S
Workshop Sessions
• ‘Rebranding’ human rights
N
Ben Jackson from Forster for Change said that
Public attitudes to human
it is vital to discover why people feel negative
rights: how can we address
or disengaged when it comes to human rights.
Is the message unclear? Are we too narrow in
the myths?
our approach? He recommended combining
P

S
E
S
S
I
O
a functional message – explaining why human
How can we dispel myths that the Human Rights
O
rights matter to the person on the street – with
Act is a ‘villain’s charter’? How can we make
an ‘emotional’ message, looking to the media
S
H human rights relevant to people here in Britain,
for examples of how to grab certain issues and
K
so that they are not automatically associated with
package them in an attractive, engaging way.
R
repressive regimes elsewhere?
Other strategies should include:
The Human Rights Act came into force in 2000,
• Engaging in wide public debate by addressing
promising a positive culture of respect for human
WO
all audiences. This will mean a modernised
rights in Britain. Yet almost 10 years on much
approach, embracing new and creative ways of
work remains to be done. Polling data shows
communicating human rights.
persistent and widespread misunderstanding
• Combining campaigning with legal channels for
about the relevance and usefulness of human
greater credibility. This has proved successful
rights. This workshop explored these attitudes
in many instances – in one South African
and put forward strategies for repackaging human
example, a legal case involving employees
rights for communities in the UK.
affected by asbestos was taken on successfully
Presentations by campaigning groups.
• The Human Rights Act: misconceptions and
Ben urged delegates not to feel discouraged:
shortcomings
the UK has a long history of human rights
struggles, and many people may not see ‘human
Recent Ipsos MORI data presented by Kully
rights’ as relevant because they already accept
Kaur-Ballagan, Head of Race, Faith and Cohesion
these rights as the norm.
Research, and Dr Emily Gray, Head of Central
Government Research, indicated the public’s
Group discussion
support for basic human rights values but their
Kamal Ahmed, Communications Director of the
suspicion of the Human Rights Act itself. While in
Equality and Human Rights Commission chaired
favour of freedom of expression, protection from an open floor debate. The following key issues
torture, equality, dignity and respect, many people were raised:
associate the Human Rights Act. with ‘political • Public awareness: How do we communicate
correctness’ and the ‘nanny state’. People also effectively with the public – given the Ipsos
admitted to knowing very little about the Act. MORI data, should we talk about ‘values’ rather
On specific rights issues, results indicated that than rights? How do we ensure that surveys
people may support the notion of equality but and polls are not designed to give particular
not the measures used to achieve it: 67% of results?
people disagreed with positive discrimination, • A unified message: How do we define a
49% disagreed with gay adoption and 56% were human rights culture, when different equality
against the right of Muslim girls to wear hijabs at and human rights sectors may not support the
school. full rights of all groups? And how can the third
Jiwan Raheja from the Human Rights Division sector combine efforts rather than continually
at the Ministry of Justice then presented data competing for ‘nuggets of attention’ – can we
showing that among public service users and have separate functions yet collectively own
health and social care workers, a significant the same brand?
majority claim to support human rights principles • The role of government: Delegates agreed
and law, and have heard of the Human Rights that for ‘rebranding’ to work, the Government’s
Act. However, only 53% feel that human rights leadership is crucial. It needs to show strong
are relevant to their daily lives. Many respondents support for the Human Rights Act and cannot
12 believe there is a need for public service remain ambivalent.
managers and decision-makers to be given • Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR):
human rights training. Members of the public identify everyday health
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32