Would you vote Tory if Kemi Badenoch was Tory the party leader and the election was tomorrow?

No

There was the threat of a legal challenge from the UK government to the Scottish government about it about which authority had the right to make law in that area.

I don't think human rights came into it. Where to put trans prisoners is a challenge - I don't think they should be in women's prisons but they're at risk in male prisons and of course, some male prisoners will feign being trans to be in a woman's prison.

@fearfuloffluff

This adds up to saying you don't believe in the rule of law. Which is fascist. The alternative to rule of law is tyranny and being unable to challenge the executive.

That's a massive and illogical leap on your part.

Pointing out real issues with having a ECHR style system, isn't anything like saying I don't believe in the rule of law.

Do you think Aus and NZ are lacking from being outside an institution such as ECHR?

Presumably you're talking about the Catholic Church's wrongs in terms of child abuse, beating, Magdalen nurseries, taking children away from unmarried mothers, financial corruption and political interference etc.

What actions of the ECHR are comparable to that?

ECHR rules on whether national laws are witihin the limits of human rights law. Very often the rulings are in favour of the government, but individuals take the case to ECHR to test the law. Papers report this as being something outrageous that shouldn't happen, but not all claims succeed, especially if they have no merit.

They rule on whether a government is staying within the rules that it signed up to. I don't see any comparison to the Catholic Church at all, it's an entirely different thing.

SNP was an absolute power in Scotland

I thought they weren’t, which is why it was blocked/delayed (not sure which) Subsequently the bill has also loss political support.

So who is the equivalent of the pope in the UK political system?

ECHR

So who is the equivalent of the pope in the UK political system?

The Catholic Church has done many bad things, but it's a faith rather than a democratically elected body.

You seem to be saying that an 'elite' comprising lawyers, judges, civil servants - who else? Are somehow acting against the will of 'the people'

In a democracy there is an executive, a legislature, a judiciary. That's the separation of powers. They balance each other out.

I don't really get what you're saying - the educated professionals at the higher echelons of these institutions are all corrupt and should be replaced? The institutions are corrupt?

You seem to be saying that sometimes things happen that you don't like, and therefore they must be against 'the will of the people' but there is no 'people', there are many different opinions and viewpoints and a mature democracy needs to balance them all, which means sometimes decisions are made that you don't like. But you suck that up and campaign if you want things to change, including voting for the party that will change things the way you want.

There seems to be a really nihilistic, destructive spirit out there led by this wing of the Tory party that wants to tear things down without really having an articulate vision of what's wrong with them, what should replace them, what their vision of the future looks like.

It’s not a done deal. I’m watching legal challenge which is always possible.

The other side is citizens rights to security and I think this will become more strained as mass displacement occurred

I don’t think things will be ‘perfect’ but I’m ready to talk about what is causing this huge problem for women in a society based on a legal lie and make some changes to institutional structures to resolve it.

So Kemi Badenoch has written to ECHR about proposed legislation that would do what you want it to do, and they have said that would be acceptable under ECHR. Why would you need to leave ECHR then?

The politicians who complain about ECHR previously complained about the EU in the same way - blaming it for decisions that were really within the remit of the national government: if only we were freed from the restrictions imposed on us by this institution, everything would be perfect

It's not true. The government should take accountability for its own decisions.

Also changing ideas of what is ‘good’.

Here too. We use votes as an electorate for accountability

Yes, that was my point. Fallibility and lack of accountability.

And don't get me started on suspicion of elites, bureaucrats etc which usually means people who have an education and stick to fundamental principles of fairness instead of going along with populist nonsense.

Yes, elites would never do anything corrupt, or unfair, or out of selfish interest, or out of incompetence.

I mean you have just said that governments do bad things, sure government elites do bad things; but the international elites, wonderful people, you would have to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist to question that level of elites.

Otherwise a government could decide that, for example, Romany people have to only live in certain reservations and can't park up where they like. The population may well support that, it would probably be a popular policy but it would also be a breach of their human rights that could basically confine them to prison camps.

Yes, like confining them to prison camps, or you know, land that they own, or have the landowners permission to be on. It's a terrible human rights violation of course, but the ECHR doesn't prevent a determined government from doing something like that if they really wanted and had the public backing; so any protection of "rights" here is only limited.

@fearfuloffluff - there are many that oppose them from within their own party. These are not lefties but thoughtful Tories. Many of them are former Ministers.

If the Tory Party campaign for this I will make common cause with these former Ministers and get campaigning.

That it was important for countries to listen to a single international authority to stop them behaving in ‘wrong’ ways. Otherwise monarchs could decide to do what they like, for example getting divorced or translating the Bible into a language to people could read.

Women’s rights to single sex spaces and sports. And stop indoctrinating children in schools with gender ideology

There’s a thread here where a woman was denied access to venues for a rape support group because they would prefer no males to be present. Multiple screen shots from venues to say no.

That to me is an extreme society that has become based on a legal lie, which if you follow it back germinated in the ECHR court case.

As for legislation changing this Kemi Badenoch is pursuing this, and has done the due diligence of writing to ECHR, and got go ahead. So in that regard she’s leading.

I have asked a few times on threads if not the change to biological sex what legislation would resolve this? I haven’t had an answer yet

I could accept legislation if it does resolve the single sex issue but if it doesn’t I’ll keep looking.

What?

For me, the current Tory party has a dangerous wing that is trying to undermine the rule of law. By equating judges, civil service etc with some entrenched 'metropolitan elite' who don't rule in the interests of the people.

For example Rees Mogg and Dorries talk about Johnson having a 'mandate' which was betrayed by other Tories bringing him down. This misrepresents the UK political system in which voters elect a party and the party elects a leader who becomes PM if he/she can command a majority. There is no mandate, it's not a presidential system.

The prorogation of parliament was another shocking and illegal example.

The characterisation of 'lefty lawyers' is another example - making a legal representative synonymous with the cause they are representing whereas they are there to argue someone's case. Defence lawyers for people accused of murder don't do it because they like murder! Lawyers for refugees etc are there to make a case, and the case is then decided upon according to the law which is set out in legislation and precedent. There's no sneaking cases through because everyone is best buddies.

The Catholic Church thought the same about the Pope.

I'd never vote Tory, no matter what. Absolutely never.

Do you really see that as likely to happen? Do you really think the Rees Moggs of this world care about improving women's rights as opposed to removing workers' rights?

I have a bridge to sell you...

What does strengthen women's rights mean? Presumably you mean keeping transwomen out of changing rooms etc?

If a government wanted to strengthen women's rights, the first thing they'd do would be to invest massively in a support system for women experiencing abuse, in detection in rape and sexual assault cases, fund childcare etc.

I'd be very wary of dropping human rights for the sake of giving the state a role in policing gender. If you go too far down that road you end up with your sex life being policed, dodgy reproductive policies that equate womanhood with childbearing, etc.

Mass displacement - presumably you mean refugees. Human rights means that right now we can't just throw them back in the sea, is that what you'd do?