Guest flumax Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Hopefully we'll be able to keep our right to life and not be slaves etc. Still not heard why it's wanting scrapped other than a few daft terrorist, daily mail stories http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-scotland-32705811 http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/may/12/scottish-government-human-rights-act-conservatives?CMP=share_btn_tw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Is this a material change that could cause another referendum? Leaving the ECHR would breach the Good Friday Agreement as well... http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/may/12/scrapping-human-rights-act-would-breach-good-friday-agreement The UK can't pull out of the ECHR and still be a member of the EU. The EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights is the same thing as the ECHR. Edited May 12, 2015 by Clyde1998 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of Paisley Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The HRA is devolved up here so we would be exempt, no matter what the ill-informed David Mundell trots out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Endell Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The HRA is devolved up here so we would be exempt, no matter what the ill-informed David Mundell trots out.Ach, you're no human, so you're definitely exempt . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Cant help but think that this sends a really dangerous message to other states, very poor precedent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khana Lagur Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The HRA is devolved up here so we would be exempt, no matter what the ill-informed David Mundell trots out. Not sure it's as clear cut as that. It's the UK that's the signatory to the HRA, not Scotland. But I'm not an expert on it, so apologies if I'm talking kak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Not sure it's as clear cut as that. It's the UK that's the signatory to the HRA, not Scotland. But I'm not an expert on it, so apologies if I'm talking kak. They would have to amend devolved legislation as KOP says An absolute can of worms Lawyer on Newsnight said so last night and questioned whether the Tories would really want to try that at this particular point in the political climate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) From what I understand - and I am far from a legal expert - the UK government could enact some changes that would have an impact across the UK, for example you could no longer appeal to the European Court in Strasbourg for Human Rights cases. The Scottish Government could legislate to mitigate most but not all of the impacts, and there would be some weird contradictions. Key thing here is whether or not the UK government wants to pick a fight with Holyrood - and also Stormont - given the wider political dynamic. Should give a good indication on what Cameron is thinking. This is a bit awkward though. Edited May 12, 2015 by aaid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Ha ha, one nation, Dave? Will you try to override Holyrood and Stormont? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindimoo Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) I can't see how it could work of constituent countries of the UK have different HR arrangements. An example. I advise students in immigration and assist them in making visa extension applications to UKVI. We often include a cover letter saying we are sending the application under HRC (just to cover their back). If the visa is refused under possible future arrangements where would that leave students who apply from Scotland to the UK government and get a refusal? Can of worms indeed. Edited May 12, 2015 by Mindimoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Now that the LibDem handbrake has been removed, expect more policies of this ilk, designed to appease the uber right-wing of the party and the nutters in the Tory press. Edited May 12, 2015 by Rossy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Now that the LibDem handbrake has been removed, expect more policies of this ilk, designed to appease the uber right-wing of the party and the nutters in the Tory press. Talking of the LibDem handbrake, they may say "you'll regret you got rid of us" but on the other hand, by propping them up even while curbing the worst excesses of the Tories, they made the prospect of a Cameron-led government less scary than it would have been. If we'd had 5 years of pure full-on Tory regime, they might have been voted out by now, rather than voted in. IMHO. Edited May 12, 2015 by exile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindimoo Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Talking of the LibDem handbrake, they may say "you'll regret you got rid of us" but on the other hand, by propping them up even while curbing the worst excesses of the Tories, they made the prospect of a Cameron-led government less scary than it would have been. If we'd had 5 years of pure full-on Tory regime, they might have been voted out by now, rather than voted in. IMHO.Agreed. One could almost feel sorry for them.Almost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lamia Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Anyone reckon they will argue to bring back the death penalty after this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindimoo Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Anyone reckon they will argue to bring back the death penalty after this! Gove's your man for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huddersfield Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Anyone reckon they will argue to bring back the death penalty after this! I think there's a strong Tory lobby for it, but probably not strong enough to see it through & it's historically (albeit a long time ago) a free vote issue not a party line one. The destruction they are already causing though to the Justice system generically is frightening & brutal though this point is, more offenders are committing suicide in prison than they would ever get around to executing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Are they seriously considering bringing back fox hunting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristolhibby Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I think there's a strong Tory lobby for it, but probably not strong enough to see it through & it's historically (albeit a long time ago) a free vote issue not a party line one. The destruction they are already causing though to the Justice system generically is frightening & brutal though this point is, more offenders are committing suicide in prison than they would ever get around to executing. Instant booting out of the EU for that. And TBH I believe the British electorate are not that savage. J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mariokempes56 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Are they seriously considering bringing back fox hunting? Free vote from what I heard... progressive caring Tories. Or callous bastards ...mmm let me think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParisInAKilt Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Free vote from what I heard... progressive caring Tories. Or callous bastards ...mmm let me think. Ffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 We've gone from death penalty to fox hunting ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Are they seriously considering bringing back fox hunting? Don't think they ever stopped it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 We've gone from death penalty to fox hunting ? Not much difference as far as some of these evil Tory fukers are concerned. They would regard both as just getting rid of some unwanted vermin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capital Saint Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Ruth Davidson tweeted this last night -I wonder if any of this eve's avid tweeters bothered to read @ScotTories manifesto. P.65 states Holyrood has final say on any rights change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilser Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Yet another piece of half arsed populist crap from a lazy kkunt of a Prime Minister (who's probably not even bothered to read the fecking Human Rights Act) designed to appeal to other lazy halfwits and pub bores who don't know what the Human Rights Act says and get all their 'news' from the Daily Mail and the Sun. As Lord Bingham said - which of these rights do we want to discard? The rights protected by the Convention and the Act deserve to be protected because they are, as I would suggest, the basic and fundamental rights which everyone in this country ought to enjoy simply by virtue of their existence as a human being. Let me briefly remind you of the protected rights, some of which I have already mentioned. The right to life. The right not to be tortured or subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The right not to be enslaved. The right to liberty and security of the person. The right to a fair trial. The right not to be retrospectively penalised. The right to respect for private and family life. Freedom of thought,conscience and religion. Freedom of expression. Freedom of assembly and association. The right to marry. The right not to be discriminated against in the enjoyment of those rights. The right not to have our property taken away except in the public interest and with compensation. The right of fair access to the country’s educational system. The right to free elections. Which of these rights, I ask, would we wish to discard? Are any of them trivial, superfluous, unnecessary? Are any them un-British? There may be those who would like to live in a country where these rights are not protected, but I am not of their number. Human rights are not, however, protected for the likes of people like me – or most of you. They are protected for the benefit above all of society’s outcasts, thosewho need legal protection because they have no other voice – the prisoners, the mentally ill, the gipsies, the homosexuals, the immigrants, the asylum-seekers, those who are at any time the subject of public obloquy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.