Migrant channel crossing deal.

[motorbiking]

Well, it saves the twenty seconds needed for the Minister to read out a one line statement. Call it forty seconds to cover both Houses.

Any particular reason you are ignoring sec 3 and 6?

That is true, although I don't know how much harder.

 

[MNW67]

Any particular reason you are ignoring sec 3 and 6?

I am ignoring them because we are discussing whether the Human Rights Act makes it more difficult to get an Act through Parliament. S3 and S6 have absolutely no impact on that whatsoever.

S3 is to do with how the courts interpret legislation. It does not affect the passing of legislation.

S6 is to do with how public authorities must act. Again, it does not affect the passing of legislation.

I am trying to do this in such a way that @Nwgs2 doesn't accuse me of being condescending

 

[noseall]

It enables legislation to be passed more easily to provide statutory obligation on a government body to prevent unlawful entry to our territorial waters. (i.e. a pushback act) It would further make it harder for those who want to challenge it, to do so. So not correct.

Nonsense waffling.
Meanwhile, an amendment to the HRA won't stop migrants coming to the UK.

A government with a mandate and a majority is able to pass law

I never said it couldn't. Read what I said.

 

[motorbiking]

Nonsense waffling.
Meanwhile, an amendment to the HRA won't stop migrants coming to the UK.

who said otherwise?

 

[motorbiking]

I am ignoring them because we are discussing whether the Human Rights Act makes it more difficult to get an Act through Parliament. S3 and S6 have absolutely no impact on that whatsoever.

S3 is to do with how the courts interpret legislation. It does not affect the passing of legislation.

S6 is to do with how public authorities must act. Again, it does not affect the passing of legislation.

I am trying to do this in such a way that @Nwgs2 doesn't accuse me of being condescending

The goal is no to get the law on to the books, the goal is for the law to be upheld as parliament intended.

Sec 3 creates an erosion of Parliamentary Sovereignty by requiring courts to interpret UK legislation in a way that is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
This can lead to situations where the unelected judiciary effectively "rewrite" laws passed by Parliament, limiting the legislature's power. This can result in lengthy and costly legal battles and a lack of political will to see them through.

You create a law, its tested, the court interprets it with their hands tied and it is effectively rewritten.

 

[noseall]

who said otherwise?

We can stop them coming here, but first we must repeal all ties to the ECHR.
It is very simple.
The hard part is finding someone with the bottle, and backing to do it.

"...Actually we don’t need to. It was Blair who enshrined it in U.K. Law via the Human Rights act. Just need to amend that - sorted..."

 

[noseall]

The truth is it turns out we don't need MBK's lies and bullshít remedies in any case. The Brexit catastrophook and all its failings, including the influx of small boat people is being handled admirably, by a grown up in Parliament.

Sir Keir is hard at work reversing Brexit damage and making deals with France and Germany. The man is a genius.

 

[MNW67]

The goal is no to get the law on to the books, the goal is for the law to be upheld as parliament intended.

Sec 3 creates an erosion of Parliamentary Sovereignty by requiring courts to interpret UK legislation in a way that is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
This can lead to situations where the unelected judiciary effectively "rewrite" laws passed by Parliament, limiting the legislature's power. This can result in lengthy and costly legal battles and a lack of political will to see them through.

You create a law, its tested, the court interprets it with their hands tied and it is effectively rewritten.

Great. I think we have almost reached a consensus.

You have now accepted that the Human Rights Act does not make it more difficult or more expensive for the government to get a law through Parliament. That had been one of your primary contentions.

And you have agreed that the main issue is actually the role of the courts. Which is what I have been saying from the start.

It might be time for you to give some detail about how you think the courts might use the HRA to stop a newly enacted pushback scheme (to use your example) and how it would be different if the HRA was changed.

 

[motorbiking]

"...Actually we don’t need to. It was Blair who enshrined it in U.K. Law via the Human Rights act. Just need to amend that - sorted..."

Ahhh something completely different from what you’ve suggested.

 

[motorbiking]

Great. I think we have almost reached a consensus.

You have now accepted that the Human Rights Act does not make it more difficult or more expensive for the government to get a law through Parliament. That had been one of your primary contentions.

And you have agreed that the main issue is actually the role of the courts. Which is what I have been saying from the start.

It might be time for you to give some detail about how you think the courts might use the HRA to stop a newly enacted pushback scheme (to use your example) and how it would be different if the HRA was changed.

We have not.

 

[noseall]

Ahhh something completely different from what you’ve suggested.

Nonsense.

 

[motorbiking]

Nonsense.

What do you understand the meaning of. “We can do X, but first we must do Y”. Do you think it means doing Y results in X?

You would be in a small group if that is your position. We could call that group. Those who are wrong or those who are wrong as usual.

I’ll let you choose.

 

[noseall]

I’ll let you choose.

Take your pointless deflective lies and waffle and shove them up your arris. Not interested.

Amending the HRA wont prevent migrants coming to the UK as you told liar.

 

[motorbiking]

Take your pointless deflective lies and waffle and shove them up your arris. Not interested.

Amending the HRA wont prevent migrants coming to the UK as you told liar.

A fantasy of your own invention.

 

[noseall]

A fantasy of your own invention.

We can stop them coming here, but first we must repeal all ties to the ECHR.
It is very simple.
The hard part is finding someone with the bottle, and backing to do it.

Actually we don’t need to. It was Blair who enshrined it in U.K. Law via the Human Rights act. Just need to amend that - sorted