Conservatives to push forward on manifesto and scrap Human Rights Act | Politics | The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... rights-act

The HRA is ignored by the government and it's agencies anyway (GCHQ, extraordinary rendition for torture, the Met.) , it's only judges who go mad with it publicly. Whatever the endgame is, it needs to be a fcuksight more defined than the HRA, even if that's only for judges.

And even better, they've appointed Gove to do it. What could possibly go wrong.

Can't say I'll be sad to see it go. It was a very bad implementation of what on the surface sounded reasonable. The problem was how widely it was abused.

+1 to that ...

as of 'Gove' they need someone who is disposable, very similar to IDS at welfare ...

Bollocks to that. You don't throw the baby out with the bath water. The perception of it being abused means we join the ranks of such humanitarian greats as Belarus and Kazakhstan. You might care to look up their respective records.

There's nothing stopping us bringing in new, better thought out laws to replace it.

You are absolutely right. However, the Tories objections to the HRA mainly seem to be that people use it to frustrate the will of the Home Secretary and the various other government departments from getting their own way and this sort of thing has to stop (regardless as to whether or not the individual using the HRA is right to use it in that way).

There will undoubtedly be some good stuff in the bill of rights but I wouldn't expect it to, for example, protect you from being spied on at the whim of some nameless person at GCHQ. I hasten to add I have no greater confidence that a Labour administration wouldn't use it to try and enshrine measures against their pet hates. They will try and put through a bill of rights that suits their purposes and ideology as much as possible whilst giving as few actual rights to the public and people who should be protected by human rights legislation (like refugees) as possible.

Yes there is, it's called bringing in Michael Gove as the person to oversee it. Jesus Christ I've never seen such a moronic [LIFTED] in politics.

Couple that with how much they've tried to dick around with the rule of law in the last 5 years (Grayling had pretty much everything he attempted overturned on Judicial Review, so then tried to restrict Judicial Review) then I don't trust them one iota to try and replace such a piece of legislation.

Indeed - the only thing preventing us bringing in better thought out laws (although quite what's the matter with the present ones is unclear to me) is the people we've put in place to do so.

The problem with the current laws is that they're easily abused.

The HRA -
Right to life
Freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
Right to liberty and security
Freedom from slavery and forced labour
Right to a fair trial
No punishment without law
Respect for your private and family life, home and correspondence
Freedom of thought, belief and religion
Freedom of expression
Freedom of assembly and association
Right to marry and start a family
Protection from discrimination in respect of these rights and freedoms
Right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
Right to education
Right to participate in free elections

Which of those do you we need to address?

Is the limitless appeals that are the problem.

bit late to start crying now.

I don't really mean that, but I didn't vote for them. shrug.

Nothing apart from prejudice, meanness, vested interests, egos, ideology, greed... None of which you could possibly accuse the Tour party of having, of course.

Scotland 'will not consent' to Tory plans to scrap Human Rights Act | Law | The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/may ... servatives

If the Tories keep this up, they could split themselves as they've done historically... it'd be too national to kill the headlines. It's no wonder Cameron wants an early poll, apparently.