Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Aruntraveller on August 29, 2016, 08:00:09 PM
-
I am surprised and angered that there has not been more of an outcry about this in the media and from the public about this:
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/25/this-is-the-bombshell-dropped-by-theresa-mays-government-while-the-media-whined-on-about-traingate/
Have we become so apathetic that we are willing not to simply give away our freedoms but to even not realise it is happening.
There is a petition to sign if you do care here:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/125604
-
I an not convinced that the story is real. To quote:
"While the mainstream media joined Richard Branson’s smear campaign against Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Conservative government dropped a bombshell. It is going to scrap the Human Rights Act."
I find it difficult to believe that the whole of the world media missed this story, it sounds like corbynista propaganda.
-
I an not convinced that the story is real. To quote:
"While the mainstream media joined Richard Branson’s smear campaign against Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Conservative government dropped a bombshell. It is going to scrap the Human Rights Act."
I find it difficult to believe that the whole of the world media missed this story, it sounds like corbynista propaganda.
http://www.theweek.co.uk/63635/human-rights-act-will-be-scrapped-government-confirms
-
Blair's missus will be down the job centre then.
-
I am surprised and angered that there has not been more of an outcry about this in the media and from the public about this:
One of the attractions of Brexit was to make it easier to scrap human rights... sorry, I mean the Human Rights Act. The media have been harping on about it for years and how it allegedly allows Europe to impose all sorts of nonsense on us. We don't need no human rights, we're British.
The next thing to go will be the working time directive because British bosses are at an unfair disadvantage not being able to introduce slave labour at will.
I might have mentioned that the Brexit vote was like turkeys voting for Christmas.
There is a petition to sign if you do care here:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/125604
A good idea - signed.
-
Blair's missus will be down the job centre then.
Hoo-fucking-ray!
-
Appalling business. I've signed.
Don't understand the references to Cherie Blair - I may have missed something.
-
Appalling business. I've signed.
Don't understand the references to Cherie Blair - I may have missed something.
Tony Blair and his government passed the vast majority of the human rights legislation and then lawyer Cherie Booth (Blair) made millions, much of it legal aid, prosecuting human rights cases through various courts, British and European.
Lord Faulkner, Blair's Attorney General was Tony's Head of Chambers when he worksd as a lawyer and was also Cherie's Head of Chambers.
-
I get it Owlswing. I have no objection to anyone making a fortune, wish I knew how :D. Cherie Blair was a marvellous barrister and I admire her for that alone.
However I don't want to derail this thread so I'll get back to the subject.
I signed the petition but apparently I have to click some link in an email which I will receive, checked inbox and haven't got anything yet ???. Sine die maybe.
The Tories plan to put something else in place of the Human Rights Act, something "British".
To me, the Human Rights Act is one of the best things to have come out of the EU and it saddens me to think we will no longer have its protection.
-
This is not new. I believe it was a manifesto commitment when the Tories came to power under David Cameron. Theresa May is simply confirming that commitment. Whether it actually succeeds, and a proposed British Bill of Rights becomes law in its place however is an entirely different matter. I think she would have difficulty in getting it through the Commons, and unlikely to get HofL consent.
-
I get it Owlswing. I have no objection to anyone making a fortune, wish I knew how :D. Cherie Blair was a marvellous barrister and I admire her for that alone.
However I don't want to derail this thread so I'll get back to the subject.
I signed the petition but apparently I have to click some link in an email which I will receive, checked inbox and haven't got anything yet ???. Sine die maybe.
The Tories plan to put something else in place of the Human Rights Act, something "British".
To me, the Human Rights Act is one of the best things to have come out of the EU and it saddens me to think we will no longer have its protection.
Note the Human Rights Act didn't come out of the EU, rather it is the European Convention on Human Rights that precedes the EU and EEC as was as was and comes from the Council of Europe which precedes and is bigger than the EU.
-
Thanks NS.
-
And as some further clarification, we were signed up to the ECHR before the Human Rights Act was passed. People could pursue things to the European Court but it wasn't UK law at the time. This meant that trying to use it tended to be very expensive. It also meant that the UK govt was much more likely to lose a case since although not enshrined in UK law the ECHR would take preference at European (not EU) level.
While I sometimes am with the line from Shakespeare and think let's kill all the lawyers, the idea that Owlswing is implying that this was merely a way to make money doesn't really fly. Also i'm not entirely sure what people would specifically disagree with in terms of the rights given in the ECHR.
The question with the Tory proposal is whether they withdraw from the ECHR completely. A convention to which UK lawyers did a lot of the drafting for and is based on much of UK particularly English law.
I am not sure what their envisaged bill will contain but the passing of it, attempted or successful, and the resulting cases, will not lead to the impoverishment or lack of employment for lawyers, more likely the opposite.
I would be interested in what thoughts anyone has on what such a bill should contain that the ECHR doesn't, or what it should miss out
-
And as some further clarification, we were signed up to the ECHR before the Human Rights Act was passed. People could pursue things to the European Court but it wasn't UK law at the time. This meant that trying to use it tended to be very expensive. It also meant that the UK govt was much more likely to lose a case since although not enshrined in UK law the ECHR would take preference at European (not EU) level.
While I sometimes am with the line from Shakespeare and think let's kill all the lawyers, the idea that Owlswing is implying that this was merely a way to make money doesn't really fly. Also i'm not entirely sure what people would specifically disagree with in terms of the rights given in the ECHR.
The question with the Tory proposal is whether they withdraw from the ECHR completely. A convention to which UK lawyers did a lot of the drafting for and is based on much of UK particularly English law.
I am not sure what their envisaged bill will contain but the passing of it, attempted or successful, and the resulting cases, will not lead to the impoverishment or lack of employment for lawyers, more likely the opposite.
I would be interested in what thoughts anyone has on what such a bill should contain that the ECHR doesn't, or what it should miss out
I think that the main objection to the Human Rights Act is that cases are heard by the European Court of Human Rights and this has resulted in some serriously anti-British decisions - for an instance - a convicted terrorist given, by the European Court - the right to stay within the UK because . . . oh I forget the exact reason, but it overturned a UK court decision to deport an active terrorist.
Is the fact that British cops are unarmed (for the most part) behind the wish for such people to stay here rather than be deported to places where the police are armed and, sometimes, extremely trigger happy?
-
I think that the main objection to the Human Rights Act is that cases are heard by the European Court of Human Rights and this has resulted in some serriously anti-British decisions - for an instance - a convicted terrorist given, by the European Court - the right to stay within the UK because . . . oh I forget the exact reason, but it overturned a UK court decision to deport an active terrorist.
Is the fact that British cops are unarmed (for the most part) behind the wish for such people to stay here rather than be deported to places where the police are armed and, sometimes, extremely trigger happy?
This was true prior to the Human Rights Act as my post covered. We were original signatories to the ECHR and overall the most influential drafters of it. The main bar to cases getting there was the cist. I am not aware of any case where the case has been armed police, are you?
-
I an not convinced that the story is real. To quote:
"While the mainstream media joined Richard Branson’s smear campaign against Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn, the Conservative government dropped a bombshell. It is going to scrap the Human Rights Act."
I find it difficult to believe that the whole of the world media missed this story, it sounds like corbynista propaganda.
LA, its been in the news from before the Brexit vote, and is most certainly true. I'm in two minds about it - the current legislation has shortcomings in my view, but unfortunately I don't think the Tories are planning to tighten it.
-
I am not aware of any case where the case has been armed police, are you?
What? Your question makes no sense - not to me anyway.
I am stating that it might be possible that terrorists fight deportation in order to stay in the UK because our poloce are not armed and terrorists tend to be arrested and imprisoned and not shot on sight.
-
LA, its been in the news from before the Brexit vote, and is most certainly true. I'm in two minds about it - the current legislation has shortcomings in my view, but unfortunately I don't think the Tories are planning to tighten it.
I'ts difficult to know what to make of it. It has hardly been mentioned in the media let alone discussed. Are all journalists so worn-out after Brexit that they just can't be bothered with anything other than the usual 'Silly Season' stuff?
-
I'ts difficult to know what to make of it. It has hardly been mentioned in the media let alone discussed. Are all journalists so worn-out after Brexit that they just can't be bothered with anything other than the usual 'Silly Season' stuff?
Not sure what you've been looking at. I've seen several BBC pages, and printed media articles on it over the last 15-odd months.
Here are a couple - though the third link is to an article that is 2 years old.
http://bit.ly/2c6ewS5
http://bit.ly/2bPJeTA
http://bit.ly/2byG5rY
http://bit.ly/1XuYnqf
-
What? Your question makes no sense - not to me anyway.
I am stating that it might be possible that terrorists fight deportation in order to stay in the UK because our poloce are not armed and terrorists tend to be arrested and imprisoned and not shot on sight.
and I asked you justify that with a case at the European court as I wasn't aware of one. Appears neither are you but then given you seemed to take the position that the Court only was involved after the Human Rights Act, perhaps not surprising that you don't know about cases.
-
Appalling business. I've signed.
Don't understand the references to Cherie Blair - I may have missed something.
She's a human rights lawyer.
-
I'ts difficult to know what to make of it. It has hardly been mentioned in the media let alone discussed. Are all journalists so worn-out after Brexit that they just can't be bothered with anything other than the usual 'Silly Season' stuff?
I read it, hence the link I posted. Maybe you should read the news.
-
and I asked you justify that with a case at the European court as I wasn't aware of one. Appears neither are you but then given you seemed to take the position that the Court only was involved after the Human Rights Act, perhaps not surprising that you don't know about cases.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/european-human-rights-judges-ban-terror-case-extradition-8575111.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/669107/european-union-eu-theresa-may-terror-suspects-david-davis-home-secretary-conservative
-
I read it, hence the link I posted. Maybe you should read the news.
Bit busy herding the grandchildren around just at the moment, but I haven't heard anything on the news or seen anything in the headlines.
-
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/european-human-rights-judges-ban-terror-case-extradition-8575111.html
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/669107/european-union-eu-theresa-may-terror-suspects-david-davis-home-secretary-conservative
What has this to do with cases about police being routinely armed?
-
Bit busy herding the grandchildren around just at the moment, but I haven't heard anything on the news or seen anything in the headlines.
Possibly because it's govt minister says govt at some point will carry out govt policy. It was covered in the run up to the GE as well.
-
Possibly because it's govt minister says goat some point they will carry out govt policy. It was covered in the run up to the GE as well.
I know that the idea has been 'kicked-around' for some time, but it never sounded as if the government ware actually going to do anything about it. Maybe May has resurrected it as a concession to the Brexiteers?
-
I know that the idea has been 'kicked-around' for some time, but it never sounded as if the government ware actually going to do anything about it. Maybe May has resurrected it as a concession to the Brexiteers?
Given that some talked of the ECHR as if it was to do with the EU, who knows.
-
Given that some talked of the ECHR as if it was to do with the EU, who knows.
It was certainly 'bound-up' with the EU in the minds of many.
-
It was certainly 'bound-up' with the EU in the minds of many.
indeed, people are often wrong, but I think the confusion by some on Brexit side was deliberate.
-
Dear Trent,
Thank you for highlighting this, I have signed the petition, more smoke and mirrors from the Tories, I hope it reaches its target and that it will be debated in the HoC.
Gonnagle.
-
I know that the idea has been 'kicked-around' for some time, but it never sounded as if the government ware actually going to do anything about it. Maybe May has resurrected it as a concession to the Brexiteers?
But it hasn't been resurrected in the last few months. It's been being discussed at various levels for over a year now, and long before the term 'Brexit' was coined, LA.
-
But it hasn't been resurrected in the last few months. It's been being discussed at various levels for over a year now, and long before the term 'Brexit' was coined, LA.
And nothing to do with Brexit. We were signatories before the EEC existed.
-
And nothing to do with Brexit. We were signatories before the EEC existed.
Seconded, NS. The sooner that people get out of the habit of 'blaming' the EU for the European Human Rights Act or the ECHR the better. Yes, it has been respoonsible for some pretty hairy situations and things - such as nigh-on 20-years' of unsigned-off annual accounts, but ...
-
I am surprised and angered that there has not been more of an outcry about this in the media and from the public about this:
http://www.thecanary.co/2016/08/25/this-is-the-bombshell-dropped-by-theresa-mays-government-while-the-media-whined-on-about-traingate/
Have we become so apathetic that we are willing not to simply give away our freedoms but to even not realise it is happening.
There is a petition to sign if you do care here:
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/125604
This isn't something created by Brexit, this has been suggested at least three years ago that the gov wanted to ditch the human rights act.
I remember feeling appalled at the time.
This is something from 2015
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3220763/Scrapping-Human-Rights-Act-Britain-level-Putin-s-Russia-claims-European-Union.html
-
I know that the idea has been 'kicked-around' for some time, but it never sounded as if the government ware actually going to do anything about it. Maybe May has resurrected it as a concession to the Brexiteers?
It occurs to me that nothing will be done about it because Parliament is going to be spending the next twenty years unwinding all the EU legislation.
-
But it hasn't been resurrected in the last few months. It's been being discussed at various levels for over a year now, and long before the term 'Brexit' was coined, LA.
I am perfectly well aware that it has been discussed for some time but the government seemed to acknowledge that there were problems and seemed reluctant to act. However, the two issues became 'entwined' by the tabloids and opportunistic Brexit politicians. There was an argument that we could never repeal the UK Human Rights Act as long as we were members of the EU. Obviously, if we leave the EU that problem disappears.
-
There was an argument that we could never repeal the UK Human Rights Act as long as we were members of the EU.
Have to admit to having never seen or heard that argument, LA.
-
Have to admit to having never seen or heard that argument, LA.
I'm afraid I can't give you a source at this minute, but I have a distinct memory of it coming-up in a discussion on Radio 4.
-
Have to admit to having never seen or heard that argument, LA.
Good old Google, I think this is the one I had in mind:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04ykd7m
It seems quite a balanced debate on the issue that is still quite valid today.
-
Good old Google, I think this is the one I had in mind:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04ykd7m
It seems quite a balanced debate on the issue that is still quite valid today.
Thanks for that, L.A. Can't say that i was taking much interest in things political at that point in time (mid- to late-January 2015) I was too busy recovering from my heart problems. I'll give it a listen later.