The Human Rights Act

[Dare to dream!]

Can anyone tell me why the Government want to to scrap it?

[keith79]

abu hamza it may have somthing to do that that fellow.

[Glyn_Wigley]

abu hamza it may have somthing to do that that fellow.

Care to elaborate?

[keith79]

i think they tried to deport him and he went to court claiming it was against his human rights he was also using legal aid cost millions. made the government look stupid. i may be wrong

[hoolahoop]

i think they tried to deport him and he went to court claiming it was against his human rights he was also using legal aid cost millions. made the government look stupid. i may be wrong

No  you are right Keith but there are other side issues as well as regaining the right to control our own Islands.

[Glyn_Wigley]

i think they tried to deport him and he went to court claiming it was against his human rights he was also using legal aid cost millions. made the government look stupid. i may be wrong

No  you are right Keith but there are other side issues as well as regaining the right to control our own Islands.

No, he's wrong. Hamza appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, as the UK is a signatory to the European Convention of Human Rights - which the UK helped created and was one of the first signatories of back in 1950. What Hamza did was nothing to do with the Human Rights Act 1998, which is what the Tories are on about.

[BobG]

The Tories are beating the Little England card.  They are scary people despite their innate stupidity.

BobG

[hoolahoop]

The Tories are beating the Little England card.  They are scary people despite their innate stupidity.

BobG

Lol

[keith79]

well done glyn

[hoolahoop]

They should standardise these Rights Acts , it certainly would remove all the confusion.

[Glyn_Wigley]

They should standardise these Right Acts , it certainly would remove all the confusion.

They did. The HRA 98 act basically just enshrined the Convention in British legislation. The only thing it changed in any significant way was that instead of only being able to appeal to the ECHR it allowed appellants to bring cases in British courts - which for those with a genuine case made it easier (and much cheaper) than having to take it to the ECHR. Just because there are spurious and frivolous cases brought - usually by people who have as little knowledge of what the HRA actually says and stands for as those that moan about the HRA - which get into the papers and make people froth at the mouth about the HRA...despite them having no chance of winning their case (which you never get to hear about, of course!) it doesn't make any sense to let those cases make you remove a valuable piece of legislation.

[hoolahoop]

Seems not as the types of appeals we are talking about are thrown out anyway if spurious. Am I right thinking that we would be the only country in Europe raising our own rules. How can we be a signatory for one and go against it in our own law .

This is ridiculous and is just a silly side ,- show for the real battle ahead. Cameron looks weak already- all the pressing problems he/we have and he chooses to push this agenda as well as the Boundary commission changes. Smacks of pampering to the 1922 Committee immediately.
We could end up isolated if we aren't careful.

Thanks Glyn BTW for explaining this to me ... I think I understand it now ?

[BillyStubbsTears]

The Tory Right-Wing have been slavering to be let off the leash for five years. Actually, for 18 years.

Whether this just Cameron chucking them a bone before they pipe down, or whether it is them truly taking control of him and forcing the agenda will probably be the question that defines the next five years of our lives, and probably the outcome of the next election.