The FT has a headline this morning that says:
It is, of course, glaringly obvious that the UK prime minister should not reduce the country's commitment to human rights treaties and laws, unless, of course, you are a member of the far-right, when trampling over such things so that most people can be enslaved in the service of a few is exactly what your politics is all about.
It has been the curse of the Conservative Party to have always embraced the far-right.
It has been its greater misfortune to have explicitly done so for several decades now.
Indecently, for the sake of the Tory majority, that faction has insisted in making its presence felt since the 90s and no Tory leader has ever found a way to manage the resulting stresses, most of which have imposed enormous cost on the UK as a whole.
Sunak is one of the weakest of this feeble group of supposed leaders. He has no chance whatsoever of addressing this issue. And so we are all in peril again.
Wise Tories would realise that their only solution is to be rid of the far-right and to embrace PR, which would guarantee a Tory presence in parliament for time immemorial to come.
But there are no wise Tories as far as I can tell. So we, and they, are dragged ever closer to fascism as a result of the failure of supposedly moderate Tories to do anything more than co-sign a letter.
Will they appreciate the stupidity of their ways in time to save a centre right in the UK, which is a necessary part of our democracy, or will this all end in tears? Time will tell.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
This makes interesting reading
https://davidallengreen.com/2023/11/the-three-elements-of-the-rwanda-judgment-that-show-how-the-united-kingdom-government-is-now-boxed-in/
In particular
This means that even if the ECHR did not apply directly, and even if the Human Rights Act did not exist, then the court would have decided the case the same way anyway, because the key legal principle is in other other applicable law.
That key legal principle is non-refoulement – that is the legal rule that requires that refugees are not returned to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The court found on the evidence before it that there was such a risk if the asylum-seekers were removed to Rwanda.
So even if we leave the ECHR and repeal the HRA, the legal position remains
I think they were right
Moderate tories = cowards.
Party before country every time.
The last moderate Tories started leaving the Party in the 80s, and the tiny remnant was ejected by Johnson. I have known some really good Tory members, and some appalling excuses for humanity in Labour. Alas, we now seem to have the latter dominating both parties.
Frightening removal of hard won human rights by this UK ‘government’. As ever, whenever they want to try horrific power abuses on their citizens they do it to the decades long beaten down and politically suppressed Northern Irish first. Watch how this lot of dark age ERG ghouls deploy their heinous get out of Gaol free card for all perpetrators of violence against innocent civilians – N.I. Troubles Act (2023) to exit the ECHR.