Ooman rights

[Petemate]

Sorry if there is a bit of duplication here, but couldn't see anything.

So Home sec wants it scrapped - hoorah. And Cleggy says it is here to stay. In my book, he is getting a bit too big for his boots, and as far as I'm concerned he can bog off. (no swearing from me today, it is Sunday...... )

[Victor McDade]

Petemate said:

Sorry if there is a bit of duplication here, but couldn't see anything.

So Home sec wants it scrapped - hoorah. And Cleggy says it is here to stay. In my book, he is getting a bit too big for his boots, and as far as I'm concerned he can bog off. (no swearing from me today, it is Sunday...... )

The Home Sec does not really want it scrapped. It's simply a sound bite ahead of conference week to keep the grass roots happy. Or maybe I'm just too cynical.

[ZOLLAR]

Victor McDade said:

Petemate said:

Sorry if there is a bit of duplication here, but couldn't see anything.

So Home sec wants it scrapped - hoorah. And Cleggy says it is here to stay. In my book, he is getting a bit too big for his boots, and as far as I'm concerned he can bog off. (no swearing from me today, it is Sunday...... )

The Home Sec does not really want it scrapped. It's simply a sound bite ahead of conference week to keep the grass roots happy. Or maybe I'm just too cynical.

They'll replace it with the "bill of rights", probably mostly the same with a few bits changed so that we can deport with out the EU stopping us.

[Victor McDade]

ZOLLAR said:

They'll replace it with the "bill of rights", probably mostly the same with a few bits changed so that we can deport with out the EU stopping us.

Yes that's the idea but how workable is it?

If I understand it correctly many foreign criminals currently avoid deportation on two counts:

1 - Article 8 - the right to a "private and family life"; and
2 - Article 3 which prohibits torture or sending someone to a country where you know they'll be tortured.

I'm no legal expert but if we introduced a 'bill of rights' then how would this circumvent the European Convention on Human Rights of which we are signatories of? And if you're not a signatory then you can't be in the EU.

I think the Tories know this and thus their protests for a 'bill of rights' is just a show.

[Jasandjules]

They can't "do away" with it, because we are bound by EU law.....

[ZOLLAR]

Victor McDade said:

Yes that's the idea but how workable is it?

If I understand it correctly many foreign criminals currently avoid deportation on two counts:

1 - Article 8 - the right to a "private and family life"; and
2 - Article 3 which prohibits torture or sending someone to a country where you know they'll be tortured.

I'm no legal expert but if we introduced a 'bill of rights' then how would this circumvent the European Convention on Human Rights of which we are signatories of? And if you're not a signatory then you can't be in the EU.

I think the Tories know this and thus their protests for a 'bill of rights' is just a show.

I agree, no idea how they would work it.

Personally I think the only way we'll ever leave the EU or rid ourselves of their laws is if the EU collapsed and we revert back to our own Sovereignty.

[turbobloke]

Victor McDade said:

And if you're not a signatory then you can't be in the EU.

Is that really the case?

So if we hadn't ratified the EU version of Ooman Royts bks and had our own more sensible version from the off, we'd have had to leave?

Jeez what a missed opportunity on both fronts.

[turbobloke]

DT: Conservative Party Conference
Cameron agrees with May that Human Rights Act should be replaced by Bill of Rights.

[Victor McDade]

turbobloke said:

Victor McDade said:

And if you're not a signatory then you can't be in the EU.

Is that really the case?

So if we hadn't ratified the EU version of Ooman Royts bks and had our own more sensible version from the off, we'd have had to leave?

Jeez what a missed opportunity on both fronts.

It's madness.

Up until 2009 this was not the case but accession to the European Convention on Human Rights became a legal obligation for EU members under the Treaty of Lisbon. You know, the same treaty Cast Iron Dave promised us a referendum on?

http://www.coe.int/lportal/web/coe-portal/what-we-...

It's comical to hear top Tories pretend they are against the ECHR when they themselves did nothing to keep us out of the Lisbon Treaty.

The Tories are as pro-Europe as any of the mainstream parties here, they are just sly enough to pretend they are not and much of their support base actually buys this.

[Petemate]

Wish I hadn't opened this now - my pee is boiling.......

[Engineer1]

Jasandjules said:

They can't "do away" with it, because we are bound by EU law.....

We are too Anglo Saxon, we need to be a little more Latin sign up to the rules then assign them an improbably low priority as far as enforcement. Italy, France, Greece, etc all seem to be able to pick and choose, I wonder if you can get it to the point the fines cost less than the enforcement would have.

[JagLover]

Victor McDade said:

ZOLLAR said:

They'll replace it with the "bill of rights", probably mostly the same with a few bits changed so that we can deport with out the EU stopping us.

Yes that's the idea but how workable is it?

If I understand it correctly many foreign criminals currently avoid deportation on two counts:

1 - Article 8 - the right to a "private and family life"; and
2 - Article 3 which prohibits torture or sending someone to a country where you know they'll be tortured.

I'm no legal expert but if we introduced a 'bill of rights' then how would this circumvent the European Convention on Human Rights of which we are signatories of? And if you're not a signatory then you can't be in the EU.

It depends on judicial interpretation, and our judges are some of the most 'liberal' in Europe. Before the convention was incorporated into British law we have far fewer problems of judges overriding politicians and somehow were able to maintain effective border controls without being judged to be in breach of the convention.

[JagLover]

Victor McDade said:

The Home Sec does not really want it scrapped. It's simply a sound bite ahead of conference week to keep the grass roots happy. Or maybe I'm just too cynical.

They will not be able to scrap it while in coalition with the Lib Dems, but given the number of Conservatives opposed to it I would be surprised if a future Conservative only administration (if it ever happens ) did not scrap it.

[Mojooo]

The 'human rights' we have won't be scrapped - the law will just be written and enforced in a way that you dont get the silly scenarios we get now and again and the overall fear of something being in breach of 'human rights' will disappear.

[martin84]

The papers saying 'Home Sec wants to scrap human rights' will sell alot of papers but thats not what she's saying. She's saying the Act as it stands has caused considerable problems for the home office which many of us would agree with. Human Rights is a vital part of any civilised society but when it seems to cover such a broad variety of things which consistently conflicts with common sense and your nations ability to enforce basic law and order it needs looking at.