Below is a guest post by Catherine Harris, written to accompany her Master of Public Policy dissertation at the end of 2023 …
It would be reasonable to assume that we can all see the value in human rights. We all want our human rights to be respected and benefit from just knowing they are there. Day to day, if we are fortunate, we probably don’t have to think about them at all. However, our concern for human rights might come to the fore when we, or someone we love, are in a more vulnerable circumstance. For example, if we need support from the social care system.
A human rights approach to social care, is the way in which people’s rights are upheld. This may be particularly important to someone who requires support to meet their everyday needs, if they live with a disability, or are older for example. While people don’t have a right to social care specifically, an effective social care system allows people to access the support they need to live as independently as possible. In other words, the social care system is a way people’s human rights can be met.
Human rights and a human rights approach seem to be important then, especially if we want to protect the most vulnerable. Yet, the Conservative led UK Government are making some radical moves that imply our human rights are becoming less of a priority. Although it was scrapped in the summer of 2023, the UK Bill of Rights promised nothing good for the security of the rights of people living in the UK.
Likewise, the ongoing Rwanda Deal, which has already been deemed unlawful by the Supreme Court, is a strong indication that the UK Government are moving against the promotion of human rights. As well as the UK Government’s questionable views on human rights, we are collectively facing the combined impact of Brexit, Covid-19 and longstanding austerity measures. It is reassuring then, that the Scottish Government are considering the future of human rights in Scotland through the new Human Rights Bill for Scotland.
Regrettably, the following paper suggests this new Human Rights Bill won’t bring much change in reality. This study finds that the language used in the human rights legislation is too vague, so vague in fact that it lacks any literal obligation for people to do the tasks expected. As well as this, there are many other factors that affect the ability and inclination of frontline workers to follow the rules of law. These include significant limitations on funding and resources, which leads to stress and burnout of workers, but also leads to people not getting the support they need.
The existing process of challenging decisions in social care is both complicated and unlikely to result in success. This means that if you’re unhappy with the support you’re offered, or if you feel like you need support but don’t meet the criteria, there isn’t much you can do about it. Clearly it is important to be able to hold social workers accountable for their decisions, but it is also important to be able to hold local authorities and our central governments accountable too. After all, they are in control of the finance and resource decisions which are having the negative impact. Until these underlying issues around accountability, funding and resources are addressed, rearranging human rights legislation is unlikely to transform the experience of social workers, or people who use social care services.
… The MPP dissertation uses the Institutional Grammar approach to code key aspects of government policy. We hope to work together to turn it into a publishable article soon.
Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy 