Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Tangled Metal
Posts: 6310
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Tangled Metal » 5 Feb 2020, 4:34pm

I seem to recall reading about or hearing an expert say that UK had a lot of the European convention on human rights covered with UK legislation anyway. Kind of a pr thing rather than something that ensures UK human rights.

If our rights are already enshrined in legislation with a means of legal recourse then that is just ssn extra layer of protection that might not actually be needed. Or it might only get used by those not happy with UK court decisions on matters.

I don't know enough to say if that's true.

kwackers
Posts: 14020
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby kwackers » 5 Feb 2020, 4:38pm

Tangled Metal wrote:I seem to recall reading about or hearing an expert say that UK had a lot of the European convention on human rights covered with UK legislation anyway. Kind of a pr thing rather than something that ensures UK human rights.

If our rights are already enshrined in legislation with a means of legal recourse then that is just ssn extra layer of protection that might not actually be needed. Or it might only get used by those not happy with UK court decisions on matters.

I don't know enough to say if that's true.

If they worked that well there'd be no need to appeal to a higher court.

My understanding of the few cases I remember researching prior to brexit was that most complainants were complaining about a government decision.
Given that its hard to reconcile its loss with an improvement in our rights.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6310
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Tangled Metal » 5 Feb 2020, 4:49pm

Yes, most cases I've seen involve one group not happy with a government decision. They go through UK courts and get a decision they don't like. So they go into this extra layer only to get a similar result. Some win, some lose. We really only hear about those who get the decision they want.

Removing that extra layer of protection could lessen our protection, but does it not bring us down to the level of other nations without external human rights appeal process? America, Australia, Canada, etc I'm guessing don't have the equivalent but rely on their own legal system.

My point is what is enough protection? Is it possible to have unnecessary layers of protection that really only second guess previous layers based on a different presentation of the same basic evidence?

Ben@Forest
Posts: 2093
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Ben@Forest » 5 Feb 2020, 5:03pm

One thing that couldn't be banned under EU law which will very likely be banned in the future is the export of livestock for slaughter elsewhere in the EU. Though of course that's going to be of concern to NI/RoI farmers, but there must be fix for that.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14721
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby mjr » 5 Feb 2020, 5:03pm

djnotts wrote:"....the prime minister is planning to rewrite the 1998 Act and potentially even suspend the UK's membership of the European Convention on Human Rights ...."

If that's true and Boris suspends the ECHR, the UK will become the second country to be suspended from the Council of Europe, which should be highly embarrassing because:
1. it was created by the 1949 Treaty of London which arose from the 1948 Hague Congress of Churchill, Macmillan, Eden and many more - basically a who's who of post-war European leaders;
2. the only other country suspended was Greece after the 1967 military coup.

I really hope it's not true.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Oldjohnw
Posts: 2839
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Oldjohnw » 5 Feb 2020, 5:12pm

I have always been glad of an extra national authority to go to. If we should ever have a less than benign Government.

Johnson is already trying to limit press freedom. His manifesto threatens restrictions on both parliament and the courts.
John

kwackers
Posts: 14020
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby kwackers » 5 Feb 2020, 10:00pm

Tangled Metal wrote:My point is what is enough protection? Is it possible to have unnecessary layers of protection that really only second guess previous layers based on a different presentation of the same basic evidence?

Depends how much you trust your government.
Certainly in the cases I saw (albeit superficially) I found my own governments position indefensible.
It shouldn't happen, you'd like to think that we as a country are a paradigm of virtue and always do whats right. The problems as always happen because someone won't back down.

As I'm currently arguing the toss with the police about how they handled my accident I'm fairly mindful of the fact that they have all the power and I have none.
They muffed up and yet refuse to back down. I can't even get a straight answer out of them as to whether my complaint has been officially recorded...

So with that in mind it wouldn't surprise me if a complaint about government procedure was like that but on steroids.
In that respect I have far more faith in the ECHR than I would in my own government.

djnotts
Posts: 1323
Joined: 26 May 2008, 12:51pm
Location: Nottingham

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby djnotts » 5 Feb 2020, 10:11pm

With no written Constitution nor "Bill of Rights" then without the EHR being incorporated into UK Law we have NO human rights. We are still in essence feudal. We are the Crown's property. We exist at their pleasure. Rights including in particular in the workplace and to family life will be viciously eroded.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 9976
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby horizon » 5 Feb 2020, 11:06pm

Ben@Forest wrote:On threads passim, and one in particular, there has been a considerable amount of non-civil discourse. As someone as a conservative with a small 'c' l have found it interesting that many on the left find themselves arguing for what is a neoliberal project.



It is a very valid point. The Left (and Labour in particular) have been split on Europe ever since it was an issue. It depends on which side of Europe you look at: frictionless trade for large corporations or environmental protection for bees. I think the general consensus around Brexit amongst Remainers was that on balance the EU is nowadays fairly left-leaning compared to the UK. Then of course there are the ideas around peace and the legacy of WW2. It is what you make of it, I suppose.
The experience of travel is something that you have to pay for but can never buy. Ho Ri Zon Chinese philosopher

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6310
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Tangled Metal » 5 Feb 2020, 11:09pm

Hmmm! There's been a lot of English innovations that has led to the idea of human rights. The idea that without the written constitution and "EHR" incorporated into uk law means no human rights protection is not true. Our constitution exists in various aspects of our laws, practises and processes. It's right the way through our legal code. If you doubt that then last year's supreme court decision on preroguing parliament clearly shows how our constitution grew over centuries of laws, court judgements, etc.

At the time of that decision a foreign legal expert or politician (German iirc) actually said that our unwritten constitution works well or is particularly robust. Impressed if you like. I believe that written constitutions in democratic nations aren't actually universal. We're not alone in democratic nations who defend human rights without written constitutions.

How many countries don't have extra national human rights courts as a last resort who you'd still consider with good human rights protections. Why do you think our country can't defend human rights in its own lands but others can?

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 9959
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Cunobelin » 6 Feb 2020, 6:20am

merseymouth wrote:What like Hammerite? Minimal preparation needed, does the job in one coat and is rock solid within days.
Bloody difficult to get out, of the brush! Not like the E.U. :wink: . MM


... and cover for the underlying faults and defects?
Shoddy finish and far inferior to a properly prepared powder coat.

kwackers
Posts: 14020
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby kwackers » 6 Feb 2020, 8:42am

Cunobelin wrote:
merseymouth wrote:What like Hammerite? Minimal preparation needed, does the job in one coat and is rock solid within days.
Bloody difficult to get out, of the brush! Not like the E.U. :wink: . MM


... and cover for the underlying faults and defects?
Shoddy finish and far inferior to a properly prepared powder coat.

I've just repainted some radiators with Hammerite - something I've done in the past.
Finish is good - although I do prepare the surfaces first.
Powder coat would be preferable but a new radiator is cheaper.

Hammerite is like most things. Understand it and use it where appropriate and you'll have no issues.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 9454
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby 661-Pete » 6 Feb 2020, 9:45am

Ben@Forest wrote:
661-Pete wrote:Aha! you've been remembering - or reading back through - my posts, yes? Yes we did go there...


I just remember the squeals of vegetarian outrage at Air Canada... :). I'd have a word with Greta, she might do something about it...
So that's what you remember? No, no squeals, and not even a vegetarian! What I do remember is the stress of undergoing twelve consecutive flights, and the last straw: the dusting-down at Canadian airport security because I'd overlooked something still in one of my pockets (a tube of antihistamine cream, as it happens).

What I did do, after this experience, was sit down on the concourse floor and burst into tears. Not something I'm proud of. :(

And yes I'd love to follow Greta's example. Unfortunately her chosen means of crossing the Pond isn't for everyone - and I'm a poor sailor.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14721
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby mjr » 6 Feb 2020, 10:30am

Tangled Metal wrote:Hmmm! There's been a lot of English innovations that has led to the idea of human rights.

Innovations including the Treaty of London leading to the ECHR and Human Rights Act! Why should we reject our own inventions? Just because it has the E word in its current name?

Why do you think our country can't defend human rights in its own lands but others can?

They can't either. That's why we have the ECHR and UN and other as-yet-imperfect attempts to defend each other.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Pastychomper
Posts: 343
Joined: 14 Nov 2017, 11:14am
Location: Caithness

Re: Civil Discourse on the Implications of Brexit

Postby Pastychomper » 6 Feb 2020, 10:33am

The problem with a written constitution is someone would have to write it, and others would want to rewrite or amend it. If we were lucky it might eventually go for a generation or two without any changes, after which some would say it had stood the test of time and others would call it old-fashioned.

I get the impression that written constitutions work well for some countries, but I'm struggling to see the difference between one and the established body of law we already have.
Everyone's ghast should get a good flabbering now and then.
--Ole Boot