2-day seminar on economic and social rights in the age of austerity

14 October 2011 by

A quick note to highlight an excellent 2-day seminar on Economic and Social Rights in the Age of Austerity at The Law Society’s annual human rights symposium. It is on 21-22 October. All details are here.

For more on economic and social rights – which are a newish frontier in the human rights world and very controversial – see Rosalind English’s posts here and here.

A host of high profile speakers will lead discussion at the event, which is to be held at the Law Society’s headquarters on Chancery Lane, London. Here are some of the speakers

  • Andy Slaughter MP (Labour MP and Shadow Justice Minister),
  • Justice Albie Sachs – former Justice of the South African Constitutional Court
  • Lady Justice Arden – Lady Justice of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales
  • Kate Green MP – Labour MP, chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Poverty and member of the Work and Pensions Committee
  • Professor Francesca Klug OBE – director, Human Rights Futures Project, LSE
  • Baroness Walmsley – patron, CRAE, co-chair Liberal Democrat Parliamentary Policy Committee on Education, Families and Young People and sponsor of the 2009 ROCK Children’s Rights Bill
  • Professor Emeritus Richard Wilkinson – director, Equality Trust and author of The Spirit Level Background
There are good discounts for public sector organisations and students. I may be speaking in one of the “breakout” sessions on human rights in the media, depending on another commitment. But don’t let that put you off! Sign up now.


  1. Wish you all the best.

  2. I wish all the best to organisors for a great success of the summit

  3. Thank you for this interesting article, helped me much.

  4. I think it is disappointing that there does not appear to be any ‘easy read’ introduction or explanation for the seminar here. The main reason is that the issues being discussed are of direct relevance to disabled people. However, I also have another reason – it would help to reassure me that this is a not a seminar which is a lot about justifying Social Darwinism.

    The Legal profession doesn’t seem to do very much for disabled people in an economic sense. On one hand, they’ll get rid of the few disabled people they have, see:


    And on the other hand, they’ll use arguments of economic necessity and austerity to justify not even paying benefits. Not very mice, is it?

Welcome to the UKHRB

This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.




This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.


Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption ALBA Al Qaeda animal rights anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 Artificial Intelligence Asbestos assisted suicide asylum Australia autism benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery Catholicism Chagos Islanders Children children's rights China christianity citizenship civil liberties campaigners climate change clinical negligence Coercion common law confidentiality consent conservation constitution contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus costs Court of Protection crime Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation deportation deprivation of liberty Detention disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Court of Justice evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Family Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage Gaza genetics Germany Google Grenfell Health HIV home office Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests international law internet Inuit Iran Iraq Ireland Islam Israel Italy IVF Japan Judaism judicial review jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid Leveson Inquiry LGBTQ Rights liability Libel Liberty Libya Lithuania local authorities marriage mental capacity Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery music Muslim nationality national security NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges Obituary ouster clauses parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury Piracy Plagiarism planning Poland Police Politics pollution press Prisoners Prisons privacy Professional Discipline Property proportionality Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania Round Up Royals Russia Saudi Arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice sexual offence Sikhism Smoking social media South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing statelessness stop and search Strasbourg Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance Syria Tax technology Terrorism tort Torture travel treaty TTIP Turkey UK Ukraine USA US Supreme Court vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wind farms WomenInLaw YearInReview Zimbabwe
%d bloggers like this: