Violations of international humanitarian law have a devastating impact on millions of lives by Jan Egeland, Martin Griffiths, Filippo Grandi OCHA, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees   Alarming drop in global funding to people in war and crisis, by Jan Egeland, Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council.   Halfway into 2024, only 18 percent of the funding needed for humanitarian assistance globally has been received.   “At a time when the world is falling apart for millions of people, we are seeing an increasing trend of international neglect. I have never before seen such a glaring gap between the need for lifesaving aid and available funding. The overall level of humanitarian assistance is totally insufficient, and just a few crises receive funding and attention while most are forgotten,” warned Jan Egeland, Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council.   “The gap between the growing needs and the available funding has increased over the last decade, but last year was the first year with an actual drop in the amount of funding for humanitarian appeals. The outlook for this year is even bleaker, and more people in dire need are likely to be left without any support at all.”   Humanitarian needs continued to grow during the first half of the year, and 48.7 billion dollars are currently needed to meet the most acute needs. A vast shortfall has developed, with only 9 billion dollars (18 per cent) received as of June 2024 according to OCHA’s mid-year update.   “It is devastating that nations are able to send satellites to the far side of the moon, but unwilling to prevent children from starving to death here on Earth,” said Egeland. “We are reliant on contributions from just a few countries, whilst many nations capable of providing more assistance are doing far too little,” added Egeland.   Around the world, food and cash assistance programmes are being cut. NRC staff have witnessed refugees returning to unsafe conflict areas owing to the reduction of support in their host communities. Others are forced to sell possessions – including farming tools which could otherwise support food security.   The lack of funding for humanitarian assistance is in several countries also compounded by cuts or suspension in development assistance, as documented in a recent report by the Norwegian Refugee Council.   “Suspension of development assistance in many countries affected by political crises means the root causes of crisis situations are not being addressed, while humanitarian funds are being exhausted responding to a multitude of needs. It is vital that development financing actors remain engaged.”   * NRC: "The gap between the total humanitarian appeals by the UN and partners and the money received amounted to $32 billion in 2023. This means 57% of needs were unmet (OCHA). The pre-tax income of the world’s 5 most profitable companies as as follows: Saudi Aramco (247.43 BN USD), Apple (114.3 BN USD), Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffett) (100.3 BN USD), Microsoft 95.02 (BN USD), and Alphabet (Google parent company) (78.78 BN USD). This totals 635.83 billion USD. 5% of each of the companies' profits is equal to 31.8 BN USD (Statista)".   http://www.nrc.no/news/2024/july/alarming-drop-in-global-funding-to-people-in-war-and-crisis http://humanitarianaction.info/document/global-humanitarian-overview-2024-mid-year-update http://www.unocha.org/news/un-deputy-relief-chief-funding-shortages-force-tougher-aid-decisions http://www.unocha.org/latest/news-and-stories http://reliefweb.int/report/world/wfp-global-operational-response-plan-2024-update-11-june-2024-new-synopsis-format http://www.wfp.org/publications/hunger-hotspots-fao-wfp-early-warnings-acute-food-insecurity-june-october-2024-outlook http://www.fao.org/emergencies/en http://www.fightfoodcrises.net/hunger-hotspots/en http://www.ipcinfo.org/   12 June 2024   G7 leaders can and must prevent man-made famine, by Martin Griffiths, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and UN Emergency Relief Coordinator:   As the Group of Seven (G7) meets in Italy tomorrow, conflicts in Sudan, Gaza and beyond are raging out of control. War is pushing millions of people to the brink of starvation. Only technicalities prevent famines from being declared, as people are already dying of hunger.   Famine in the 21st century is a preventable scourge. G7 leaders can and must wield their influence to help stop it. Waiting for an official declaration of famine before acting would be a death sentence for hundreds of thousands of people and a moral outrage.   Conflict is fueling hunger in too many corners of the world – from Mali to Myanmar – but nowhere is the choice between inaction and oblivion so clear as in Gaza and Sudan.   In Gaza, half of the population – more than one million people – is expected to face death and starvation by the middle of July.   In Sudan, at least 5 million people are also teetering on the brink of starvation. Communities in more than 40 hunger hotspots are at high risk of slipping into famine in the coming month, including in war-torn parts of Aj Jazirah, Darfur, Khartoum and Kordofan.   And in both Gaza and Sudan, intense fighting, unacceptable restrictions and meagre funding are preventing aid workers from delivering food, water, seeds, health care and other lifesaving assistance at anywhere near the scale necessary to prevent mass starvation. This must change – we cannot afford to lose even a minute.   Though we will continue to do our part to save lives where we can, ultimately, humanitarian aid is not the solution to the conflicts robbing millions of people of the lives they deserve.   Countries in the G7 must immediately bring their substantial political leverage and financial resources to bear so that aid organizations can reach all people in need. We must move large amounts of humanitarian assistance across borders and battle lines today – and mobilize considerable funding to keep the response going tomorrow.   But more than anything, the world must stop feeding the war machines that are starving the civilians of Gaza and Sudan. It is time instead to prioritize the diplomacy that will give people back their futures – and tomorrow, the G7 is at the helm.   http://www.unocha.org/news/g7-leaders-can-and-must-prevent-manmade-famine   Statement by Filippo Grandi, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to the United Nations Security Council. (30 May 2024):   The number of those who have been forced to flee their homes by war, violence and persecution reached 114 million at our latest count. Next month we will update this figure. It will be higher. The political solutions needed to solve displacement obviously continue to be absent.   I last briefed this Council in October. Back then, I shared my views on several crises and warned that humanitarians, while not giving up, were near breaking point. Seven months have passed but the situation has not changed — if at all, it has grown worse. So, most regrettably, I will have to speak once again about the same crises — and of how they displaced an ever-growing number of people.   Why is this happening? The reasons are multiple, and often related to geopolitics — which is your domain, not mine! Let me however focus on one more immediate factor, that my colleagues and I — and indeed all humanitarians — witness in their everyday work: non-compliance with international humanitarian law. “Non-compliance” is a cold and technical expression: what it means, really, is that parties to conflicts — increasingly, everywhere, almost all of them — have stopped respecting the basic rules of war, and sometimes even pretending to do so; civilians are killed in growing numbers; rape and other forms of sexual violence are used as weapons of war; civilian infrastructure gets hit and destroyed; humanitarian workers become targets.   You hear and discuss this every day. The President of the International Committee of the Red Cross - which is mandated to uphold this body of law – spoke to you last week on the subject. But I want you to hear it from me, too, because we at UNHCR deal with one, specific, consequence of these violations: since this brutal conduct of hostilities meant not only to destroy but also to terrify civilians, civilians — more and more often — have no other choice but to flee, in terror.   What has happened in Gaza since the Hamas attacks last 7th October, and throughout the Israeli offensive, is a case in point. Let me add my voice to those who have been urging you to pursue an immediate ceasefire, the release of hostages, and the full resumption of humanitarian aid; and most importantly, to spare no effort to resurrect a real peace process — the only way to ensure peace and security to Israelis and Palestinians.   Unfortunately, none of this has happened yet. The atrocious events in Rafah made us witness once more — and most dramatically — hundreds of thousands of people trying to avoid lethal attacks by moving frantically in the limited, constrained space of southern Gaza, reached only by a trickle of aid; with dozens losing their lives.   Among the many images from this conflict that will haunt us for a long time is that of desperate people trapped and often killed inside a war zone. Their safety should be our — your — paramount concern. And while UNHCR — respecting fully its division of labour with UNRWA — is not and will not be operational there, let me say — from the perspective of my role and my mandate — that while Palestinians should be protected wherever they are, the atrocious dilemma of whether they should exit Gaza — or not — is one that Israel has the clear responsibility to avoid; because yes, there is indeed a universal right to seek asylum, so often responded to by countries neighbouring conflicts, and which I will always advocate for, as a matter of principle.   But in this case, there is also — and especially — the international legal obligation of an occupying power not to force - not to force - the civilian population to flee the territory it occupies. And another forced exodus of Palestinians will only create one more intractable problem and make a solution to this decades-long conflict impossible to find.   The war in Gaza is also a tragic reminder of what happens when conflicts (and by extension a refugee crisis) are left unattended. It must also serve as a call not to forget other unresolved crises.   A stark (and nearby) example is that 13 years after the start of the conflict in Syria, 5.6 million Syrian refugees remain in neighbouring countries, which have also hosted Palestinian refugees for generations, with Lebanon’s plight remaining the most worrying, and tensions over the presence of refugees in that country being again extremely acute; and Jordan, another major host of Syrians, caught squarely between two crises.   The plight of Syrian refugees however gets attention only when other factors emerge — of late, some arrivals of Syrians in EU countries have spurred a flurry of proposals on how to solve the problem, including by sending back refugees to so called “safe areas” in Syria. Let me take the opportunity to reiterate once again our position on this question: the voluntary, safe return of Syrian refugees to their homeland is the best solution and their right; though most refugees would like to return one day, very few do currently, with many expressing either fear of being targeted and lack of confidence in the Syrian government, or concern that in Syria living conditions — services, housing, work — are in an abysmal state.   It is the Syrian government that is responsible for addressing the first set of obstacles; and regarding the second, we urge all donor countries to step-up support to early recovery activities as per Security Council Resolution 2642. If we are serious about solving the Syrian refugee problem — and we must be — the only way forward is to overcome political constraints and work on both tracks, with all stakeholders — as UNHCR indeed is already doing.   Meanwhile, violations of international humanitarian law have continued to have a devastating effect on millions of lives around the world, including forcing people to flee. In none of the refugee and displacement crises which I described to you last October have we seen any sign of progress in this respect.   For example, Myanmar, where since my last briefing to you more than 1.5 million people have been displaced by fighting, bringing the total to over three million, with many trying to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. The situation in Rakhine State is especially worrying. The conflict between Myanmar’s armed forces and the Arakan Army has flared up again, displacing different ethnic groups, and with the Rohingya community caught between the parties and targeted with dangerous abuse, stigmatization and forced recruitment; and with humanitarians operating in a high-risk environment, which has already compelled agencies to temporarily relocate from certain areas.   I wish to reiterate here my recent appeal to the parties to ensure the protection of civilians and of aid workers; to the countries neighbouring Myanmar to allow safe access for refugees fleeing for their lives; and to you to ensure that a political process to address Myanmar’s problems is again (and seriously) placed on the international agenda, before some of the consequences further threaten the stability of the region.   In the Democratic Republic of the Congo violence between men with guns is so common that no other place on earth is as dangerous for women and children as the east of that country. And my reaction is not naïve. I worked there. I know the intractable ethnic problems; the plunder of resources by a multiplicity of actors, including states; the regional ramifications; the constant disrespect of the civilian character of IDP sites by armed men, endangering both the displaced and humanitarian workers.   But how can members of the United Nations, how can ‘we the peoples’ pay so little attention and have so much inaction in a place where sex with a child can be bought for less than a cold drink? What a shameful stain on humanity!   We, the humanitarians, are trying to play our part. Last year, President Tshisekedi asked UNHCR to revitalize efforts to find solutions to complex situations of forced displacement across the region’s borders, and especially between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The Rwandan government agreed and we resumed dialogue, but in reality, without a broader political process — or at least a political framework — it will be difficult to make progress on the humanitarian side; and aid is increasingly hard to mobilize for the victims of this state of affairs.   Let me touch briefly on Ukraine as it is another theatre of war where international humanitarian law gets violated every day: look at the unrelenting attacks on the Ukrainian power network, which cause enormous hardship on civilians. Attacks do not spare houses and other civilian infrastructure.   Last January, in the heart of winter, I met Ukrainian children going to a makeshift school in the Kharkiv underground because it was the only place that could be kept safe and warm by the local authorities. And displacement — there, too — is increasing again, mostly within the country, and mostly of elderly and other vulnerable people living near the frontlines, requiring urgent and lifesaving humanitarian and psychological support. And as you continue to deal with the war in Ukraine as a political and military issue, don’t lose focus on its deep, devastating human consequences on the people of Ukraine.   The blatant disregard of international humanitarian law by parties to conflicts also makes peace much more difficult to attain. Death, destruction and displacement deepen societal divisions, tearing apart trust and making it difficult to put the pieces of a country back together.   An obvious example is Sudan, which I visited in February and where parties to the conflict keep creating additional obstacles to aid activities with their reluctance to give access to some key areas, preventing humanitarians from helping many of those in need, including through crossborder and cross-line operations, the organization of which remains extremely complicated.   The political backdrop is discouraging: inadequate peace-making efforts or outright support for one of the sides, or the other, are making the conflict much worse. For both sides, disregarding all sense of humanity and consideration for their own people, the solution remains essentially a military one.   As a result, there are now nine million people displaced inside Sudan or refugees in neighbouring countries — some of which, like Chad or South Sudan, are grappling with their own fragilities; a number similar to what we have observed in Ukraine but met with continued neglect and indifference by the international community.   And funding remains completely inadequate. At a conference in Paris in April, over $2 billion in contributions were announced, but very little has materialized so far. Aid activities inside Sudan are funded at only 15% and the refugee operations at 8%. This requires no further comment.   Sudan is also an example of the broader consequences of disrespect for the rules of war and total lack of accountability. First and foremost, of course, on civilians: for instance, almost no child in Sudan has gone to school for months; and here, too, sexual violence is rife, in Darfur and other war zones.   Daily, refugees arriving in Chad tell us of appalling stories of women raped in front of their children and of children murdered in front of their mothers. And I ask you: how can those who fled such horrors ever feel safe enough to return? How can they ever trust those men with guns?   Beyond that, how can Sudan's middle class - the same middle class that somehow held the country together through so much turmoil over the past decades and is now being displaced or destroyed, rebuild the country after this conflict?   Nor should it be a surprise that we have seen a 500% increase in the number of Sudanese arriving in Europe in the year after the outbreak of violence. Most of them never wanted to leave home. But brutal violence has forced them to flee. And insufficient aid in neighbouring countries forced them to move again — especially to North Africa and beyond, towards Europe.   Rich countries are constantly worrying about what they call “irregular movements”. But in this and other situations, they are not doing enough to help people before they entrust themselves to human traffickers. The consequences are inevitable.   So, compliance with international humanitarian law — which of course is an obligation – also has an element of self-interest. It is a grim political landscape the one I see around us, from my humanitarian viewpoint: short sighted foreign policy decisions, often founded on double standards, with lip service paid to compliance with the law, but little muscle flexed even from this Council to actually uphold it and — with it — peace and security.   International humanitarian law is the clearest representation of the effort to find a common ground. And if, at times of war – some of the most horrific and turbulent times humanity can experience – parties must set their differences aside and operate in a way that protects, at least, the lives of civilians (which today I urge them to do), so should you in your day-to-day work.   Last year I called on you to use your voice – not your voices. But this Council’s cacophony has meant that you have instead continued to preside over a broader cacophony of chaos around the world. It is too late for the tens of thousands already killed in Gaza, in Ukraine, in Sudan, in the DRC, in Myanmar and so many other places.   But it is not too late to put your focus and energy on the crises and conflicts that remain unresolved, so that they are not allowed to fester and explode again. It is not too late to step up help for the millions who have been forcibly displaced to return home voluntarily, in safety and with dignity. It is not too late to try and save countless millions more from the scourge of war. Visit the related web page
	Dismantle the barriers faced by millions of persons with disabilities by UN DESA, European Disability Forum, agencies   June 2024   Accelerating the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities, report from the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs   Six years away from the deadline for the 2030 Agenda, the Disability and Development Report 2024 shows that persons with disabilities are being left behind. Progress for persons with disabilities on 30 per cent of targets of the SDGs is insufficient; on 14 per cent, the target has been missed or progress has stalled or gone into reverse.   These include targets on access to financial resources, health care, water and ICT as well as on building resilience of persons with disabilities during disasters and other emergencies. A mere 5 indicators are on track, i.e., with progress consistent with achieving their respective targets for persons with disabilities by 2030 – these include progress in education laws on equal access, disaster early warnings in accessible formats, online services for persons with disabilities, government ministries accessible for persons with disabilities and monitoring of bilateral aid dedicated to disability inclusion.   Wide gaps persist between persons with and without disabilities, particularly on food insecurity, health, access to energy and ICT – with gaps above 10 percentage points – and on multidimensional poverty and employment – with gaps above 20 percentage points.   For women with disabilities, indigenous persons with disabilities, persons with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities and persons with disabilities living in rural areas, the gaps are wider. Moreover, although countries have increasingly involved persons with disabilities in decision-making processes, overall, this involvement remains low.   The COVID-19 response was largely not inclusive of persons with disabilities, especially in the early stages of the pandemic, with discriminatory practices in COVID-19 treatment, lack of information in accessible formats and reduced access to COVID-19 testing (41 per cent of persons with disabilities versus 28 per cent of persons without disabilities did not have access to COVID-19 testing).   Half of COVID-19 deaths occurred among persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities lost jobs and income at higher rates than others. Early in the pandemic, a third of persons with disabilities lost access to personal assistance, assistive technology or accessibility services. Persons with disabilities faced more difficulties than others accessing and affording food, water delivery, energy, housing, health care, medicines, masks and sanitizers.   One in 5 students with disabilities dropped out of school during the pandemic and 9 in 10 did not have the ICT needed to participate in remote learning. Half of workers with disabilities faced barriers working remotely, such as inaccessible online platforms.   The isolation created by lockdowns increased the risk of violence, with a quarter of persons with disabilities experiencing violence at home and almost half of women with disabilities not feeling safe at home. Lockdowns disrupted data collections creating a lack of evidence to guide pandemic responses for persons with disabilities.   Not all countries introduced measures to support persons with disabilities to face these challenges. Only half of households with students with disabilities received financial support for the personal assistance and technology they needed for remote learning, less than half of countries targeted persons with disabilities in their COVID-19 social protection measures and only 10 per cent of countries conducted rapid emergency data collections on persons with disabilities during the pandemic.   Compared to the Disability and Development Report 2018, this time around there is more data on persons with disabilities – data availability is at its highest level since the adoption of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Despite these advancements, only 50 per cent of targets have indicators with enough data to assess progress.   For 40 per cent of targets, there is only data to provide a one point in time snapshot. For 10 per cent of targets, there is not enough data for a one point in time snapshot – these include targets on extreme poverty, child mortality, health impact of pollution, early childhood development, child labour and the impact of corruption and bribery.   The way things are going, the world will not achieve the SDGs by, for and with persons with disabilities by 2030. Depending on the target, progress needs to accelerate to 2 to 65 times faster.   Accelerations are particularly needed in making physical and virtual environments accessible for persons with disabilities, in adopting anti-discrimination legislation, in expanding social protection and in implementing measures to guarantee the safety and protection of all persons with disabilities during disasters and emergencies.   As the international community prepares for the Summit of the Future in September 2024, all States need to step up progress to accelerate the SDGs and disability inclusion. The world needs to build on the lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic to plan better for future crises.   The Disability and Development Report 2024 provides a snapshot of the current situation and progress made by goal/target and identifies concrete steps that global leaders and relevant stakeholders can take to accelerate the implementation of the SDGs by, for and with persons with disabilities.   http://reliefweb.int/report/world/disability-and-development-report-2024-accelerating-realization-sustainable-development-goals-and-persons-disabilities http://www.unsdsn.org/resources/the-sustainable-development-report-2024/   * Nick Herd, a disability rights activist reports from the 17th session of the Conference of States Parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities:   http://news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1150786 http://www.icj.org/africa-african-commission-on-human-and-peoples-rights-calls-for-the-full-continental-ratification-and-implementation-of-the-african-disability-protocol/ http://www.ilo.org/resource/news/ilo-report-urges-action-close-social-health-protection-gaps-persons http://www.social-protection.org/gimi/ShowTheme.action?id=6   May 2024   Building an inclusive Europe, by Ioannis Vardakastanis and Haydn Hammersley. (European Disability Forum)   With the EU elections looming, it’s time for policy-makers to dismantle the barriers faced by millions of persons with disabilities.   Persons with disabilities are expected to be patient — constantly in receipt of promises by policy-makers that change is on its way and that their concerns will be acted upon. Yet, it is hard to ignore just how light certain manifestos for the June election are on their commitment to the more than 100 million persons with disabilities living in the European Union.   It is not only that the pledges on disability inclusion are meagre. Even the websites of the main European political parties were recently found to be incompatible with basic accessibility requirements.   This is even more incomprehensible when Europe is juggling so many crises which disproportionately affect persons with disabilities — often not just left behind but forgotten. Far from the ‘polycrisis’ justifying the sidelining of disability issues, on the contrary, it enhances the case for their prioritisation.   We are talking about a very significant group of people. The latest figures from Eurostat suggest that 27 per cent of individuals in the EU have some kind of disability; among women, this rises to almost 30 per cent. It’s hard to let policy-makers off the hook for overlooking challenges faced by more than a quarter of the population.   The data speak for themselves as to the urgency of removing the barriers faced by persons with disabilities. EU-level figures paint a startling picture of just how different life looks if one has a disability.   Take poverty. In the EU, 18.3 per cent of people without a disability live at risk of poverty and social exclusion. For those with a disability, however, this figure jumps to 28.8 per cent. It leaps even higher for women with disabilities, of whom 29.8 per cent are so at risk, and soars to around 36 per cent for persons with disabilities who have high support needs.   Or consider employment. On average, the employment rate of persons with disabilities in the EU is over 21 percentage points lower than that for persons without. In some countries, the difference is far greater, such as in Ireland (37 percentage points), Croatia (36pp) and Belgium (35.3pp).   Persons with disabilities are also far more likely to be working only part-time, in low-paying jobs or in sheltered workshops, which has a huge impact on their quality of life.   Young people with disabilities have it particularly hard. Many are forced to drop out of education early because they do not get the support they need: 22.1 per cent of persons with disabilities in the EU drop out of school, compared with only 8.4 per cent of people without disabilities.   Again, the higher a person’s support needs, the more likely it is that these will not be met by the education system: a whopping 41.8 per cent of young people with high support needs do not finish school.   Those who manage to complete their schooling and go to university then meet an array of further barriers, particularly if they plan to take up learning opportunities abroad. The lack of quality, inclusive education worsens employment perspectives generally for young people as they make the transition towards adulthood: 31.1 per cent of young persons with disabilities are not in employment, education or training (NEETs); among those with higher support needs, the figure is around 42 per cent.   Nor does it stop there. Countless persons with disabilities are denied boarding on planes, trains or buses each year in the EU without explanation or arrive at their destination to find their assistive devices broken without any hope of receiving full compensation.   More than one million persons with disabilities are still segregated in institutional care across the EU. And countless women and girls with disabilities continue to undergo forced sterilisation.   This is a snapshot of the barriers society creates for most persons with disabilities in the EU. They do not need sympathy but expect their rights as citizens to be vindicated. And while the EU cannot be expected to resolve all of these issues – the treaties do not give it the prerogative to do so – it could do a number of things much better.   Greater ambition is needed   First, its institutions need to acknowledge the scale of the challenge and allocate financial and human resources accordingly. Structural innovation is required: there should be a directorate-general for equality and fundamental rights in the European Commission, working in close co-operation with a disability committee or co-ordinator in the European Parliament and an equality configuration in the Council of the EU.   The union also needs to be much more ambitious in its political and policy priorities, focusing on the concerns of persons with disabilities with the courage to impose legally binding measures. The EU has proved its ability to do so through initiatives such as the new EU Disability Card and Disability Parking Card and legislation such as the European Accessibility Act.   In line with the EU’s competences, why not begin the new mandate by finally tackling denial of boarding on flights and ensuring fair compensation when mobility equipment is lost or damaged during travel? The commission has proposed legislation to revise these rights but stopped short when it comes to passengers with disabilities. The parliament and the council have the chance to propose a better, rights-based text.   The EU should also work on employment. There is a blueprint in the European Youth Guarantee, an initiative supported by EU funding which has assisted tens of millions of young people across the EU to get into jobs and training programmes and resulted in a reduction in the number of unemployed youth. The European disability movement is asking the EU to put in place a similar initiative for persons with disabilities.   This ‘European disability employment and skills guarantee’ would be an adapted version, removing age limits for eligibility, allowing individuals to retain their much-needed disability allowance when in their new role and providing extra funds to support employers in making any necessary workplace adaptations or purchases.   It is crucial, too, that people be given access to the assistive devices and technologies they require to carry out day-to-day activities. The EU could pave the way by better controlling the availability and affordability of assistive technologies and devices persons with disabilities depend on across the single market.   We also urgently need the forced sterilisation of women and girls with disabilities to be prohibited. And the EU must immediately stop its money being used to fund institutions where persons with disabilities are segregated and denied basic rights.   What is needed, first and foremost, is for policy-makers to acknowledge the barriers faced by Europe’s disabled population and to make removing these a priority.   Our message to all political groups, all candidates for the European Parliament and all those in line to represent their member states in the next term within the other EU institutions is: do not pity persons with disabilities — just act.   http://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/european-integration/building-an-inclusive-europe-7499   European citizens firmly support European Aid – MEPs must acknowledge this reality   Statement by Edouard Rodier, the Norwegian Refugee Council’s (NRC) director for Europe, ahead of the new European Parliament term:   “As the newly elected European Parliament prepares for another term, MEPs face a crucial task: deciding on the European Union’s (EU) aid budget for 2025.   “While numerous topics create division within Europe, data and surveys tell us that Europeans are united on one front: the conviction that the EU has a duty to demonstrate global solidarity through European aid.   “However, national leaders and politicians are increasingly pushing for significant reductions in official development aid and scaling back on humanitarian aid pledges. Despite these pressures, MEPs must remember the clear voice of their constituents when deciding whether to cut or expand Europe’s aid budget this month.   “More than nine out of ten Europeans believe it is vital for the EU to fund humanitarian aid globally. In some EU countries, nearly everyone agrees, with Portugal, Greece, Cyprus, Malta, Slovenia, and Ireland showing 97 per cent approval rates for European aid. Denmark, Latvia, Sweden, and Finland have seen over 10 per cent increases in the number of people who consider European aid very important since they were asked in 2020.   “Such strong consensus should be a gift to policymakers. It’s evident that citizens want to continue seeing the EU utilize taxpayer funds to assist people facing severe crises.   “This consensus reflects a pressing reality: in 2019, when the previous group of MEPs assumed office, 131 million people needed humanitarian aid. Today, that number has risen to 308 million due to conflicts, climate crises, and economic challenges.   “Reducing long-term development funding to places like Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali or Myanmar at this time is not a good way to save money. Providing aid today is more effective than having to address spiralling humanitarian needs tomorrow.   In Burkina Faso, for example, NRC has worked with communities that relied on trucks delivering potable water supply for several years before finding a durable solution. Even though water-trucking is essential in some emergency settings to save lives, in the context of protracted crises such as the Central Sahel, investment into solar-powered boreholes is better to allow for sustainable and dignified support to people in need.   “Cutting off a lifeline to millions of people will have a direct and disproportionately large impact, with the consequences being far more costly if these fragile situations spiral into deeper or prolonged crises.   “A policy disconnect is looming. Europeans are committed to providing aid, while European lawmakers are focused on reducing it. MEPs have a rare chance to bridge this divide and represent their citizens by advocating for and approving an increased humanitarian and development aid budget. Reducing aid budgets when millions depend on them, and when Europeans support them, would be reckless policymaking.”   http://www.nrc.no/news/2024/september/european-aid/
	View more stories