THE FOURTH OF JULY

[Adam W.]

I think that raising the tax threshold to £20,000 is a good idea and would help the lowest paid whilst giving incentive to the unemployed to seek work, leaving the ECHR is a good move as it frees our legal system from the EU and migration needs to be controlled because increasing the Uk population by 6 million in a decade is unsustainable and is putting enormous pressure on resources and is the highlight of conservative failure. So what is cruel about what Reform would like to do ?

My bold.

Kissing all of your rights goodbye is not a clever thing to do.

 

[Jacob]

My bold.

Kissing all of your rights goodbye is not a clever thing to do.

In any case they are already incorporated into UK law.
It it very weird how so many want to lose their human rights or remove regulations which preserve the quality of their lives on so many levels. Craziest of all was giving up the freedom of movement allowed by the EU.

 

[Spectric]

I think Reforms contract is sensable and is a long term framework to achieve a good outcome rather than the short term manifesto's of the other parties that want us to believe they can be delivered. Also Reform is not pretending it has any chance of wining, it accepts starmer has won but also can see that starmer needs to be kept in check which a conservative opposition would not do and then after we have all been through five years of starmer, well five years of labour as starmer may not still be around we might wake up and accept that for real change we need something other than labour or Conservative.

Be very fearful of those who think the rules of human rights are a bad thing

We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights.

Well, take all the foul rhetoric about "small boats" from the Conservatives

Name a single positive about the invasion of small boats full of young men who are apparently paying thousands for the privilege to get here, are they really paying upfront or just accepting a debt to be repaid once in the UK ? They are getting rid of paperwork on the crossing to hide there true identity and our border force is not fully able to check many out so we have many unknowns and if you think how difficult it is for some people living in the UK to make ends meet with jobs then how do you think these young men are going to make a living. Nothing wrong with controlled immigration but you need to be selective like the Australians and only accept what you have a need for.

 

[Adam W.]

In any case they are already incorporated into UK law.
It it very weird how so many want to lose their human rights or remove regulations which preserve the quality of their lives on so many levels. Craziest of all was giving up the freedom of movement allowed by the EU.

It's probably because the hard of thinking confuse the European Court of Human Rights with the European Union.

Perhaps it has something to do with the European bit in the name and their inability to understand that it is just a location type thing.

 

[Adam W.]

I think Reforms contract is sensable and is a long term framework to achieve a good outcome rather than the short term manifesto's of the other parties that want us to believe they can be delivered. Also Reform is not pretending it has any chance of wining, it accepts starmer has won but also can see that starmer needs to be kept in check which a conservative opposition would not do and then after we have all been through five years of starmer, well five years of labour as starmer may not still be around we might wake up and accept that for real change we need something other than labour or Conservative.


We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights.


Name a single positive about the invasion of small boats full of young men who are apparently paying thousands for the privilege to get here, are they really paying upfront or just accepting a debt to be repaid once in the UK ? They are getting rid of paperwork on the crossing to hide there true identity and our border force is not fully able to check many out so we have many unknowns and if you think how difficult it is for some people living in the UK to make ends meet with jobs then how do you think these young men are going to make a living. Nothing wrong with controlled immigration but you need to be selective like the Australians and only accept what you have a need for.

Et voilà!

 

[Spectric]

It's probably because the hard of thinking confuse the European Court of Human Rights with the European Union.

I would say that most people realise that the ECHR is part of some european council that is older than the EU and whose members include Russia, as Russia is not an EU member it shows that the ECHR and the EU co-exist but are tangled up like a bowl of spagetti.

 

[Adam W.]

Russia was expelled from the European Court of Human Rights over Ukraine and no, contrary to popular belief, they are not entwined with the EU like a bowl of spaghetti.

 

[John Brown]

My bold.

Kissing all of your rights goodbye is not a clever thing to do.

Especially when the only "gain" is being able to send a handful of humans to Rwanda...

 

[RobinBHM]

leaving the ECHR is a good move as it frees our legal system from the EU

ECHR is not connected to EU

because increasing the Uk population by 6 million in a decade is unsustainable

I’m not sure what that has to do with ECHR

migration is 95% legal migration, ECHR is not involved

So what is cruel about what Reform would like to do ?

U.K. is an advanced wealthy economy, people fleeing war and persecution should be helped, we need to do our bit.

If net migration is reduced to zero, the NHS and care system will not be able to cope……if that means my elderly relatives don’t get the care they need, I would consider that cruel

 

[Jacob]

Especially when the only "gain" is being able to send a handful of humans to Rwanda...

at about £2 million per person;
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac....-uks-policy-to-send-asylum-seekers-to-rwanda/
INSANE - even Liz Truss could see this!
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-in-effort-to-fill-vacancies-and-drive-growth

 

[RobinBHM]

I would say that most people realise that the ECHR is part of some european council that is older than the EU

Yes the Council of Europe, which is entirely separate from the EU




The Council of Europe formed shortly after the Second World War to try and prevent the horrors of the war from reoccurring.

The aim of the Council was to protect human rights, and democracy in Europe.

One of the most important things that the Council of Europe has done is creating the European Convention of Human Rights

s Russia is not an EU member it shows that the ECHR and the EU co-exist but are tangled up like a bowl of spagetti

Non sequitur.

Actually one of the key writers of the convention was a British lawyer Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe one of those lefty lawyers (he was a Conservative MP)

 

[sploo]

I think Reforms contract is sensable and is a long term framework to achieve a good outcome rather than the short term manifesto's of the other parties that want us to believe they can be delivered. Also Reform is not pretending it has any chance of wining, it accepts starmer has won but also can see that starmer needs to be kept in check which a conservative opposition would not do and then after we have all been through five years of starmer, well five years of labour as starmer may not still be around we might wake up and accept that for real change we need something other than labour or Conservative.

The problem is that it's not sensible; it's a fantasy of numbers that couldn't possibly work; but it looks attractive - which is all that matters for the voters who don't think.

We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights.

As others have noted, the ECHR is not the EU. For several years now the lunatic fringe of the Tory party have pushed to try to reduce those rights from the UK justice system, and should (in my greatest nightmares) Reform ever grow strong enough to actually win power, you can be 100% certain that those rights would start to be eroded further. It's what fascist minds do.

Name a single positive about the invasion of small boats full of young men who are apparently paying thousands for the privilege to get here, are they really paying upfront or just accepting a debt to be repaid once in the UK ? They are getting rid of paperwork on the crossing to hide there true identity and our border force is not fully able to check many out so we have many unknowns and if you think how difficult it is for some people living in the UK to make ends meet with jobs then how do you think these young men are going to make a living. Nothing wrong with controlled immigration but you need to be selective like the Australians and only accept what you have a need for.

I don't think anyone would consider people risking their lives (whilst being exploited by people traffickers) to be a positive. The issue is that our government have closed off legal routes for immigration (and underfunded the immigration service); meaning the only way left is illegal. Having created that problem, they then point to the scourge of "small boats" (complete with the usual anti-immigration fear mongering). Essentially they created the problem they use to scare you.

The right route is to have a properly funded immigration department, and legal routes for people to apply. There will always be attempts at illegal migration; you'll never stop that - but you would massively reduce the "small boats" if people had an alternative.

You can absolutely guarantee that Reform would not be the solution to this problem; they'll simply continue the same process, and ratchet up the fear and anti-immigrant rhetoric.

 

[Chris152]

The problem is that it's not sensible; it's a fantasy of numbers that couldn't possibly work; but it looks attractive - which is all that matters for the voters who don't think.


As others have noted, the ECHR is not the EU. For several years now the lunatic fringe of the Tory party have pushed to try to reduce those rights from the UK justice system, and should (in my greatest nightmares) Reform ever grow strong enough to actually win power, you can be 100% certain that those rights would start to be eroded further. It's what fascist minds do.


I don't think anyone would consider people risking their lives (whilst being exploited by people traffickers) to be a positive. The issue is that our government have closed off legal routes for immigration (and underfunded the immigration service); meaning the only way left is illegal. Having created that problem, they then point to the scourge of "small boats" (complete with the usual anti-immigration fear mongering). Essentially they created the problem they use to scare you.

The right route is to have a properly funded immigration department, and legal routes for people to apply. There will always be attempts at illegal migration; you'll never stop that - but you would massively reduce the "small boats" if people had an alternative.

You can absolutely guarantee that Reform would not be the solution to this problem; they'll simply continue the same process, and ratchet up the fear and anti-immigrant rhetoric.

The bottom line being that the boats are a fabricated crisis (unless you're one of the unfortunate people who've tragically lost loved ones in the sea) designed to stir up xenophobic and racist emotions and fears (seemed to work well with brexit) and distract the electorate from the real crises that this country now faces. Can't believe the time and space wasted on the small boats, airtime devoted to people like farage, distractions that displace the real issues.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Membership of the ECHR is both a benefit in securing the protection of human rights and freedoms, and a constraint to the nation state (in this case the UK) in exercising its sovereignty.

That the UK through democratic process may choose to leave ECHR is reasonable if the barriers created by membership are judged excessive. It is no different to membership of club - to enjoy the benefits requires compliance with the club rules.

"Legal" immigration - the UK sets its own rules. IMHO reliance on a constant inwards stream is unsustainable long term -

• it places demands on all infrastructure - health, housing, education etc,
• increases population and environmental impacts,
• denies other countries with greater needs skilled staff,
• the imbalance between needs and the availability of skilled workers is perpetuated

A clear plan for self-sufficiency to support the population with the likely future demographic mix is needed covering training, reskilling, automation etc etc.

"Illegal" migration covers those who arrive in the UK without permission and thus outside the criteria established for approval. The current UK system for assessing asylum applications takes far too long and criteria are unclear. Both these weaknesses need to be addressed.

That the UK should be able to make a decision to grant or deny permission is reasonable. Views will no doubt vary as to what constitutes "reasonable". Currently ECHR constrains the ability of the UK to deport those for whom the the outcome is refusal.

Current Labour and Tory strategies seem different but equally ineffectual - no wonder direct talking Nigel soundbites work:

• Tories think that Rwanda type schemes will deter illegal immigration and therefore reduce the flow. Very high cost, limited numbers, probably ineffective.
• Labour think a strengthened border force and negotiations with France will solve the problem - probably naïve and ineffective - we've been fighting the war on drugs for decades without success.

 

[Keith Cocker]

I think Reforms contract is sensable and is a long term framework to achieve a good outcome rather than the short term manifesto's of the other parties that want us to believe they can be delivered. Also Reform is not pretending it has any chance of wining, it accepts starmer has won but also can see that starmer needs to be kept in check which a conservative opposition would not do and then after we have all been through five years of starmer, well five years of labour as starmer may not still be around we might wake up and accept that for real change we need something other than labour or Conservative.


We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights.


Name a single positive about the invasion of small boats full of young men who are apparently paying thousands for the privilege to get here, are they really paying upfront or just accepting a debt to be repaid once in the UK ? They are getting rid of paperwork on the crossing to hide there true identity and our border force is not fully able to check many out so we have many unknowns and if you think how difficult it is for some people living in the UK to make ends meet with jobs then how do you think these young men are going to make a living. Nothing wrong with controlled immigration but you need to be selective like the Australians and only accept what you have a need for.

 

[RobinBHM]

I would say that most people realise that the ECHR is part of some european council that is older than the EU

Yes the Council of Europe, which is entirely separate from the EU




The Council of Europe formed shortly after the Second World War to try and prevent the horrors of the war from reoccurring.

The aim of the Council was to protect human rights, and democracy in Europe.

One of the most important things that the Council of Europe has done is creating the European Convention of Human Rights

s Russia is not an EU member it shows that the ECHR and the EU co-exist but are tangled up like a bowl of spagetti

Non sequitur.

Actually the

 

[RobinBHM]

UK through democratic process may choose to leave ECHR is reasonable

Not if there is a U.K. govt whose intentions are to remove freedoms and rights of its citizens.

We currently have a right wing populist govt that is dangerous, it wants to control the media, cut peoples benefits, cut public services, restrict our freedoms to protest.

The Tories want to make the executive unaccountable by removing supreme courts power to judicial review.

Proroguing parliament to prevent democratic process sets a dangerous president.

If the Conservatives take U.K. out of ECHR we are at the mercy of a rogue state.

 

[GweithdyDU]

I think that raising the tax threshold to £20,000 is a good idea and would help the lowest paid whilst giving incentive to the unemployed to seek work, leaving the ECHR is a good move as it frees our legal system from the EU and migration needs to be controlled because increasing the Uk population by 6 million in a decade is unsustainable and is putting enormous pressure on resources and is the highlight of conservative failure. So what is cruel about what Reform would like to do ?

Please go and read. The ECHR has nothing to do with EU law and never has had. A common misconception but one that needs to be understood if one is to have form a constructive opinion on the ECHR.

 

[GweithdyDU]

I think Reforms contract is sensable and is a long term framework to achieve a good outcome rather than the short term manifesto's of the other parties that want us to believe they can be delivered. Also Reform is not pretending it has any chance of wining, it accepts starmer has won but also can see that starmer needs to be kept in check which a conservative opposition would not do and then after we have all been through five years of starmer, well five years of labour as starmer may not still be around we might wake up and accept that for real change we need something other than labour or Conservative.


We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights.


Name a single positive about the invasion of small boats full of young men who are apparently paying thousands for the privilege to get here, are they really paying upfront or just accepting a debt to be repaid once in the UK ? They are getting rid of paperwork on the crossing to hide there true identity and our border force is not fully able to check many out so we have many unknowns and if you think how difficult it is for some people living in the UK to make ends meet with jobs then how do you think these young men are going to make a living. Nothing wrong with controlled immigration but you need to be selective like the Australians and only accept what you have a need for.

Hellllp. "We have had human rights for years and they been upheld by the justice system in the UK, we do not need some EU bureaucrat with a grudge to tell us about human rights."

EU bureaucrats have nothing to do with the ECHR". In fact, the 1998 Human Rights Act enables people of the Dis-United Kingdom to enforce their ECHR rights in a British Court by British judges, rather than having to go to the expense and complication of having their case heard in Strasbourg.

 

[sploo]

On thing that this thread (and especially the last few pages) has really reinforced is how populists (such as Farage) thrive on creating fear and anger in the population; where that fear and anger is based on fundamental misunderstandings of the bogeymen put in front of them (be that the EU, the ECHR, immigrants etc). It's hardly a new problem I know, but it does illustrate how tragically successful it is as a strategy.