Have we done this yet?

http://jackofkent.com/2014/10/exclusive-tory-proposals-for-bill-of-rights/

People who do not fulfil their responsibilities in society should not be able to claim so-called “qualified rights” in their defence in a court of law

Very, very scary.

Not applicable in Scotland…

That is debatable, apparently – not quite that simple.

Anyhow, still very, very worrying for those South of the border.

thankfully, will never happen, theyd need a majority government of complete *****

Wtf is fulfilling your responsibility in society?

Going to the right school.

The Tory Party is only part of the problem.

Another part of the problem is the electorate, much of which lets the Sun, Daily Mail, Telegraph, etc.
do their thinking for them.

And yet other problem of course is the ineffective, at best, and nonexistent at worse, opposition.

But then we only have ourselves to blame.

People who do not fulfil their responsibilities in society should not be able to claim so-called “qualified rights” in their defence in a court of law

seems pretty straight forward to me – “People who commit serious crimes in the UK, and in doing so infringe upon the basic rights of others, should lose their right to claim the right to stay here under the right to family life. So for example, a foreign criminal, guilty of causing death by dangerous driving and so taking away the rights of another citizen, would not be able to claim family rights to stay in the UK.“

There are plenty of well publicised heart wrenching stories of families who have seen loved ones die at the hands of people who shouldn’t have been living in the country yet we are powerless to remove them.

Would the EU allow any UK govt to derogate from the EHCR?

There are plenty of well publicised heart wrenching stories of families who have seen loved ones die at the hands of people who shouldn’t have been living in the country yet we are powerless to remove them.

no there aren’t, the stories are all made up by the Daily Mail

Deranged loons trying hard to outloon UKIP loons

Limit the reach of human rights cases to the UK, so that British Armed forces overseas are not subject to persistent human rights claims that undermine their ability to do their job and keep us safe.

The world is our Guantanamo !

People who do not fulfil their responsibilities in society should not be able to claim so-called “qualified rights” in their defence in a court of law

Having not read the article, I presume this means that we can now loot the offices and assets of tax avoiding non-doms and there’s nothing they can do about it? 😀

The Human Rights Act and Convention are really important pieces of legislation, and I’d be reluctant to play around with either.

BUT

The way some crafty lawyers have wasted millions of pounds twisting them to enable – frankly – criminal scum and/or dangerous nutters to carry on undermining or threatening wider society concerns me.

I’m not sure how me or anyone can start to square the circle though.

big_n_daft – Member

no there aren’t, the stories are all made up by the Daily Mail

Of course they’re all true !

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXM7DzeMLe4[/video]

Does anyone else, upon seeing a picture or footage of Ms May, just get Monty Pyhton and The Holy Grail – She’s a witch, burn her sketch in their head?

Hateful, horrid woman…

what i dont get is that under her stewardship the UKBA has lurched from one crisis to the next, yet shes still seen as a likely leadership candidate

She’s a witch

There are plenty of well publicised heart wrenching stories of families who have seen loved ones die at the hands of people who shouldn’t have been living in the country yet we are powerless to remove them.

Except that the people being referred to do have the right to live in this country, DC would like to remove that right.

Do the tories just have a thing for evil incompetent witches?

A proper written constitution first would be a better idea, to stop this making things up as we go by the executive and the judiciary. The ECHR is fit for purpose it’s the government by reasonable suspicion (see the proposals for restricting free speech put up by “the witch” at this weeks Tory conference) that needs reining in.
Willie Whitelaw had the right idea when these things were tried with him “Nice try now go away and work within the law”.

I like David Allen-Green. There are few lawyers around who make complex legal discussions both accessible and understandable in a real life context.

I’ve been following his tweets closely, and agree with his assessment: this is an incredibly dangerous proposal. In effect, it changes the understood concept of human rights being the entrenched rights if the citizen against the state exceeding it’s power, to the state being able to determine the extent if that reach first.

Thin end if the wedge.

kimbers – Member

what i dont get is that under her stewardship the UKBA has lurched from one crisis to the next, yet shes still seen as a likely leadership candidate

Kind of incredible isn’t it. I suppose she’s a tory feedback loop. ZOMFG TEH IMMIGRATIONZ we must act! Incompetently! Causing immigration problems! ZOMFG TEH IMMIGRATIONZ we must act!

uselesshippy – Member
Wtf is fulfilling your responsibility in society?
POSTED 1 HOUR AGO #

resisting stupid legislation like this.

Under these proposals, we basically no longer have human rights, we have rewards for being good little citizens.

Subjects…not citizens, shirley?

We are Her Majesty’s subjects *, we are CMD’s Puppets to be manipulated as the Tories see fit.

* – That’s a fight for some other time.

Under these proposals, we basically no longer have human rights, we have rewards for being good little citizens.

Remember, Britain is still a country ruled mostly by Normans. Nothings really changed in 1000 years.

That’s what you are to them, a dirty serf. I heard that kind of attitude from pupils at a private that I will not mention day in and day out when I was in my late teens.

We are Her Majesty’s subjects *

citizenship has been in place since the British Nationality Act 1948 (or was it 1947) at least

Remember, Britain is still a country ruled mostly by Normans.

Well that’s an eyeopener. So his name’s not really Dave ?

The thing thats top of the list of why to despise Dave and chums is their absolutely breathtaking arrogance! They seem to regard themselves as some kind of imperial power, that sees the British Constitution (such as it is), and now our Human Rights as some kind of gift to their ‘subjects’ that they can apply or withdraw to suit their own interests, on a whim. Just look how they’ve viewed the Scottish referendum result as an opportunity for a bout of shameless gerrymandering.

Which is why they loath the ECHR so much. It serves as a brake on them being able to do what the hell they damn well feel like.

A bill of rights? I wouldn’t trust this opportunistic bunch of shysters to write a shopping list

So because a handful of dirtbags allegedly misuse the HRA for their own gain none of us get to have rights…
This is how dictators think.

there would be no pasties or pork scratchings on it so you are wise to not trust them

The Tory Party is only part of the problem.

Another part of the problem is the electorate, much of which lets the Sun, Daily Mail, Telegraph, etc.
do their thinking for them.

@epic, this is truely priceless. We live in a democracy and removing the ECHR right to overule our courts is what the majority want.

Hardly anyone reads the papers anymore, what you are seeing in these polls is what the public think. Real Human Rights supporters should campaign for convicted criminals not holding UK passports to be able to deported as by defending those individuals they have undermined their own case.

Of course we’ll will have rights. We will have rights determined by a UK Bill just not by an EU Bill. To argue that the EU is able to determine human rights but a British parliament cannot is insulting. To suggest we will not have rights is simply daft.

You are Nigel Farage, and I claim my enormous EU parliamentary expenses claim!

Cheers! 😆

The Rt Hon Lord Howard of Lympne, CH, QC said:

“The argument is not about human rights, to which we all subscribe. No, the argument today is whether arrangements such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Human Rights Act actually help to protect such rights or, by the way in which they have operated, bring the concept into disrepute.”

Well he may have a point there.

ta argue that the ECHR is any way shape or form linked with the EU is inuslting daft and wrong

It is done by the council of europe who are completely and utterly independent of and unrelated to the EU- FAIL.

One wonders if the mass media have somehow had a role in conflating the two in the minds of the largely ill educate public? What do you think?

To suggest we will not have rights is simply daft.

Which is why no one has said it on this thread

Are any of your views based on facts or evidence?

So because a handful of dirtbags allegedly misuse the HRA for their own gain none of us get to have rights…
This is how dictators think.

exactly the only european country not signed up is Belarus- europes ‘last dictatorship’

Well he may have a point there.

There are rights we have signed up to protect, when we do not adhere to them and then say we will leave and make up our own with our own judges ruling we bring the process into disrepute. Our international standing will be diminished. Its almost Putin in nature. i dont like what the international community says so I am leaving and making up my own rules with the judges I pick saying if i stuck to them

Imagine if it was prosecuting a “tin pot dictatorship” for offences and they responded like this

It is not the action of a civilised or mature democracy.
they shame the nation by suggesting this