A Fairer Education in Africa

Education is not a finite resource like drugs or energy, it’s self-perpetuating. It’s also empowering; enabling people to take control of their lives and have more say in how things are run. Education programmes are popular with charities and governments, but as with a lot of development, there’s devil in the detail.

Particular devils that are widely overlooked are the obstacles that girls face in getting to and staying in school. Money is increasingly there for building schools and improving teaching, but not enough attention is being paid to how gender remains a major factor in determining who actually gets access to it.

One organisation dedicated to rebalancing these injustices is Pathways Togo (www.pathwaystogo.org). Since its founding in 2010, Pathways Togo has been building more and more support for girls and young women to get a high school and university education through scholarships, mentoring and workshops.

The young women who have earned scholarships with Pathways Togo have overcome many of the obstacles typical of girls struggling to get an education in rural Africa. High on the list is pressure to marry young through arranged and often polygamous marriages. Furthermore early pregnancies, lack of access to sanitary products, and personal safety and health issues make attending school and studying at home impossible for many girls. Domestic duties also limit girls’ time to attend schools; many are expected to do childcare and work in family farms and businesses.

Paying for school is also a serious challenge for many students. Where boys remain priorities in families, girls will often have to depend on brewing and selling alcohol, moving away from home, and selling street food in order to support themselves and continue their education.

Others have had more support from within their communities, with many families investing a great deal in their children’s education. One young woman had narrowly escaped an arranged marriage at age 11, and with support from her sister had been able to earn enough money to continue through school, earn a scholarship from Pathways Togo and eventually progress to university.

Many of the young women Pathways Togo has worked with have felt that the presence of strong female role models has made a great difference to their lives and those around them. While these are undoubtedly signs of progress, the work still to be done is vast.

The support of volunteers who can raise funds for scholarships, and help provide training and workshops for girls and young women is what keep organisations like Pathways Togo doing what they do. Governments and international organistions are investing heavily in education, but without this crucial work to address the gender gap in education, more education investment risks exacerbating the gender gap in wider society.

On October 5th, Jubilee Scotland  hosted a People’s Debt Tribunal at the Scottish Parliament, which saw Lidy Nacpil, representing Freedom from Debt Coalition Philippines and Jubilee South make the case for the cancellation of debt owed by the Philippines to the World Bank. Here an attendee of the Tribunal shares her thoughts.

‘ Debt cancellation is a call not for charity but for justice’ - Lidy Nacpil.

‘We have a very fruitful partnership with the Phillipines’, says the Worldbank. ‘The Worldbank owes us for its damaging loans’, counters Filipino campaigner Lidy Nacpil. Jubilee Scotland is campaigning for the Scottish government to set up an international debt arbitration tribunal where creditors and debtors can meet. Thorough debt audits could help solve the debt crisis that is currently keeping developing countries in a poverty trap.

Debtors meet creditors, by Emma Boyd

Third world debt seems to have disappeared from the public mind along with Jubilee 2000, Bono and Geldof. In 1998 and 2005, two initiatives pledged the one-off cancellation of the debts of 40 of the poorest countries. But, according to Jubilee Scotland, this remedy is ‘in many ways merely a sticking plaster’, offering too little too slowly: Many countries, like the Phillipines, are excluded and debt is only cancelled to what is considered a ‘sustainable’ level, based on the country’s export earnings, while ignoring its domestic spending needs. Besides, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank demanded austerity measures in turn for debt cancellation like cuts on public spending and the privatisation of basic services, which many of the 40 countries have as yet not been able to meet.

This means that in 2008, the world’s poorest 48 countries still had debts totalling US$168 billion, and the 128 poorest together owed a dazzling total of US $3.7 trillion to multilateral bodies, individual countries, private companies, banks and individuals. Over the course of 2008 alone, the developing countries paid $602 billion towards servicing these debts. This year’s figures will be even higher, as the economic crisis has led developing countries to take up more loans. As a result, despite the aid rhetoric and the Millennium Development Goals, money keeps flowing from the Global South to the North instead of vice versa.

Many of the debts still stem from the 1960s and 1970s, when banks and gouvernments in the North were eager to lend the huge amounts of money made from the rising oil prices to developing countries. Looking for Cold War allies, lending parties closed their eyes on corrupt or oppressive regimes and most of the money did not go into responsible hands and into development. In the 1970s and 1980s, the oil crisis led interest rates on the loans to soar. Additionally, falling commodity prices left countries with less hard currency to service the debts. The knock-on impact on exchange rates means that debts, which are most often counted in foreign currency, have skyrocketed in real terms for the affected countries. The debt total of US$3.7 trillion is the result.

Already since the early 1990s, campaigning organizations have called for an arbitration forum of some sort where historical cases of illegitimate or unfair debt can be lodged and solved, as well as unpayable debt relieved. With the 2010 Arbitration (Scotland) Act and the newly set up Scottish Arbitration Centre, Scotland would be a suitable host for such a tribunal. To demonstrate this, Jubilee Scotland organised a mock debt tribunal in Holyrood on the 5th of October. Here, the Phillipines and the Worldbank met. Or, better said, Lidy Nacpil met “John Smith”, an actor who played, scarily realistically, a Worldbank representative quoting solely from the Bank’s official documents. In the debt tribunal, the legal principle of ex aequo et bono (“from equity and conscience”) was applied, according to which an arbitrator or tribunal has the power to move away from the law as laid down and to consider the case in the light of arguments of natural justice such as fairness and equity.

Lidy presented her country’s case: The New Economics Foundation has calculated that the Philippines need at least 63% debt cancellation in order for the government to meet the basic needs of its citizens, such as health, education and infrastructure, without taxing those living below the ‘ethical poverty line’ of $3 a day. According to a recent study, 107 countries are burdened with an ‘unpayable debt’ like the Phillipines.

Former president Marcos, who governed the country from 1965 to 1985, left the Phillipines with more than half of its current foreign debt. Although democratically elected, Marcos turned the Phillipines into a dictatorship with martial law in 1972. When he fled the country in 1985, the country’s debt had gone from US$1 billion to of US$28 billion, most of it either stolen by Marcos or invested in failed or useless projects. The Bataan nuclear power plant is notorious in this regard. It was built by the US company Westinghouse on an earthquake fault-line at the foot of a volcano and has therefore remained unused. Westinghouse got paid generously nevertheless as the US gouvernment credit agency took over the standing debt. In 2007, the Filipino government finally completed paying off the $1.5 billion for the plant’s construction, more than 30 years after it began. As Marcos’ regime devastated the country’s economy, subsequent governments had to continue taking on loans to pay off the old ones.

During the fourteen-year dictatorship, the Worldbank granted five loans to Marcus. Now, the Phillipines still owe the Worldbank around US $3 billion out of a total foreign debt of US $47,5 billion. The original loans from the Worldbank have long since been repaid, but because the interest has compounded, 80% of the debt is still owed. If nothing changes, Filipino taxpayers will continue to pay for the illegitimate debts of Marcos until 2025, 39 years after he was overthrown. While ‘Smith’ glorified the loans as an investment in pro-poor development, Lidy Nacpil said there is little evidence that the Worldbank has had any positive impact at all. ‘Debt cancellation is a call not for charity but for justice’, Nacpil concluded.

Of course, one could argue that debt cancellation would create poor incentives by making future borrowers hope that they will have their debts waivered too. Also, developing countries are dependent on loans and if creditors would stop this flow of money due to lack of trust in return, the result could be disastrous, especially now in times of economic downturn. This, however, would relieve Northern countries of responsibility too easily. As we have seen, a major part of the third world debt is the result of the self-interested and reckless lending of first world creditors during the Cold War. Fillipino people are currently forced to pay off a loan that was not taken up in their name and went to support an undemocratic dictator. The Worldbank could have reasonably foreseen this and should thus assume responsibility. Besides, one could argue that the Fillipino people themselves never had a contractual arrangement with the World Bank.

The envisioned debt tribunal is just one step in creating a fairer lending system. Future loans should be given responsibly, on fair terms, and in a transparent way that is open to scrutiny by parliaments, media and citizens. Any loans given on unjust terms should be considered the responsibility of the creditor and thus eligible for cancellation in future. Jubilee’s mock tribunal demonstrated that debt arbitration can be done fairly and effectively. Or would it take a Bono to convince the Scottish gouvernment?

Fair Trade, Empowerment and Human Rights

“Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible” - UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

Examine the Principles of Fair Trade and it quickly becomes apparent the intention of Fair Trade is to EMPOWER disadvantaged producers and their communities. The principles reflect business practices free from exploitation; are based on respect for universal human rights, women’s rights, child rights, minority and migrant rights, rights of the disabled, and labour rights; embrace gender equality; and incorporate environmentally sound practices. However, the fact remains that for many of our producers their rights are not well known; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains an abstract idea, an international convention far from their immediate reality.

When our producers are unaware of their rights, there is opportunity for exploitation. In the field of International Development, programs and projects are often designed to target root causes. One increasingly popular approach is a Rights-Based Approach (RBA) which recognizes poverty as injustice and includes marginalization, discrimination, and exploitation as central causes.

As Fair Trade supporters and advocates, it is nice to believe that we are leading the way in making ethical consumer choices a reality in the global marketplace. Admittedly, many of our producers reside in countries which are not well known for upholding those rights. However, unless we support our producers with knowledge of their rights, we fail to follow the principles of Fair Trade. Look at this from the perspective of our producers:

Fair Trade is a partnership, not a charity. As set out in our shared Principles, Fair Trade importers, wholesalers, buyers, and retailers are required to provide for the development of producer groups in order that they are empowered, self-sufficient trade partners capable of conducting international trade in ways which are beneficial to them and their community free from any form of exploitation. To integrate a Rights-Based Approach is to strengthen our trade partners not only in trade relations, but in their quality of life; to enjoy the freedoms internationally recognized as inherent to all human beings. Taking a closer look at our Shared Principles we see that our principles are based on UN Human Rights Declarations and Conventions, and the ILO Conventions. For a comprehensive analysis read Journey for Fair Trade: Human Rights Framework.

Saturday, December 10, 2011 is Human Rights Day

(http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WelcomePage.aspx).

This year, let’s make it a point as a global Fair Trade movement, to not only join the celebration, but integrate a Rights-Based Approach into Fair Trade; Join together in an effort to raise awareness of Universal Human Rights with our trade partners and their communities!

Here is an idea for Fair Traders regardless of where you reside – empower your trade partners directly: the United Nations has translated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights into 131 languages. Download and print a copy in the language of your trade partner, take an extra step to creatively decorate it, and mail it to them. What a great way to personalize your trade relationship:

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/SearchByLang.aspx.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has been translated into 58 languages and is available from UNICEF on their child-friendly page. UNICEF has made the CRC available in an easy to read English poster which is quite colorful and attractive. If you have trade partners whose first language is not English, download a copy and take the extra step to print it out in their language on a poster size paper, decorate and laminate it, and mail it to them! What a terrific way to let them know you support and care for their children:

http://www.unicef.org/magic/briefing/uncorc.html

To advocate for a Rights-Based Approach to Fair Trade it is vitally important that Fair Traders know what the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) is and how it works, particularly when it impacts 51% of the global population, yet women are often considered to be in the minority. To see how this convention works to empower women, read Journey for Fair Trade: Understanding CEDAW. The national UNIFEM offices have translations of CEDAW in printed locally available - they have a budget for printed materials, so don’t hesitate to make a request!

For those who have trade partners in developing nations, I encourage you to do some online research of Women’s Rights Organizations, to include Rights-Based Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) in their country and put them in touch with your trade partner. Contact the UNIFEM national office if you need a referral to a local NGO which conducts workshops in women’s rights. It is important that as Fair Traders we unite with the Rights-Based Organizations in their efforts to make change happen and put an end to gender inequality and social  http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm

To integrate a Rights-Based Approach to Fair Trade begins by raising awareness of the rights we are all entitled to enjoy; the rights which form the very foundation of our Shared Principles. Take a stand for human rights and begin raising awareness with a celebration on Human Rights Day, December 10^th, 2011. For ideas and information read Journey for Fair Trade: Fair Trade Celebrates Human Rights Day.

Mitch Teberg, MA

WFTO Associate Member

Sustainable Development / Fair Trade / Women’s Rights and Gender

Researcher / Trainer / Consultant

www.journeyforfairtrade.blogspot.com

Why I’m supporting November 30^th strikers

I don’t have a pension. I don’t work in a sector where I’m likely to get one any time soon. And I wholeheartedly support everybody planning to take strike action on November 30^th.

People in the public sector are being attacked on so many fronts. Over the last year, thousands of workers, mostly women, have lots their jobs or had their hours dramatically cut. The young have been hit hard – cut out of college education by the scrapping of EMA, outpriced from university education and now unemployed in the millions.

Those who are in jobs have seen the greatest insult – government pension plans will force everyone in the public sector to work longer, pay more and receive less. Can it possibly be right that a PE teacher will still be out teaching rugby at the age of 66? In net terms, public sector workers will lose the equivalent of a day’s wages every month. Nothing about this is fair.

Tory politicians have said that taxpayers don’t want our money spent on public sector pensions. Well, I do. In fact, I only want my taxes spent on fair pensions, job creation, free education and decent healthcare. Instead, the government is haemorrhaging cash on illegal wars and dirty deals.

For these reasons, I fully support anybody who chooses to go on strike in November.

The Egyptian Twitter Revolution?

Much has been written about social media’s role in the Arab spring. Few but the most hardline technodeterminists genuinely believe the existence of Twitter, Facebook and the like are solely responsible for the mass uprisings.

However,  a view persists that these tools played a fundamental role. Several news sources, the BBC and Committee for the Protection of Journalists (CPJ) among them, proclaimed social media’s impact in Tunisia’s so-called Jasmine revolution.

Let’s look at a couple of facts:

- Twitter activity abou the Jasmine uprising peaked on 15th January 2011 - the day after Ben Ali was deposed and a full three weeks after the protests began. The peak broadly correlates with Western Media’s interest in the Tunisian uprising. Stats here.

- The Sidibouzid hashtag that CPJ flags up as being critical in the revolution was only created on 27th December 2010, ten days after Mohammed Bouazizi set fire to himself and the day the protests reached the capital, Tunis.

Both these facts suggest there was no Twitter revolution in Tunisia. It was utilised primarily as a broadcast medium for westerners to follow events.

But what about Facebook?

This is rather more difficult to assess as Facebook does not make its data public. Tangential evidence suggests Facebook did play a significant part.

In 2008 there was another uprising in Tunisia in the mining town of Gafsa. Causes were similar - lack of employment and frustration at the corrupt regime. With an election pending Ben Ali took no chances, shutting down Facebook and sending in his forces. And the strategy worked. Ben Ali crushed the uprising and went on to win the election.

So what was the key difference?

In 2008 there were 28,000 Facebook users in Tunisia; in 2010 the were 2 million. By shutting down Facebook in 2010 Ben Ali risked politicising a fifth of his population, many of whom may have been apolitical to that point. However, by allowing users to post emotive videos, share links and formulate strategy online he allowed what he sought to avoid; apolitical citizens being politicised.

The sheer volume of Facebook users put Ben Ali in an impossible position. And this may indeed be social media’s strength - its latent potentiality. The vast majority of content being passed around on social media is in no way political but the dense interconnectivity of social media facilitates means messages can and do spread quickly if the offline environment creates the appetite for protest.

David Cameron’s call to ban social media during riots fell into the same trap. Such a move would irritate people who previously had no reason to protest, likely swelling the numbers involved in any uprising. In this sense, social media’s stength may well be in its numbers.

Hi, I’m Megan, a new media activist volunteer for People  & Planet - I will be sharing my thoughts,  ideas and experiences with you for the next year! At the moment I am president of Cardiff Uni’s People and Planet society and hoping to create some fun and magic for the newbies in September, as well as keeping the rest of the UK up to date on the Buy Right campaign.

Buy Right for Workers Rights

I am quite a passionate person and therefore will be exposing my anger or delight at the way the world is evolving. I would call myself a feminist, green human rights activist who is also very focused on having fun, therefore I hope to fit in well in the happiness of national People & Planet. Today, upon my first day of training, I learnt about the successes of People & Planet since 1968 and felt so proud to become part of such a productive and worthwhile organisation, where hopefully I can make a small impact myself

Since singing at a Fairtrade event at 14 I have felt determined to make human rights a priority, especially when thinking about the tiny things I can do to help. Therefore I will be spreading the word and mobilising students to put pressure on their university to join the Workers Rights Consortium, just as Sheffield are about to, and making sure that all the People & Planet’s across the country are making the most of Fairtrade Fortnight in February.

However I will probably be letting out some anger, perhaps just against statements made on Question Time by ignorant right wing individuals or expressing my constant disbelief at people who are so apathetic about climate change and human rights issues - in a hope that one individual, one day, might read my blog and start thinking differently and make a small change of their own.

Here’s to a year full of hope and ambition with my fellow media activists at People & Planet

Cheers!

For Open Democracy

Watch the video

It is commonly accepted that a basic tenet of democratic society is the ability of its citizens hold those in power to account. Many people’s first engagement with doing so will be the simple act of collecting petitions in the street.

Yet this basic form of democratic engagement is gradually being made illegal. As shopping streets are increasingly owned by private companies, landowners are using the laws of trespass to ban any activity on their property that does not make them a profit.

For example, from 2006 - 2008, People & Planet ran a campaign asking Topshop to guarantee that no forced child labour is used in the production of their garments, following a spate of reports showing that clothes made from cotton picked by child labour in Uzbekistan was being sold in the UK.

Reasonably enough, small groups of students gathered outside Topshops to politely gather petitions from customers. When shops were situated on the high street, this passed without incident. When shops were part of shopping centre complexes, students were forced out, sometimes physically, by private security.

Therefore, the recently released video (above) of a group of campaigners being ejected from Birmingham Bullring shopping centre after just 38 seconds of attempting to collect petitions was unsurprising, but no less shocking. So too the stories circulating the internet of the library assistants outside their workplace being moved on by Westfield heavies, the Jubilee Debt Campaign activists requested to move a street stall 40 centimetres forward and countless others.

However now there is something that can be done about it. The government has announced a Freedom (Great Repeal) Bill in their legislative programme, which, amongst other things, promises to restore the right to campaign.

People & Planet is supporting a petition, hosted by 38degrees.org.uk for the inclusion in the Freedom Bill of a legal right to protest in areas which are freely open to the public but which are privately owned, such as the walkways of shopping centres.

Please do sign the petition and join the campaign for the right to campaign

A member of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army overlooks the Panguna mine.

To re-open the notorious Panguna mine or not. This is the question for the people of Bougainville. Are the prospective financial benefits of the mine enough for the people to want it opened? Will the islanders be able to keep control of the mine or will it open the doors for the mining companies to dominate and operate unaccountably as they have done in the past?

In the late 1980’s and 1990’s what was described as the first eco- revolution took place on the Pacific Island of Bougainville. The story was similar to so many places on earth, exploitative multinational company takes the resources of a land without any regard for the local inhabitants or their environment.

In Bougainville’s case it was copper and in their case they decided they had had enough of the mine and starting with homemade weapons they forcibly closed the mine and defeated first the Papua New Guinean army then the Australian army brought in to take the mine back for BCL a subsidiary of the British company Rio Tinto.

After the Bouganvillians had taken control of their island Papua New Guinea imposed a naval blockade on the island to make the people there suffer with hope that they would turn against the revolutionaries. It had the opposite effect, reinforcing the peoples will, and creating fertile ground for human ingenuity, creativity and resourcefulness. Forcing the population to live at one with their land, making use only of what they had with no imported goods.

Remarkably they managed to create their own electricity and found a way to drive cars with coconut oil. The result was a small example of people effectively being forced to live in a sustainable way. Unable to aqquire imported goods they resorted to their imagination, creativity and hard work to rebuild their society in harmony with their environment. They proved that a society with creativity can make plenty of electricty with water and can fuel essential vehicles with renewable oil.

The mine was closed in 1989. On several occasions the re-opening of the mine has been raised. Recently an article appeared on the Australian network, ABC, suggesting that the mine might be re-opened. The islanders belived that the income would help finance their moves for full political independance. The former president of Bouganville, Joseph Kabui, stated back in 2005 that if they re-opened the mine Bouganville could become the ‘Kuwait of the Pacific.’ Whether the mine is reopened or not, it will rightfully be the desicion of the islanders and not the trans-national  companies.

All over the world from Chile to Africa to Papua, indigenous people, the ones who know how to manage their land wisely, are shamefully brushed aside and treated as an obstacle for development (a common pseudonym for natural resource theft). That the people of Bouganville are considering re opening the Panguna mine shows that people are not per se against the use of their environment for their benefit. It’s a matter of the overall control of the resource and fair distribution of the benefits that is at the root of natural resource conflicts such as that which ignited the revolution in Bouganville. Precisely two points which are in direct conflict with the accepted norms of the shareholder demands that drive international business.

If those in power in transnational business do not change the way they operate then people all over the world are entitled to follow in the footsteps of the people of Bouganville and take their land back.

Watch this film

Our friends in the US from United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) have begun a new campaign demanding the infamous worker right abuser Nike ‘Just Pay It’. Nike currently owe 1,800 workers $2.2 million in severance payments and without jobs these workers are in need of food and money. Associated Press also report that owners of the factory pocketed payments to the Honduras’s national health care system, costing workers their health insurance.

However the student fightback in the US has already had a small but significant success with the Worker Rights Consortium affiliated University of Wisconsin ending contracts with Nike in solidarity with workers. This makes the university the first in history to stand up to Nike and make a clear demand that human rights are respected, an action which USAS hope will echo throughout the sector and encourage other universities to cut.

This small victory highlights the importance of the Worker Rights Consortium and the power a affiliated university can have in protecting human rights within its supply chain. Find out more about the Worker Rights Consortium and how you can get your university to affiliate.

The Worker Rights Consortium have also recently created a UK specific Q&A document to help answer any questions

Workers Rights means Liberation not just for workers but for all groups! A sentiment shared by The Workers’ Rights Consortium, which states it is against all forms of discrimination; gender, race, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, nationality, political opinion, or social or ethnic origin.

Why women’s day??? well studies show that women are amongst the three most vulnerable groups in the work place along with ethnic minorities and foreign born. Not mention 90% of the workers in sweatshops are women.

And there are some outstanding abuses of women’s rights goings such as companies requiring pregnancy tests upon applying for employment, forcing workers to take contraceptives, paying women less, demoting or firing for maternity leave.

The worker rights consortium pushes this code of conduct regarding women’ rights

“Women’s Rights:

1. Women workers will receive equal remuneration, including benefits, equal treatment, equal evaluation of the quality of their work, and equal opportunity to fill all positions as male workers.

1. Pregnancy tests will not be a condition of employment, nor will they be demanded of employees.
2. Workers who take maternity leave will not face dismissal nor threat of dismissal, loss of seniority or deduction of wages, and will be able to return to their former employment at the same rate of pay and benefits.
3. Workers will not be forced or pressured to use contraception.
4. Workers will not be exposed to hazards, including glues and solvents, that may endanger their safety, including their reproductive health.
5. Licensees shall provide appropriate services and accommodation to women workers in connection with pregnancy.

The Workers Rights Consortium protects and aids women’s liberation movements. Take a look at the story of these five women who formed Bangladesh’s first non-politically-aligned, women-led, trade union and where imprisoned for it. http://www.workersrights.org/freports/Sunman.asp

Yes the Workers Rights Consortium is not perfect; it doesn’t give a direct voice to Women activists… however compared other models, which take funding from the companies causing the abuse, who don’t always act on complaints, it’s certainly a positive step. If you had been pressured into an abortion by your employer would you go an organisation you didn’t trust to be on your side? The Workers Rights Consortium Fosters close ties to independent labour organizations and its independence puts it in a position to win the trust of all groups in a community.

Birmingham People and Planet has teamed up with Women’s Rights activists on campus to fight for equal rights in the supply chain, on March the 8^th international Women’s day. We delivered our massive petition, which was symbolically written on T-shirts, to the Vice chancellor to protect women and women’s rights in our supply chain.

Only this rather bad photo unfortunately….