Reform to scrap human rights, surely people won't vote for that

Only been in power a year
That should say
I missed of half my sentence

You will get that
Reform,like every other party have to come up with policies on lots of issues
If people like the ideas they vote for them ,if they don't they vote elsewhere.
Untill we are near the next general election,no one really knows what all the policies are for any political party.
All we do know ...is what labour said they were going to do ...and what they are actually doing...
Unfortunately the media don't seem very keen on keeping us up to date on what labour are successful at ..they seem to want to only tells us the negatives.
I'm not a labour voter ,but I still say ,give them a chance,they have only been in power .
I'm not a reform voter either ...but ...if I think their policies are the best of a bad bunch at the next election,they will get my vote ..
I'm not impressed with any of the parties at the moment,they all leave a lot to be desired

You can imagine reform doing this .....
That's no basis ...just because you imagine it ..
It's either fact ..they are going to do it ...or fact they are not ..which is it

But they don't disadvantage white British people. Newspapers have no interest in printing stories about white people availing themselves of human rights laws, as they might when treated unfairly. But if an immigrant or a prisoner does it - outrageous! How dare they!

The media loves to take stories and give them outrageous headlines when the truth is much more prosaic and reasonable, but no one bothers to read that far down. Eg, a story about 'TERRORIST SUES FOR BEING IN CUSTODY FOR 36 HOURS' was everywhere some years ago, but actually the man was innocent, he'd been swept up because a relative was involved in terrorism; he was kept under arrest without bring given reason for too long legally and he was also mistreated,, such as being deliberately kept awake all night while in custody. But the media loves a simplistic narrative that villainises human rights, because newspapers are run by the sort of people who would benefit from everyone having fewer rights.

True, we only know the failures of the existing framework.

OP Gender is not a 'protected characteristic' under the Equality Act.

People voted for Brexit 'To stop foreigners coming here' and no further thought.

Never underestimate how stupid some people are.

If you had said that Trump would be elected president 20 years ago you would have been laughed out of the room - and then say he gets convicted and then REelected.... you'd be committed!

Control immigration
Reduce ballooning benefit bill
Reduce fiscal drag from income tax rate freezing
Get rid of discriminatory employment practices
Stop attempting to stifle free speech

So how would Farage and his party (private limited company) improve life for the c.70 million citizens of the UK?

You’re right there’s no cogent argument. There also seems to be a tendency for some who vote for Labour / left just to insult over much else.

It's not an argument at all.

☝

It's not an argument at all.

Playing chess with a pigeon would be a better use of my time.

That's a great argument - you've convinced me now.

ODFOD

This is a thread about HR + ECHR. Labour breached both of those with the Education Tax. So it's a completely pertinent and relevant contribution and illustrates that in its current form it isn't fit for purpose!

As like with Brexit I won’t vote for Reform. However, plenty of people would for sure. Unfortunately, the rights have been abused over and over. We literally are inundated with criminals and low levels of educated immigration that brought their culture with them. It does not look good. Some truly had enough some of us are leaving. Not matter how many threads discussing Farage and the perils of Reform. it is futile.

People who think Farage is the answer to any problem aren't worth debating with.

So we have a 72 year plus old document which sets out rights designed to protect people two generations ago? Coming out the Second World War. The world has changed since then.

This is the problem with positive right. A bit like the US constitution giving people the right to carry arms. At the time that was enacted there is no way that they could have envisaged the society now, the types of weapons available. People with bad intent lean on that right and it causes a lot of problems, legislation should be fit for purpose, having to align to a Treaty drafted for an entirely different world causes issues. Human Rights legislation needs to be reviewed to ensure it is fit for purpose in the current climate? Like all laws HR legislation should move and react to the society it’s trying to govern

Oh dear! So now we have evidence of what Farage thinks, you resort to derogatory language about the wide variety of supporters.

im afraid, once you resort to that level of comment it is clear you actually have no argument beyond, “I don’t like it and hate everyone who thinks differently to me”. Come back when you have a coherent argument based on evidence or at least a well argued philosophical position.

It’s a thread about ECHR. Article 2 is supposed to protect education choice. It didn’t. This is a relevant and recent example of a basic human right (including yours and you children) being eroded due to the ECHR not being fit for purpose.

Tax on children’s education. VAT on education. Of course you understand the implications of this for the future. I won’t patronise you by outlining them.

Here we go again..privileged people complaining about independent schools no longer having protections with regard to tax. I am sure that is at the top of everyone's list when it comes to the problems this country faces at the moment.

Yes. We are in a situation whereby HR prevents us deporting people and taking action against some criminals but allows the taxing of children's education. Fucking madness!

It amazes me that people don’t think any deeper than ‘scrapping our human rights’ and see how it’s actually failing. It’s not blaspheming to suggest there can be alternative. It came into affect in 1953, it’s 72 years old! The world population was 2.5 billion then and it’s now over 8 billion with mass migration seen on scale that couldn’t have been imagined back then. It simply doesn’t reflect the way the modern world is and that’s before we get into the subject of the massive growth of the malign influence of human rights lawyers.

Exactly!
The courts found that the Education Tax DOES interfere with APT1 and Art 14 of HR Act and DOES discriminate but it's fine so 🤷‍♀️ If the HR act can't protect us from our government then it needs reforming.