1. Class, markets and cohesion: An analysis of state use of EU structural funds to reinforce segregated living arrangements for disabled people in Europe Ciara Brennan csb1@hi.is University of Iceland, Centre for Disability Studies

2. Aims of presentation 1.Explore the role of the state, markets and class-based power relations as interconnected components in the reproduction of oppressive social orders in Europe. 2.Outline the ways in which structural funds for European cohesion policy were misused to reinforce oppressive social relations and incarceration of disabled people in Europe. 3.Consider the role of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and civil society in redirecting markets, reconceptualising the role of the state. Ideas, comments and feedback very welcome! 2Rannsóknasetur í fötlunarfræðum

3. Background European Cohesion policy 2007-2011 1/3 rd of total European financial budget (€75 billion) Mundane jobs creation objectives…. Employment often seen as a means of addressing cycle of poverty (Priestley, 2003) Neo-liberal obsession with solving social oppression through open markets, enterprise and jobs creation alone Generate job development Open markets Encourage business Reduce gaps in development Gender equality

4. Background  European Coalition for Community Living Report (2009) – Refurbishment and rebuilding of institutions – Hungarian Government spent €37 million of EU funds to expand and develop new institutions – Romanian government used funds for a policy of institutional “modernisation” – “Maintain an archaic system that perpetuates the social exclusion of disabled people” (ECCL, 2010; p41).

5. Aims vs. outcomes Aims (relatively uncontroversial)Outcomes Jobs creation„Investment“in institutions Free market stimulusAllocation of funding Address povertyReassert inequalities, status quo, fundamental class relations EU Commission ratification of UN CRPDViolations of Article 19 and other fundmantal human rights

6. Analysis  How did a mundane exercise in jobs creation result in the reinforcement of segregation of disabled people in Europe?  Warrants a holistic examination Trans-disciplinary (Thomas, 2007) The interplay of economics, politics and society; Marxist approaches 1.Economic- the use of structural funds for “investment” in institutions, and market orientation of policy Monetary focus rather than addressing the social inequalities Illustrates how vast amounts of money could not address deeply embedded social structures

7. Analysis 2. Politics- State regulation of fundamental class relations Structural funds used by states to reinforce an oppressive social order unaccountability 3. Society- Deeply embedded power relations Neo-Marxism, professionals as “key practitioners of the state: maintaining their status through reproducing ruling ideologies that reduced disabled people to passive recipients of welfare” (Goodley, 2011, p61) Reassertion of status quo, and state reluctance to address power relations

8. Reconceptualising the state The operationalization of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities The role of civil society Sweden- “civil disobedience” Choice, control, self-determination State as an enabler through policy and legislation in line with the UN CRPD Direct payments

9. Conclusions Abuse of structural funds give an insight into the social relations that compromise the global economy and the oppression of disabled people (Burnham, 2009) Illustrates how funding at a macro level can have very negative outcomes for individuals Need for a more holistic (societal and political) approach in addition to funding Potential role of the UN CRPD State obligations rather than control and paternalism Guidelines for the use of structual funds to be published in 2012 (Bulic, 2012) Power rebalance towards civil society

10. References Burnham, P. (2010). Class, capital and crisis: a return to fundamentals. Political Studies Review (8) pp27-39 Clarke, S. (1983). State, Class Struggle and the Reproduction of Capital. Kapitalstate (11) pp113-30 ECCL (2009). Wasted lives, wasted money, a wasted opportunity? European Coalition for Independent living. London. Goodley, D. (2010). Disability Studies: An intersectional introduction. London: SAGE. OHCHR (2012). Getting a Life – Living Independently and Being Included in the Community A Legal Study of the Current Use and Future Potential of the EU Structural Funds to Contribute to the Achievement of Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Priestley, M. (20073. Disability: A Life Course Approach. Cambridge. Polity Press. Quinn, G. (2012). Getting a life and being included in the Community. A legal Study of the Current use and future potential of EU Structural funds to Contribute to the Achievement of Article Thomas, C. (1999). Female Forms. Experiencing and Understanding Disability. Buckingham. Open University Press