new salary would be easily found.

  3. Ant

    Oh boo hoo, how they’re having to count their pennies now that they’ve had a fire lit under their arse.

  4. Slim

    Would Jesus be a luvvie or a hatie?

  5. ChrisPer

    Cry us a river. If these stormtroopers of political correctness had protected our human rights in respect of freedom of speech and equality before the law, no extrra commissioner would have been appointed.

  6. grumpy

    Good on them for giving the coalition another weapon. Instead of abolishing the HRC all Abbott has to do is keep appointing commissioners without increasing the budget. Eventually the whole shebang will disappear up it’s own fundament.

  7. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    Keep the bullying programme.

    Fund it by sacking Tim Soutphomassane, Liz Broderick and Gillian Triggs.

    Society would be the winner.

  8. Gab

    Keep the bullying programme.

    Yes, I suspect Wilson will need to refer to it after he starts the new job.

  9. Sinclair Davidson

    I’m just wondering if this constitutes mismanaging the finances and Brandis can sack Triggs?

    Gab – I have no doubt there will be lots of lawfare against Tim.

  10. Gab

    lawfare

    is that a euphemism for “bullying”. I must remember that.

  11. Andrew of Randwick

    It shocked the political establishment as Mr Wilson had been a director at an organisation that called for the abolition of the Human Rights Commission

    Who is the political establishment the reporter Ms Ireland so authoritatively refers to?
    .
    I also note that Prof Triggs runs up the flagpole of cutting the only HRC program that the general public may have heard about, or have an interest in. Typical public servant passive aggressive response.

  12. Chris M

    I’m hoping this is a six month employment upon which the HR show is declared to be a success and wrapped up right? That is ridiculous money for parasites.

  13. .

    Does Triggs actually run this as the executive officer?

    Do Tim, Tim, Gilli, Liz etc sit at a monthly meeting, aye, nay, with Tim 1 writing notes and Tim 2 banging out answers about 2015/16 tea monies?

  14. jupes

    I’m just wondering if this constitutes mismanaging the finances and Brandis can sack Triggs?

    Yes. What was Cormann’s veiled threat “watch this space” about?

  15. Des Deskperson

    ‘I’m just wondering if this constitutes mismanaging the finances and Brandis can sack Triggs? ‘
    While I haven’t looked the HRC Act in detail, it’s usually very difficult to terminate the appointment of a statutory office on any grounds other than misbehaviour, physical or mental incapacity, absence from duty or bankruptcy. I’m not sure that there would be any legal grounds for termination a statutory appointee on the grounds of inefficiency.

    Statutory Officers used to be covered by the APS code of conduct and could presumably therefore be disciplined for a breach of section 2 – the requirement to act with care and diligence – which would cover budgetary incompetence. However, I think that the recent amendments to the PS Act may have exempted statutory officers from this provision. I’ll check.

  16. .

    While I haven’t looked the HRC Act in detail, it’s usually very difficult to terminate the appointment of a statutory office on any grounds other than misbehaviour, physical or mental incapacity, absence from duty or bankruptcy. I’m not sure that there would be any legal grounds for termination a statutory appointee on the grounds of inefficiency.

    Federal Laws are written in a language that looks like ours but is not the same.

    We are the Cantonese and they are the Mandarin(s)!

  17. Des Deskperson

    This is what the Public service regulations say about the application of the APS C code of conduct to statutory office holders:

    a) a statutory office holder is bound by the Code of Conduct only to the extent to which the statutory office holder:

    (i) is assisted by APS employees in a supervisory capacity or another capacity related to the statutory office holder’s day to day working relationship with APS employees; or

    (ii) deals with APS employees in a supervisory capacity, or in another capacity related to the statutory office holder’s day to day working relationship with APS employees;

    In other words, coverage would depend on Trigg’s supervisory and managerial responsibilities, if any. I myself reckon that it would be tricky to try to do a statutory officer for inefficiency under s 2 of the code of conduct.

  18. Bruce

    will be paid about $320,000 – a sum equal to that of his fellow commissioners, though less than the commission’s president, Gillian Triggs

    What a lot of money for a job that could be improved by abolition.

    So my simple proposal is to halve all their salaries. If they don’t like it make all the positions part time. If they don’t like that make them zero time and pay them accordingly.

    Mr Wilson is fine, he clearly can find work. As for the others, well McDonalds are recruiting.

  19. johanna

    Any chance they could quantify how many more kiddies will be bullied if they have to cut their school bullying program?

    Thought not.

  20. C.L.

    Abbott should have sacked the malicious bint.

    Here we see again a classic illustration of the softcock Liberal Party allowing our country’s institutions to remain dominated by left-wing extremists.

    I’m sorry but as I said last week, the Wilson appointment doesn’t excite me. It’s just a meaningless sop in and of itself.

  21. candy

    Maybe in six months they will wrap it all up to two commissioners on a part time basis in a small office and have done.
    Dreadful waste of money. Once Tony Abbott is secure he will pare it down.

  22. Rabz

    What was Cormann’s veiled threat “watch this space” about?

    It means they need to start keeping a very low profile. Quite frankly, I’m sick to f*cking death of hearing about these morons.

    As I noted the other day, there is a very important matter before these lobotomised totalitarion numpties at the moment.

    If they stuff that up, heads will roll.

  23. gabrianga

    The Commission has already spent the money that would have and should have provided for xxx’s
    salary.

    Obviously working off the Conroy NBN plan?

  24. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    As I noted the other day, there is a very important matter before these lobotomised totalitarion numpties at the moment.

    Missed your post Rabs. What is this important matter?

    London to a brick they produce a luvvie-friendly verdict anyway.

  25. rebel with cause

    I’m sorry but as I said last week, the Wilson appointment doesn’t excite me. It’s just a meaningless sop in and of itself.

    Not only that CL, but when Labour gets back in power they will use the Wilson appointment to justify a hundred of their own. They will pay back in kind and them some when given half a chance.

    If you don’t agree with an institution on philosophical grounds, the correct response is to get rid of it. Appointing fellow travellers just gets the Right playing a game that the Left are a hundredfold better at.

    You would have thought that the Conservatives would have learned from their stacking of the ABC board with friendly faces – it does not work. Wilson is but one man, and the rest of the organisation has a completely different moral framework. He will be continuously undermined and thwarted by the very staff that will claim to support him. Moreover, he is now in the unenviable position of being part of an organisation that he doesn’t believe should exist. I question whether the cause of free speech wouldn’t have been better aided by Wilson remaining at the IPA.

    I don’t doubt Tim Wilson’s sincerity and I hope that he proves me wrong, but right now my view is that this is a Pyrrhic Victory. I find the celebratory backslapping in going on in these quarters over his appointment somewhat troubling – we are celebrating a poke in the eye to an opponent who has got us fighting squarely on their terms.

  26. C.L.

    If you don’t agree with an institution on philosophical grounds, the correct response is to get rid of it. Appointing fellow travellers just gets the Right playing a game that the Left are a hundredfold better at.

    Hear hear. Exactly.

    The Liberal Party is a disgrace.

  27. Mr Rusty

    I’m fed up to the back teeth of these wankers who think they are being clever with their subtle inference that ‘Conservatives = public sector cuts = abolished programs = more bullying in schools = overpaid 6 figure salaries.’

    Tim Wilson’s best response would be to sack Troggs and Soppymop and say – “Being such a caring and compassionate conservative I have in fact just doubled the funding and I’m allocating Troggs salary specifically to combating bullying of gay schoolkids”, then lets see what kind of smart-arsed article the SMH tries to write then.

  28. Sinclair Davidson

    Mr Rusty – Triggs is the head, so Tim can’t sack her. But the luvvies haven’t yet realised that he is 2IC. So when Triggs is away, he is in charge.

  29. sabrina

    That’s twice Sinclair’s (a Professor) base salary. Sack them all, they have had too many merry Christmas at the expense of taxpayers. Useless work by ..!

  30. Baldrick

    The luvvies at No Fibs have pulled their poll on Tim Wilson.

    Update: The poll has been removed due to interference from Australia’s leading libertarian and centre-right blog. Thanks for your support though. “

    In the words of Jack Nicholson … ‘You can’t handle the truth!’

  31. Eddystone

    “Update: The poll has been removed due to interference from Australia’s leading libertarian and centre-right blog. Thanks for your support though. “

    Hahahahaha!

    So much for defending the right of those you disagree with.

  32. egg_

    Professor Triggs threatens to:

    cut their school bullying program

    Beyond parody.

  33. Keep the bullying programme.

    Fund it by sacking Tim Soutphomassane, Liz Broderick and Gillian Triggs.

    Society would be the winner.

    Spot on. A perfect solution.

    I’m afraid that otherwise the world’s smallest violin will be playing for the HRC at Casa Martyr this Christmas.

  34. JohnA

    Sinclair Davidson #1121432, posted on December 23, 2013 at 12:49 pm

    Mr Rusty – Triggs is the head, so Tim can’t sack her. But the luvvies haven’t yet realised that he is 2IC. So when Triggs is away, he is in charge.

    Sinc, you write that as if he has “deputising” authority rather than line authority as 2IC.

    If he actually has line authority, he could take charge of the budget and cut his coat to suit his cloth, maybe?

  35. .

    “No Fibs” are a pathetic, ultra left, astroturf from Crickey. In fact, the idiots advertise as such.

    No Fibs? Where is their section on Gillard and the carbon tax?

  36. Rabz

    Walrus – watch this space.

    Or go to their webshite and do some wading.

  37. Rabz

    London to a brick they produce a luvvie-friendly verdict anyway.

    Here’s hoping they are actually stupid enough to do so – which I don’t doubt.

    They’ll be signing their own death warrants. They’re also scheduled to make a decision on this matter before Wilson, T. is appointed.

    This is a good thing.

  38. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    Or go to their webshite and do some wading.</blockquote

    Yecch!

    All that holier-than-thou posturing! I'll need a good shower afterwards.

  39. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    Blockquote fail, sorry.

  40. What about lateral thinking? Dear Tim could always resign. He could argue that your work on human rights is more important than me. Returning to the IPA he would be assured of a higher salary – so not too much of a personal sacrifice. Otherwise, he might be classified as a dreaded “luvvie”. (Please pause, given the season and spirit of love that courses though all your beings, no personal attacks.)

  41. Leigh Lowe

    Trigger has just revealed herself to be totally incompetent or disingenuous at best.
    TW’s salary comprises about 1% of the HRC budget. What this useless bint is saying is that she can’t do what thousands of families have to do every day. That is, people on a net salary of, say, $50,000, suddenly having to find $500 for a car repair or a bung fridge.
    And I am not so sure about her exemption from disciplinary action if she overspends the budget. She has telegraphed that it is likely so if she overspends having already admitted she should cut programs to accommodate TW’s salary, that could be construed as some sort of fraud on the Commonwealth.

  42. Rabz

    What about lateral thinking?

    Lateral Thinking?

    I’ll give you ‘lateral thinking’, you pompous fuck:

    Shut. It. Down.

    Fire. Them. All.

  43. Des Deskperson

    ‘And I am not so sure about her exemption from disciplinary action if she overspends the budget’

    Depends upon whether she has any managerial responsibilities. Many Judicial and quasi judicial statutory offices have no financial and operational responsibilities, their role is largely pontifical. In these cases, if there is organisational fraud or budgetary inefficiency, its the COO or the CFO – a public servant covered by the code of conduct and the legal requirement to be efficient, effective etc – who wears it.

    A stat officer can, of course be done for personal fraud – rorting travel expenses etc.

  44. .

    wmmbb
    #1121658, posted on December 23, 2013 at 4:55 pm

    What about lateral thinking? Dear Tim could always resign. He could argue that your work on human rights is more important than me. Returning to the IPA he would be assured of a higher salary – so not too much of a personal sacrifice. Otherwise, he might be classified as a dreaded “luvvie”. (Please pause, given the season and spirit of love that courses though all your beings, no personal attacks.)

    Eat shit.

    You want to reduce my civil liberties and impoverish Australians at the expense of the lunar left Greens and utterly corrupt and parasitic ALP and unions.

  45. What about lateral thinking?

    Lateral Thinking?

    I’ll give you ‘lateral thinking’, you pompous fuck:

    Shut. It. Down.

    Fire. Them. All.

    Carthago delenda est. You go, girlfriend. Or boyfriend, as the case may be.

  46. Sinclair Davidson

    JohnA – I don’t believe that Tim or any of the commissioners have any control over their salary – it is fixed by the Remuneration Tribunal (as I understand it). In any event, why should he take a pay cut? He was appointed to a job and promised a fee that would entice him away from his current job.

    Tim is 2IC in the AHRC structure – certainly if was him, I ‘d be meeting with Triggs before his commencement date to have her explain her budget and spending choices to him. ANd I’d be informing her that I expected to be consulted on any choices etc. that she makes in the next month or so.

  47. Tintarella di Luna

    lateral thinking

    The kind of lateral thinking engaged in by wmmbb on the Cat is called latrinal thinking

  48. Tintarella di Luna

    Carthago delenda est

    Hi Dr Martyr – and I’ll raise you a Sinistra delenda est

  49. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    . (Please pause, given the season and spirit of love that courses though all your beings, no personal attacks.)

    Wrong blog Sunshine.

    Time to skip town.

  50. Hi Dr Martyr – and I’ll raise you a Sinistra delenda est

    Oh gosh, don’t call me that here … I will be growled at.

    But I’ll accept the Sinistra delenda est with pleasure. And you gift-wrapped it, too; how nice.

  51. Rabz

    I will be growled at.

    You’ll live.

  52. Bons

    It is just so bloody FUNNY – but there is far cheaper and meaningful comedy available.

  53. On the substance of the post, referring to the newspaper report, the appointment of Mr Wilson was made as an additional appointment, not to fill a vacancy. As such it is suggested that his salary should be covered by additional funding. If so, that would be reasonable and consistent with good budgeting given the commitment of existing funding.

    Mr Wilson’s special interest is freedom of speech. Catallaxy is,for some the exemplar of free speech. It is by this account a bastion standing steadfast against the external Barbarians as all impartial readers of the headings (including this one), posts and comments can attest. The presumption of freedom of speech is that we listen with respect to those who hold opposing or differing positions. If we are all held accountable to that principle we will do justice to freedom of speech. At minimum, perhaps we might of our choice not engage in scapegoating, or any other form of expression that would imply violence.

  54. JC

    The presumption of freedom of speech is that we listen with respect to those who hold opposing or differing positions.

    No it doesn’t. It doesn’t mean that at all. You are suggesting for instance I ought to respectfully listen to a lunatic who says the CIA killed Kennedy or the moon landing was staged in Hollywood. It would also mean that i/we should respectfully listen to someone saying a substantial across the board wage increase will raise employment.

    Free speech directly relates to the right to political dissent, not the stuff you are talking about.

  55. Gab

    After all this time, and for all their tantrums, Leftards still don’t understand what free speech means.

  56. JC

    Gab

    It’s truly fucking incredible isn’t it. Almost by definition being a leftwinger means you have no fucking idea what free speech means and have no mental capacity to understand what it means even if it is explained to you every single day.

    I’ve not seen one single nutball leftwinger who has any grasp of the concept. Ever.

  57. I am the Walrus, koo koo k'choo

    The presumption of freedom of speech is that we listen with respect to those who hold opposing or differing positions.

    Um, no.

    It means people have the freedom to speak their minds, safe from fascist loons trying to silence them.

    It doesn’t at all mean the rest of us are under an obligation to listen to them.

  58. Gab

    This is how they understand free speech:

    Dad: Do not talk to your mother like that oops. I’ll start again in language they can understand:

    Parent 1: Do not talk to your other parent like that!

    Leftard: You’re not the boss of me and I can say whatever I want!!11!!! You can’t repress my free speech!!11!!!

  59. JC

    Free speech means the right of the poor, disenfranchised and the dispossessed to speak truth to power.

  60. Des Deskperson

    ‘ As such it is suggested that his salary should be covered by additional funding. If so, that would be reasonable and consistent with good budgeting given the commitment of existing funding. ‘

    But governments of all persuasions change their priorities all the time and agencies can’t always expect extra funding, so they may need to look at lower priority programs that need to be scaled back. Identifying these is one of the skills of an effective public sector manager.

    In the case of the HRC, either (a) the organisation has carefully and objectively reviewed its priorities and decided that the school bullying programs are the least important items in the budget – maybe because they’re expensive and ineffective – and can be scaled back, or (b) the whole thing is a crude and arguably treasonous political stunt by Triggs, playing on current the emotional resonances in relation to bullying .

    wwmb, what do you reckon?

  61. Leo G

    On Sunday, Professor Triggs said Mr Wilson’s salary would have to come out of the commission’s annual budget of about $25 million.

    But Prof Triggster’s budget is $29.6 million, including the FMA s31 appropriations.

  62. Gab

    On Sunday, Professor Triggs said Mr Wilson’s salary would have to come out of the commission’s annual budget of about $25 million.

    But Prof Triggster’s budget is $29.6 million, including the FMA s31 appropriations.

    Whoops, there goes another million in cash.

  63. DD since you probably know more of the process in regard to agency funding than I do, I assume you have correctly alluded to the skills of a good public sector manager. The context is a change of government, and while the Commission does have a Minister, who is hostile at least to the application of s.18(c) of the Racial Discrimination Act.

    The Public Sector managers presumably are involved in the politics of protecting their budgetary allocations. In this case, as in others, the head of the agency, has been appointed primarily for their acknowledged skills and knowledge in a specialized subject. I simply do not know enough to option (a) or (b), although prima facie the latter is somewhat tendentious.

  64. JC

    You don’t know much of anything. You don’t even understand the basic concept of free speech if it hit you on the head and caused a big bump, so stop trying to sound even half way smart.

  65. .

    …does have a Minister, who is hostile at least to the application of…

    Becuase it is a violation of free speech.

    How hard is that for you to understand?

  66. Combine Dave

    So what other programs does the AHRC fund that may be cut to accommodate a new commissioners (one actually committed to free speech)?

  67. Fisky

    The presumption of freedom of speech is that we listen with respect to those who hold opposing or differing positions.

    No, that isn’t the presumption of free speech at all actually. You haven’t got the slightest clue what you are talking about.

  68. Fisky

    No it doesn’t. It doesn’t mean that at all. You are suggesting for instance I ought to respectfully listen to a lunatic who says the CIA killed Kennedy or the moon landing was staged in Hollywood. It would also mean that i/we should respectfully listen to someone saying a substantial across the board wage increase will raise employment.

    Or that some light-skinned ‘aborigines’ are using 1/8 of their ancestry to promote their careers. The Left would respectfully hear me out if I said that, right wmmbb?

  69. Mr Rusty

    Mr Rusty – Triggs is the head, so Tim can’t sack her.

    Of course, my bad. The way that lot have been going on they’ve even led me to believe Tim had been appointed to Master of the Universe.

  70. Frisky, I suggest it would depend on how you made the argument. There is another “right of cultural identity”. But then, I don’t have the slightest clue, do you?

    JC (should I be wishing you happy birthday?) You may well be right about my not knowing much of anything. I don’t have a bump on the head , not even as great big bump. Of course preventing head injuries is very important – especially for football players. I appreciate your suggested definition of free speech, but it cover the wider social and political right of freedom of speech.

    It is not original to suggest that the purpose of democratic discussion is to discover the truth. Another of looking at free speech is that it is a learning process. Surely, it is interesting and entertaining, if somebody was to suggest that the moon landing was a studio production? The JFK assassination is a very interesting historical event, and the question of establishing the truth in retrospect is challenging.

  71. Fisky. thanks for your comment:

    Or that some light-skinned ‘aborigines’ are using 1/8 of their ancestry to promote their careers. The Left would respectfully hear me out if I said that, right wmmbb?

    These issues can be, and probably would be, polarizing. I realized that I do not know who my great grandparents were, or anything about their lives. Could it be in other cultures this is not the same? We tend to take for granted that our way of understanding and seeing the world is the only or, if not, the best way.

    On the broader question, it is not apparent that freedom of speech is in practice an unqualified right. For example, the US Supreme Court has recognized various restrictions on the exercise of the First Amendment. We all might be aware of libel laws. I assume that the disciplined practice of democratic citizenship is the best means for protecting our personal rights as of others. ( I will give more thought to suggest particular examples).

    .

  72. wreckage

    We all might be aware of libel laws.

    Traditionally, the accusation of libel can be defended – easilly, in almost all cases. It is quite hard to prove libel. This is the inverse of the current attempts to muzzle free speech.

    If the Left truly believe that free speech should entail proper manners, let them argue that, and put forward a formal framework of etiquette that excludes absolutely no point of view.

    Inevitably, this is not what they argue, at least, not coherently. After all, Marilyn Manson fans must be permitted to wear t-shirts reading “I am the God of Fuck”; that’s freedom of expression! On the other hand, Climate Denial, Racism, Hate Speech, are all criminal acts, or being touted as acts that should be criminalized.

    So, if you want to argue that “claims that are demonstrably false, known to be false, and made purely with the intent of causing measurable material harm, should be illegal” go right ahead. That concept in law precedes the AHRC and does not fall under their remit.

  73. Sinclair Davidson

    Indeed, early reports especially in the Fairfax media suggested Tim was the head of the commission.

  74. WhaleHunt Fun

    Surely the presumption of freedom of speech is that we listen with as little respect and as much candid pisstaking as seems worth giving.

  75. Mike of Marion

    Sinclair Davidson
    #1123998, posted on December 26, 2013 at 8:20 am

    He may well be in 6 months!!!!

  76. JC

    On the broader question, it is not apparent that freedom of speech is in practice an unqualified right. For example, the US Supreme Court has recognized various restrictions on the exercise of the First Amendment. We all might be aware of libel laws. I assume that the disciplined practice of democratic citizenship is the best means for protecting our personal rights as of others. ( I will give more thought to suggest particular examples).

    I’m more than happy to run with the American constitutional right to free speech and any qualifications found by the US Supreme Court. I’m betting you and your leftie friends would be though.

  77. duncanm

    “No Fibs” are a pathetic, ultra left, astroturf from Crickey. In fact, the idiots advertise as such.

    worse… Magrot grafted a wad of your cash from Macquarie Uni (via her ‘mate’) prior to the previous election.

  78. Sinclair Davidson

    Mike – my preference would be for it to be shut down in six months.

  79. candy

    Australian Government shuts down Human Rights Commission is not a headline that would do Tony Abbott or any prime minister any good, given we still have some Aboriginal peoples sicker and poorer than the rest of us but he might pare it down bit by bit to something more rational.
    I think Tony Abbott might have more pressing governmental matters at the moment anyway.

  80. Sinclair Davidson

    Candy – poverty amongst segments of the community is not a human rights problem – it is a welfare problem.

  81. candy

    Sinclair, I thought the Human Rights Commission devoted some of their website to indigenous social justice and poverty issues etc?

  82. Sinclair Davidson

    Candy – they do. But it remains a welfare problem, not a human rights problem. That is part of the criticism of the AHRC – they do things outside of their remit.

  83. I would take issue, Sinclair, with the contention you make that human welfare issues and human rights issues are separate. The fair go sums it up.

    If everybody is shouting at each other, you may believe that is freedom of speech, but to what extent does it advance the purposes of self expression? I thought this discussion, limited in terms of participant viewpoints, is nevertheless instructive. One of my teachers said “personality is a gift”. I remembered that comment if nothing else – as you do.

  84. Sinclair Davidson

    Well no. Welfare is about redistribution i.e. taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Human rights is about treating everyone equally, irrespective of their race, colour, creed, wealth, or income.

Comments are closed.