Actfortheact - Save the human rights act now

[Rascal]

The HRA is no longer fit for purpose,can't see why a British Bill of Rights being introduced is an issue other than Gove is having input into its being.
HRA has been used & abused to the point where solicitors/lawyers use it as a stick on this Country & its people.
Get rid.

What would you like to see in a British bill of rights that is not in the HRA and what parts of the HRA are unfit for purpose?


Can you also please explain how such a bill could also include provisions for the different legal systems of the UK and how would it affect the Good Friday agreement.


Further can you also explain why our rights have to change to suit those of a politician. Our rights are apolitical, they are not owned by Parliament, they are ours by nature of being human.


What i also would like to know is as we dont have a written constitution can we rely on our judicial system to interpret a new "British" bill of rights in the way it is meant or will it just open a huge can of worms and leave us all as citizens defenceless to the whims of the Government of the day.


If scrapping the HRA is all about the UK government being able to send people home because they believe them to be terrorists then it has to be the single most ludicrous act ever in the history of our country. 70 million people lose there rights so a dozen nutjobs dont have them....

 

[urmston]

The HRA is no longer fit for purpose,can't see why a British Bill of Rights being introduced is an issue other than Gove is having input into its being.
HRA has been used & abused to the point where solicitors/lawyers use it as a stick on this Country & its people.
Get rid.

What would you like to see in a British bill of rights that is not in the HRA and what parts of the HRA are unfit for purpose?


Can you also please explain how such a bill could also include provisions for the different legal systems of the UK and how would it affect the Good Friday agreement.


Further can you also explain why our rights have to change to suit those of a politician. Our rights are apolitical, they are not owned by Parliament, they are ours by nature of being human.


What i also would like to know is as we dont have a written constitution can we rely on our judicial system to interpret a new "British" bill of rights in the way it is meant or will it just open a huge can of worms and leave us all as citizens defenceless to the whims of the Government of the day.


If scrapping the HRA is all about the UK government being able to send people home because they believe them to be terrorists then it has to be the single most ludicrous act ever in the history of our country. 70 million people lose there rights so a dozen nutjobs dont have them....

I'd rather be 'defenceless' to the 'government of the day' and the laws it makes than 'defenceless' to a load of judges in Europe.

We 'defenceless' Brits get the chance to re-elect our government every five years, but we really are 'defenceless' against Europe's courts, its noddy parliament and its unaccountable, unelected bureaucracy.

The HRA has not benefited most UK people one little bit, but it has benefited lots of criminals, and some people tied to use it to get votes for criminals in prison.

It has been less than useless.

Get rid.

 

[urmston]

Further can you also explain why our rights have to change to suit those of a politician. Our rights are apolitical, they are not owned by Parliament, they are ours by nature of being human.

What a bizarre and obviously untrue statement.

The HRA was passes into law by politicians in parliament.

Just as our politicians and parliament had the right to pass the HRA, they have the right to amend it or scrap it.

All human rights are made by and defined by humans, and nearly always by humans who are politicians.

The idea that they are apolitical, exist independently of any human decisions and are just waiting to be discovered like America or penicillin is utterly ridiculous.

 

[stonerblue]

The HRA is no longer fit for purpose,can't see why a British Bill of Rights being introduced is an issue other than Gove is having input into its being.
HRA has been used & abused to the point where solicitors/lawyers use it as a stick on this Country & its people.
Get rid.

What would you like to see in a British bill of rights that is not in the HRA and what parts of the HRA are unfit for purpose?


Can you also please explain how such a bill could also include provisions for the different legal systems of the UK and how would it affect the Good Friday agreement.


Further can you also explain why our rights have to change to suit those of a politician. Our rights are apolitical, they are not owned by Parliament, they are ours by nature of being human.


What i also would like to know is as we dont have a written constitution can we rely on our judicial system to interpret a new "British" bill of rights in the way it is meant or will it just open a huge can of worms and leave us all as citizens defenceless to the whims of the Government of the day.


If scrapping the HRA is all about the UK government being able to send people home because they believe them to be terrorists then it has to be the single most ludicrous act ever in the history of our country. 70 million people lose there rights so a dozen nutjobs dont have them....

I'd rather be 'defenceless' to the 'government of the day' and the laws it makes than 'defenceless' to a load of judges in Europe.

We 'defenceless' Brits get the chance to re-elect our government every five years, but we really are 'defenceless' against Europe's courts, its noddy parliament and its unaccountable, unelected bureaucracy.

The HRA has not benefited most UK people one little bit, but it has benefited lots of criminals, and some people tied to use it to get votes for criminals in prison.

It has been less than useless.

Get rid.

Sources for this fact? Some figures or even better a graph will do.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Some people have very small minds.

 

[Metal Biker]

Can someone provide a "graph" or "source" comparing Human Rights in the UK with Human Rights in Canada, Saudi Arabia and China?

I'm interested to see how the "we have Human Rights by nature of us being human" view is shared in these different areas and cultures of the world.

 

[bluemanc]

Can't understand the venom on this,getting rid of the HRA which was in 1998 under tony blairs government incorporated into UK law was in the Tory Manifesto.
The Cons were voted into government on the back of this,pointless moaning now.
Selective human rights activists/lawyers i can understand being pissed off at the scrapping,it will cost them multi-millions.
As i've said my hope is that gove has little input in the mechanics of the replacement.

 

[nahnahrickyholden]

Bump! The official launch of our campaign actfortheact will take place this Monday. You will hopefully remember back in May our fundraising efforts, for a nationwide poster campaign, which is now ready to go nationwide. Look out for the posters up and down the country on buses, billboards, train and tube stations. You can get involved with the campaign by visiting actfortheact.UK where you will find campaign details, posters, testaments and the opportunity to sign our letter to Michael Gove. Visit now and sign up today to show your support. Thank you Matt.
#kesiaslaw #actfortheact #stillachildat17

 

[donachie&chadvalleybigleague]

What a bizarre and obviously untrue statement.

The HRA was passes into law by politicians in parliament.

Just as our politicians and parliament had the right to pass the HRA, they have the right to amend it or scrap it.

All human rights are made by and defined by humans, and nearly always by humans who are politicians.

The idea that they are apolitical, exist independently of any human decisions and are just waiting to be discovered like America or penicillin is utterly ridiculous.

Actually I think there is something that we might think of as innate and waiting to be discovered about needs/rights and a reciprocal attitude guaranteeing these that allows humans to flourish. You only have to look at research on early attachment and the environment that allows security (in attachment, for example, but also in well functioning family's, creative groups, etc). It is secondary, the task of symbolising this phenomena in useful verbal terms and indeed acts. There is (by definition, human needs are innate in every human) a need for this to be captured, held, enshrined globally as far as is possible, and outside of individual family's, governments, countries.

Of course you need to preserve this act outside of our individual government and it's 'moods'.

It's so clear on here much of the time to differentiate between the humane, compassionate argument and the narrow minded, paranoid, bigoted views of exclusion and projection. The latter often seems attractive in it's simple, categorical expression. Fortunately the likes of @Rascal show how much is absent from these other arguments presented by the concrete and simplistic.

 

[nahnahrickyholden]

Sign up now at www.actfortheact.uk it takes seconds to do, and you can play your part in letting Michael Gove know what we think of his plans. Keep your eyes peeled across Manchester from Monday for billboards and buses.
Cheers Matt