"With extreme poverty on the rise, I call on all member states to address poverty systematically and comprehensively, including by pursuing fiscal policies that are firmly based on human rights”, said today the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, on the occasion of this year’s International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.

“‘No poverty’ features as the first of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals. Yet, despite this world-wide commitment and the encouraging advances made over decades, there is no room for complacency. Since 2021, extreme poverty has been on the rise again world-wide.

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reversed progress made on poverty reduction in Europe, exacerbating pre-existing and structural deficiencies in social protection systems. In 2022, the war in Ukraine, high energy prices, trade disruptions and rising inflation are destabilising an already weakened system, pushing more and more families into poverty.

According to a report by the European Investment Bank, the impact of rising energy and food prices is particularly dire in countries in Central and South Eastern Europe, where a relatively larger share of the population is at risk of poverty, while savings rates and incomes tend to be lower overall. But poverty is growing everywhere in Europe. In July 2022, Germany’s main foodbank reported that well over two million persons had sought assistance, as 600,000 more people now live below the poverty line than before the pandemic. According to the UK poverty report, the country was facing a “tide in poverty” in 2021. This trend is being exacerbated by an inflation rate of around 10% as of summer 2022, which is hitting a growing number of low-income families, pushing them deeper into destitution. In Spain, tens of thousands of people rely on emergency food aid and demand for social housing has sharply increased.

Poverty is a multifaceted social scourge that undermines the exercise of all human rights by wiping out the basic ability to live in dignity. According to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, no social phenomenon is as comprehensive in its assault on human rights as poverty. A person who lives in poverty faces a range of interdependent deprivations, including precarious housing, inadequate food, hazardous working conditions, limited access to education and health care, lack of political power and unequal access to justice.

Poverty is fundamentally caused by structural inequalities that arise from an unequal distribution and redistribution of income and wealth, reflecting the widening gap between rich and poor. Indeed, while according to WHO/World Bank estimates, over half a billion people were pushed into extreme poverty due to rising health costs in 2021, the world’s richest ten billionaires doubled their wealth. It is essential, therefore, that member states respond to growing income and wealth inequalities with targeted support measures aimed at those most exposed to poverty.

Women, especially older women, systematically experience poverty at higher rates than men, as they often carry the main responsibility for household expenses and experience persistent gender pay gaps that translate into gender pension gaps later in life. Alarmingly, one in four children growing up in Europe is at risk of poverty, malnutrition and social exclusion, with serious lifelong implications ranging from stunted physical growth to lasting health effects, lower educational achievement and lifelong job insecurity, making poverty a hereditary threat that is hard to escape.

Especially high poverty rates are also observed among other groups across Europe, including persons with disabilities, migrants, and persons belonging to racialised communities.

At a time when war and high energy prices are significantly raising the cost of living everywhere, European governments have sought to relieve the growing pressure on households through multibillion euro packages, often containing tax cuts, price caps and lump-sum allowances. While these measures may have the advantage of being swift, they typically do not prioritise those most exposed, and they make no long-term impact in addressing poverty.

Lasting steps towards the eradication of poverty require a shift in the narrative from charity to human rights-based entitlement and the insulation of social assistance programmes from short-term political pressures. I call on member states to develop sound social protection floors for the most vulnerable, prioritise their investment in early childhood support and education, and address the significant non-take-up of rights by simplifying application processes and involving those affected in the design of schemes.

Systematic human rights screenings of member states’ budgets and fiscal policies can both improve the accountability and transparency of economic policy processes, and help governments identify areas where public funds are being lost, including through tax evasion. Human rights-based fiscal policies can also help find suitable alternatives to austerity, thereby preventing social crises, and assist in reversing inequality by alleviating the disproportionate burden borne by people with low income in some countries.

Breaking the cycle of intergenerational poverty, including through equitable fiscal policies and the sustainable resourcing of comprehensive and rights-based poverty eradication programmes, must become a top priority for member states.”

Interpellé ces dernières années par plusieurs réclamations de particuliers confrontés à une pollution au mazout de leur terrain, le Médiateur de la Wallonie et de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles n’a pu que constater l’incapacité de nombreux citoyens à faire face aux conséquences financières d’un tel événement.
Outre les situations individuelles très compliquées qui peuvent en résulter, si un particulier ne dispose pas des moyens suffisants pour assainir son sol, les conséquences environnementales peuvent être énormes. Le problème de pollution devient alors un problème public.

Le Médiateur avait déjà interpellé la Région à plusieurs reprises dans ce type de dossiers. La naissance du Fonds Promaz laisse enfin entrevoir une solution concrète pour les victimes de sinistre mazout, et pour l’assainissement des sols en Belgique.

Afin de mieux comprendre le fonctionnement du Fonds et les contours de son intervention, le Médiateur a rencontré ce 03/10/2022 Monsieur Willem VOETS, administrateur délégué de Promaz.

Promaz est un fonds agréé par le Gouvernement, actif depuis le 28/02/2022 et jusqu’au 28/02/2025 pour vous assister financièrement et/ou opérationnellement dans les situations de sinistre mazout.

En cas de pollution de sol avérée, ou en cas de suspicion de pollution liée à une fuite d’un réservoir de mazout, n’hésitez pas à contacter Promaz afin d’introduire un dossier, ce fonds est actif pour toute la Belgique !

Ce dernier peut intervenir à concurrence de 200.000,00€ pour les particuliers, et 100.000,00€ pour les personnes morales. Il peut intervenir pour un dossier actuellement en cours, mais également pour des sinistres survenus dans le passé.

Si vous êtes concerné par une pollution de sol provoquée par une fuite dans un réservoir de mazout, ne tardez plus. Toute demande doit être introduite au plus tard le 28/02/2025.

Concerné ? Vous pouvez obtenir plus de renseignements gratuitement sur le site internet www.promaz.be, par e-mail : info@promaz.be ou par téléphone au 0800/63.636

How central Government handles complaints about services will be transformed by new Complaint Standards unveiled today by the public services watchdog.

The UK Central Government Complaint Standards have been developed by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO), in collaboration with central Government departments, other public bodies, and advice and advocacy groups.

Organisations including the Cabinet Office, Department for Transport, HMRC, and the Food Standards Agency are acting as trailblazers for the Standards. They will lead the way in embedding the Standards in their organisation and will work with the PHSO to further develop and share good practice across Government.

The Standards were created following research that revealed:

• more than two thirds of people didn’t think their complaint to public services would be listened to
• 44% thought complaining would not make a difference
• almost a third said they would be worried that complaining might affect how they were treated by the organisation in future.

The Standards aim to improve this situation by helping organisations provide a quicker and simpler complaints handling service that:

• promotes a learning culture
• welcomes complaints in a positive way
• is thorough and fair
• gives fair and accountable responses.

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman Rob Behrens said:

“By adopting the Standards, organisations will resolve more complaints at the earliest opportunity and use learning to improve services for the public.

“Mistakes happen, but how they’re handled can avoid them being repeated and make a big difference to those affected. It’s no exaggeration to say that in some circumstances this could be life-changing.

“I’m glad to see support for the Standards. I hope that senior leaders across central Government commit to embedding them as part of creating a culture where complaints are embraced and welcomed as opportunities to learn.”

In developing the Standards, the Ombudsman also held a consultation with Government complaints handlers, the public, and third sector and advocacy organisations. The results showed widespread backing for the Standards, with 82% saying it was clear what they were trying to achieve and 91% supporting their aims.

Feedback from this consultation further highlighted the need for reform. A respondent working in the third sector told PHSO:

“From consultation with our community, it is clear that they face a complicated and confusing complaints landscape.”

Talking in a recent PHSO podcast, the Complaints Champion for UK Government, Angela MacDonald, said:

“We in the Civil Service and the broader public sector are here to serve the public. When you’re serving 70 million people, it means that even if you’re fantastic 99% of the time, that 1% is an awful lot of people.

"There should be some commonality about how we put it right when things go wrong. Having had the opportunity to spend time with Government departments, large and small, I’ve realised there’s massive diversity of experience and capability.

“But the mark of who we are is what we do when it goes wrong and there has to be a good-quality consistent way of doing that. Hopefully these Standards will deliver that level of constancy and support colleagues to deliver good service to complainants.”

The cost of providing care has become an increasingly common theme in the complaints made to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman over the past year.

Highlighted in its Annual Review of Adult Social Care, which covers both council and independent care complaints, the Ombudsman said it is seeing more cases where councils are failing to provide care, or are limiting care, while using cost as the justification.

In one case, a family went from paying nothing for their elderly mother’s care to more than £3,500 a month after the council changed the way it assessed people’s contributions towards their care because of ‘budgetary pressures’. In another case, a young adult’s care and support needs were not met while two councils argued about who should foot the bill.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

“The issues we are investigating are neither new nor surprising, but do indicate a system with a growing disconnect between the care to which people are entitled, and the ability of councils to meet those needs.

“Care assessments, care planning and charging for care have been key features of our cases this year and a common theme is councils failing to provide care, or limiting it, and justifying this because of the cost. We appreciate budgets are becoming increasingly stretched but authorities’ duties under the Care Act remain and we will continue to hold authorities to account for what they should be doing rather than what they can afford to do.”

Over the past year, the Ombudsman has upheld 70 per cent of the cases it has investigated about adult social care – a figure higher than the 66% average uphold rate across all areas it investigates.

However, since the last comparable year before the pandemic the Ombudsman has received 16 per cent fewer complaints about adult care as a whole. Significantly, it has seen a 21 per cent drop in complaints about care arranged and funded independently.

Mr King added:

“I’m also concerned that more than a decade of rising demand and unmet need have left service users and their families, disillusioned and feeling there is no point in making a complaint.

“I want people to know that their voice matters. What can at first appear a simple error affecting a single person can trigger a change in practice benefitting many others. We can and do use our powers to achieve the maximum impact from our investigations – indeed despite the fall in complaint numbers, we have made more recommendations to improve services than ever before.”

Over the past year, the Ombudsman received 2,596 complaints and enquiries about adult social care, however just 13% (340) were from people who arranged and funded their own care. This compares with 3,073 complaints and enquiries in 2019-20 with 430 about independent care. During the same period, the Ombudsman made 631 service improvement recommendations, compared with 596 in 2019-20. Service improvements can include recommendations to review or create policies and procedures, staff training, improving communication with families and record keeping.

Article date: 12 October 2022