Some of the prospective Tory leadership candidates want to us to…

[Crystalbits]

Leave the ECHR. Can anyone explain if this is a good thing. I mean there must be some logic to it. Robert Jenrick was Minister of State for Immigration, surely he knows the facts. Please explain this to me like it’s an idiots guide !

I know one of these particularly well and the citizens are happy enough not to change their situation and they do well on tables measuring rights, it can be done

You’re right. Look at Russia - they can arrest whoever they want and lock them up without a fair trial, subject them to torture and not have to worry about any political opposition.

America doesn’t cover itself in glory either.

many countries are outside of Europe, so of course they have different metrics. ECHR is a gold standard though.

and there’s a reason why so many people from these ‘other 150 countries’ are all flocking to Europe. It safe, stable and prosperous as a result.

Not all Conservatives think alike -

"I was deporting people every week.. I was kicking out foreign national criminals every week.. I deprived citizenship of terrorists who sought to dour country harm on a number of occasions"

"The ECHR didn't stop me"

James Cleverly explains how the ECHR does not stop the UK government from removing failed asylum seekers, contrary to the claims of other candidates for Conservative leadership like Robert Jenrick who says the ECHR does stop the UK from doing that

x.com/implausibleblog/status/1841140012227633654?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

Or more hilariously, if Labour were to follow Jenrick or Farage's advice and withdraw from these conventions, being in government with a large majority for the next five years what if the Labour government legislated to get rid of habeas corpus* and decided to lock them up for an indefinite time as troublemakers?

Or does "National Governments should be able to decide what are the human rights of their citizens are" only apply when there is a delightful Tory or Reform administration and automatically disapply itself when there is a Labour government?

*It already did by the way, or had a damned good go at it. monthlyreview.org/2005/11/01/the-end-of-habeas-corpus-in-great-britain/

But why SHOULD it be done? The immense expense and logistical difficulty and actual risk of destruction of the union and / or violence in NI - why go through all that when we have a perfectly good human rights convention as it stands? One which is good enough for every other European country except Belarus and Russia?

It would cost billions to address all the policy areas that would be affected by us coming out of the ECHR - and for what?

It is a bit ‘fool me once shame on you…’

i think it’ll depend on migration pressures and the next five years for that

I could see a GE with Aus style against joining the EU Pact although it’s pretty far off and public opinion is hard to know

Well, it would be a bit pointless for Australia to be in the European Court of Human Rights. As said elsewhere, the two European nations not in it aren't examples to follow.

And isolationism is not a good thing.

Noticeable that there is tumbleweed from posters who support leaving the ECHR when the GFA is mentioned.

Either they've given it no thought and dont care.

Or they know that it can't be squared and dont care.

The ECHR isnt even the reason for the failure of the Rwanda plan - it would have failed anyway. The Surpreme Court judgement was at pains to point that out.

I think everyone knows geography the point for Aus is it can use different policy to its advantage, and will see lower strain over the next decade

I am up for hearing both Aus style or entering EU Pact as possible ways to go

An Aus style or EU pact on human rights?

The EU Pact is related to incoming migration policy

Aus has pretty much settled on policy its citizens find preferable

We don’t really have viable policy so could go in either direction, maybe in five years it’ll be discussed, however it’s far off

Another parallel with Brexit agitators.

Other countries are available.

Thank you, has been very useful for my A-level Politics class as we are looking at exactly this in lessons this week.

You've missed a few articles off there

Further, and despite Conservative Party rhetoric to the contrary, it is arguable that membership of the ECHR reinforces specific human rights which are fundamental to British values, such as democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and respect and tolerance – as any school or college website will make clear

You do realise that we could still have those rights? When we write them for ourselves?

"Oh noes, these two European countries that I don't like are not in the EHRC, therefore we MUST NOT leave the EHRC!" is not the argument you think it is.

I said it was a summary

Made it easier for you to decide which ones you want to give up

Any thoughts on the GFA?

Leave the ECHR. Write new UKHR. Conduct a review of the GFA, as required.

It's not like the ECHR has never been rewritten.

You'd immediately be in breach of the GFA.
Conducting a review is meaningless.
I appreciate you don't value it but many people do.

Maybe you should read the GFA?

This suggestion is as mad as Brexit. Which, as we all
know, has been a wild success. Let's have more of it.

Basically you just want to replace the letters EC with UK?

davidallengreen.com/2023/07/why-the-united-kingdom-government-cannot-leave-the-echr-without-either-breaching-or-re-negotiating-the-good-friday-agreement/