Gove and the Human Rights Act

I heard Andrew (plebgate) Mitchell on TV yesterday speaking against the proposed repeal of the HRA and it seems that Cameron had run into opposition from his own backbenchers, not to mention the House of Lords. So it's not in the Queen's speech today, much to the horror of the right wing press!

From a Guardian article:

"But without commenting on the timing, Liz Truss, the Conservative environment secretary, insisted the plan was “absolutely” going be delivered at some point because it was a “clear manifesto pledge”."

It seems to me that the gov have come up against some opposition from backbenchers, the labourites and some others, and so are now intending to "think tank" it. What's wrong with that?

Surely David Cameron wants to bring in our own "human rights bill". Isn't it because we don't want to have to allow all illegal immigrants to remain in this country simply because they rent a home and buy a cat? And we don't necessarily want to allow prisoners to vote, simply because the EU courts say we must.

It's not that he intends to do away with all human rights in this country!

I think there is somne deliberate panicking going on on this thread.

But the difference with the HRA bit is that it's constitutionally incredibly important and the Tories have been banging on about it for years and so should have got their ducks in a row. Personally fwiw I think all political parties should be much more circumspect in their manifesto promises and discuss underpinning principles and values more. For example rather than the sale of social housing ( and there's another one that may well come unstuck in the courts) it would have been better to have had some overarching ideas put forward about how the housing problem in certain parts of the country could be tackled in a meaningful way. So to sum up the 'flap' about the abolition of the HRA was actually an informed discussion about the real difficulties of putting something else in its place and for the Government to just realise that is not exactly confidence inspiring IMO

Just wondering whether we expect too much of political manifestos. Isn't a manifesto a sort of list, or description, of what a political party would like to do in ideal circumstances? Given that political circumstances are never ideal because practical politics is messy (like most human activities), perhaps we shouldn't get in flap so soon about stuff like the abolitin of the HRA.

Yes, of course the Tories will spin the listening bit. Any politician worth their salt would. That's how it works regardless of party alignment.

I am going to take a guess that the HRA will not get dropped at any time.

I for one did take on board your comment GT about not waiting and see before scaremongering as that is not how politics works.

I would add though that scaremongering for scaremongering sake is not on. Nor is not having anywhere enough facts and scaremongering. That applies to real life and gransnet. The thread about people living in this country and being chucked out after an EU referendum was a bad example of people getting very het up about something that is highly or extremely unlikely to happen in the slightest.

But yes, in principle, I think that you are right GrannyTwice.

Yes - that's why they'll spin the 'listening ' bit. I mentioned consultation in my post. He clearly won't say he's dropping it at this stage but I guess it may well quietly disappear in the mayhem that the EU referendum will become

There is now going to be a consultation about scrapping the HRA. Apparently that will be announced in the Queen's Speech today.

Italics - sigh

Well clearly DC has been listening. That can be spun into ( and will be) a positive or ( as I think) is an example as I said ^ of sound bite policy making without thinking through the implications and consequences and that is concerning. I also think that what has happened is an excellent example of why if we are against a policy proposal we should be vociferous from the getgo. Some of you said we should wait and see before scaremongering but that really isn't how politics works. As I also said ^ this now allows DC not to lose face in the way he would have done if it had gone say further without some much needed thought and consultation. I expect we will see the blessed Michael taking to the airwaves today saying something on the lines of being a listening government we have realised we have completely cocked up need more time to consider

I think there will be quite a lot of u turns too. Governments nowadays dont seem to think things through as well as they used to.

Hope so. Should there be a limit to the number of u-turns before another general election is called?
There's going to be a demo tomorrow when the Queen's speech is being read, and a march by No to Austerity to Downing Street. Should be interesting television tomorrow for anyone not having to go out.

I can see this term of government being one long round of Tory u-turns!

Won the first round, then. He appears to have chickened out.

Wish I had, Tegan, shaken his hand, I mean.

www.politics.co.uk/news/2015/05/26/eve-of-battle-human-rights-act-supporters-bullish-ahead-of-q

At least five Tory MPs against the repeal of the HRA.

I'm so proud to have shaken his hand; I think he was the most decent man to ever walk the face of this earth. Sometimes can't believe he's no longer with us .

Been to the gala a few times over the years.
Our village now has a new banner or rather a restored one.

Thanks Tegan haven't seen that before. I did remember when he spoke about the Raging Grannies who he had seen in America and would have liked to join. Anyone intersted should look at-http://raginggrannies.org/starter-kit/
fantastic way to grow old disgracefully!!!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jugNw7rSdw
any talk of Tony Benn makes me play this song....

His son can do a good job of it, trisher. It's strange watching the same mannerisms.

Just remembered years ago seeing Tony Benn, he had a tour where he read pieces from writers over the years about the long fight for Human Rights. It was so interesting and moving to hear the history of this movement. If only he was around to speak about this now.

Thatbags, I note that the article does not give a name for the government minister. It also says "their" which means it could be a he or she.
So Cameron could be facing a vote of no confidence in his first hundred days. It only needs another six rebels.

www.theguardian.com/law/2015/may/24/british-courts-echr-leveson

Leveson being cagey, but says there is no need to repeal HRA.

There is an article in Breitbart saying that a government minister will give up his seat before supporting the abolishing of the 1998 Human Rights Act. There may be others who don't support the government's electoral promise which, the article suggests, was made in the belief that there would be another coalitionso it wasn't going to happen. The article also says abolishing the HRA is just a proxy for the 'battle' over EU membership.