Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

ECHR withdrawal in 2022? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited June 19 in General
imageECHR withdrawal in 2022? – politicalbetting.com

After the events of the last week it seemed inevitable that there would be a market on Le Royaume-Uni withdrawing from the European Convention on Human Rights and Smarkets have obliged. Sagacious observers like David Herdson have noted the Tory Party’s response to the recent ruling by the ECHR shows the Tory party have gone quite mad.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,708
    Test
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827

    Test

    Not today, oh, damn, done that one already.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 1,453
    edited June 19
    Would this government just push it through as part of getting Brexit done?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,708

    Would this government just push it through as part of getting Brexit done?

    They could but the Lords could delay it for a year.

    Next issue would be what is next? The Slavery Convention? The Refugee Convention? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    FPT
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    What a swell party it is…
    https://www.texastribune.org/2022/06/18/republican-party-texas-convention-cornyn/

    Absolute dumpster fire at Texas GOP convention.

    Behold Gilead.
    Jeepers

    This paragraph leaps out at me


    “Tensions within the party at times got personal. Video posted online showed far-right activists physically accosting U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw, calling the conservative Republican “eye-patch McCain” over his criticism of Russia. The group included self-identified Proud Boys and Alex Stein, a social media activist from North Texas. A Navy SEAL veteran, Crenshaw lost his right eye to a bomb in Afghanistan.”

    Republicans. Maintaining America’s Ghastly Aspects

    Driving past Lake Sevan just now I felt a fierce pang of sadness about the USA. It is self immolating, and both sides are eagerly pouring on the gasoline
    Yup. I'm not ramping Gilead because I want it. I'm calling out the horror as America slides into the pit of religious fundamentalism and intolerance.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827
    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634
    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    "....both sides are eagerly pouring on the gasoline..."

    Sure.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827
    Jos showing why, for all his batting brilliance, the test team are better sticking with Ben Foakes.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 33,475
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    "....both sides are eagerly pouring on the gasoline..."

    Sure.
    As bad as them Woke SJW types he's always ranting on about.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,387
    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,708
    DavidL said:

    Jos showing why, for all his batting brilliance, the test team are better sticking with Ben Foakes.

    Yet his most iconic moment in an England shirt is him by the stumps running out somebody.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,138
    HA! Curse of the new thread:

    On topic: I bloody well hope not, but Johnson will do anything to distract or save his skin.

    From previous thread:
    An October General Election?

    Hard to know. I doubt it, but then I know several things:

    1. Johnson wants to stay as Prime Minister longer than Cameron managed (so six years and two months).
    2. He can't get to that length without winning another General Election (July 2019 to September 2025 is the six years and two months).
    3. So he needs to fight and win another General Election between now and January 2025.
    4. He hates losing, and I can't imagine he'll allow himself to be defeated in a General Election as his exit, so in my mind his plan is to fight and win one more GE, then retire after September 2025.

    He'd then be able to retire, rub his term length in the face of Cameron along with TWO GE wins (with a majority in each) something not achieved by any Conservative leader since Thatcher.

    The state of the whole country, any constituent part of it [1], his political party, his wife and family and pretty much anything else besides himself are irrelevent to this all.
    So when does his best chance of winning a GE come? This October? Possibly? May 2023? May 2024? October 2024 or the last possible day of late January 2025?

    [1] Although I think he'd be miffed to lose Scotland. He'd think Cameron would gloat (whether he would or not) that 'at least he didn't lose Scotland', so I think he'll try and avoid that if he can.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,193
    Leon said:

    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


    You have a chronic case of EU derangement syndrome.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    Absolutely. Lets scrap human rights. That'll show the liberals.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968

    Leon said:

    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


    You have a chronic case of EU derangement syndrome.
    Lol

    Looking at that photo, would you like to persuade the average voter that the ECHR has “nothing to do with the EU”?
  • TresTres Posts: 964

    Leon said:

    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


    You have a chronic case of EU derangement syndrome.
    leon needs laying
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,193
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


    You have a chronic case of EU derangement syndrome.
    Lol

    Looking at that photo, would you like to persuade the average voter that the ECHR has “nothing to do with the EU”?
    Is having something to do with the EU supposed to be a bad thing?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 2,397
    edited June 19
    FPT:
    DavidL said:

    I must have missed these claims about inflation and wages but would agree that the triple lock in particular was absurdly generous to pensioners and really, really should not come back. I think wages must try to keep up with inflation but not chase it. By that I mean that wage increases must recognise the increasing costs but a headline, brief peak is not a target. If it is then the risk is that inflation becomes more endemic, even after the international factors wane.

    What we have at the moment is a really tight labour market with little promise of this improving any time soon. This should both drive up wages and make employers think about how they use their more expensive staff more efficiently. If this drives up productivity its a win win for everyone.

    Taking the pensions issue first, I've actually quite a lot of sympathy with the argument that the triple lock was introduced to help boost incomes, especially for poorer pensioners, that had come to lag some distance behind wages and which were leaving a lot of oldies in poverty as a consequence. The real problem isn't that pensions were boosted (albeit that I would agree that the triple lock cannot and should not be sustained forever,) it's that earned incomes and their buying power have been suppressed for such a long time - this is a product of the pernicious effects of house price inflation and low wage settlements.

    These are both things that the Government clearly wishes to continue: house price inflation benefits homeowners (especially well-to-do, mortgage free pensioners) and landlords, whereas large wage demands leave it with a lot of extra money to find. The crap pay rise issue has certainly been all over the news in recent months: both the Governor of the BoE and Johnson have been all over the airwaves spouting bullshit about wage-price spirals.

    The problem with stating that we are going through an inflationary peak and workers should just put up with it for a year or two is two-fold: firstly, who knows how long this is going to drag on for and how bad it will get (personally I suspect it won't last all that long, but none of us can be sure of this, certainly not hard pressed workers on low or moderate incomes.) And secondly, this comes at the end of a decade-and-a-half of most people being told that they should put up with crap wage increases already. Hence, to repeat, the fact that real terms earned incomes are lower now than in 2008.

    The tight labour market will probably help in the long run, but workers cannot afford forever to be waiting for jam tomorrow, which is what stingy businesses and certainly the Government keep telling them. Employees across the public sector are near revolt over this, ditto in private enterprises where workers have been astute enough to remain unionized in substantial numbers. There will be ructions - and rightly so.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,827
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,387
    Leon said:

    nico679 said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    What’s morally right about withdrawing . What exactly is in the convention that you disagree with ?
    “Nothing to do with the EU”

    How fucking stupid do you have to be, to believe that


    And how stupid do you have to be to not realize that the convention was set up before the EU even existed ! You don’t have to be in the EU to be in the ECHR.

    It’s strange how the right wing who hero worship Churchill are now desperate to trash something he was instrumental in creating.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
    It’s not a legal system. It’s a pointless parasite on our own legal system, which is more than capable of defining human rights - and defending them


    My god how did we manage for 1300 years before “Europe”?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,708
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    Hang on, you Brexit backers said that about the Cour de Justice européenne.

    Make up your minds.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
    Especially when the majority of people blocked from being deported were blocked by British courts.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    Hang on, you Brexit backers said that about the Cour de Justice européenne.

    Make up your minds.
    All of it. Junk all of it. If we’re out we’re out
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,945
    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    You know Georgia. You've just been there. They use the same red cross on a white background as we do. So if we use your rationale I assume that Georgia is England.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 1,387
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
    It’s not a legal system. It’s a pointless parasite on our own legal system, which is more than capable of defining human rights - and defending them


    My god how did we manage for 1300 years before “Europe”?
    So you trust the current Tories to protect your rights . And you call others slow learners !
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    dixiedean said:

    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?

    Covid is over. Boris defeated it. So why have a booster programme?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    You know Georgia. You've just been there. They use the same red cross on a white background as we do. So if we use your rationale I assume that Georgia is England.
    I really can’t be dealing with arguments this dumb

    It’s like arguing with a bewildered pit pony

  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,106
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
    It’s not a legal system. It’s a pointless parasite on our own legal system, which is more than capable of defining human rights - and defending them

    My god how did we manage for 1300 years before “Europe”?
    We had Parliamentarians who were at heart honest and well-meaning.

    Is that the right answer?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    I am approaching an Armenian BEACH
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 2,397
    dixiedean said:

    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?

    Seem to recall that a continual rolling programme of Covid boosters for the entire population has long since been ruled out (and I don't see that changing except in case of a monster variant, which as time passes seems increasingly unlikely - the fact that we're now just getting sub-variants of the Omicron lineage hopefully suggests that the virus is reaching an evolutionary cul-de-sac.)

    Anyway, I believe that the elderly and vulnerable groups are going to be called back again in the Autumn, but they're not going to bother with the rest of us. Especially after all the non-knackered young and middle aged people who can be persuaded have had the full course of vaccines, I imagine that they're considered to be just too unlikely to get seriously ill for it to be worth the time and expense of running a whole population programme.

    Though FWIW, if Covid boosters go on sale in pharmacies in the same fashion as flu jabs this Autumn, I'm buying one.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,036
    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,051
    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 20,945
    pigeon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?

    Seem to recall that a continual rolling programme of Covid boosters for the entire population has long since been ruled out (and I don't see that changing except in case of a monster variant, which as time passes seems increasingly unlikely - the fact that we're now just getting sub-variants of the Omicron lineage hopefully suggests that the virus is reaching an evolutionary cul-de-sac.)

    Anyway, I believe that the elderly and vulnerable groups are going to be called back again in the Autumn, but they're not going to bother with the rest of us. Especially after all the non-knackered young and middle aged people who can be persuaded have had the full course of vaccines, I imagine that they're considered to be just too unlikely to get seriously ill for it to be worth the time and expense of running a whole population programme.

    Though FWIW, if Covid boosters go on sale in pharmacies in the same fashion as flu jabs this Autumn, I'm buying one.
    Thanks for that.
    Must say that news completely passed me by.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,728
    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    Did you manage to flog any flint dildos there?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,728
    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    I’m amazed you didn’t say ‘vote for Brexit,’ although I’m sure Scott will be along soon to supply the deficiency.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,728
    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    So you were watching the birdie instead of eyeing up the birds?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 2,397
    dixiedean said:

    pigeon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?

    Seem to recall that a continual rolling programme of Covid boosters for the entire population has long since been ruled out (and I don't see that changing except in case of a monster variant, which as time passes seems increasingly unlikely - the fact that we're now just getting sub-variants of the Omicron lineage hopefully suggests that the virus is reaching an evolutionary cul-de-sac.)

    Anyway, I believe that the elderly and vulnerable groups are going to be called back again in the Autumn, but they're not going to bother with the rest of us. Especially after all the non-knackered young and middle aged people who can be persuaded have had the full course of vaccines, I imagine that they're considered to be just too unlikely to get seriously ill for it to be worth the time and expense of running a whole population programme.

    Though FWIW, if Covid boosters go on sale in pharmacies in the same fashion as flu jabs this Autumn, I'm buying one.
    Thanks for that.
    Must say that news completely passed me by.
    A quick search unearths the following from last month:

    The following advice should be considered as interim and for the purposes of operational planning for autumn 2022.

    The JCVI’s current view is that in autumn 2022, a COVID-19 vaccine should be offered to:

    + residents in a care home for older adults and staff working in care homes for older adults
    + frontline health and social care workers
    + all those 65 years of age and over
    + adults aged 16 to 64 years in a clinical risk group

    Vaccination of other groups of people remains under consideration within JCVI’s ongoing review.


    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/jcvi-interim-statement-on-covid-19-autumn-2022-vaccination-programme/joint-committee-on-vaccination-and-immunisation-jcvi-interim-statement-on-the-covid-19-vaccination-programme-for-autumn-2022
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    So “Armenia’s most popular beach” is the weirdest beach in history

    It’s sunny and clear yet we’re by a lake and we’re at 2000 metres altitude so the air is cold and the water is murderously cold


    And everyone is getting determinedly drunk. I love Armenia
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 33,475
    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    Should get your kit off just in case.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 6,012
    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 7,878
    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    The glib answer is that we voted against Chaos with Ed Miliband.

    There's a longer answer about discontent widespread in the country, and the inability of politicians on the centre or left to provide answers. But I don't have the ability to do it justice.

    Suffice it to say that if you don't provide good answers to difficult questions people will turn to bad answers.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503
    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    Don't they have advisory or rather warning signs on the beach? One would like to know when one is at risk of entering a nudist beach, as it is not always obvious.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503
    Leon said:

    So “Armenia’s most popular beach” is the weirdest beach in history

    It’s sunny and clear yet we’re by a lake and we’re at 2000 metres altitude so the air is cold and the water is murderously cold


    And everyone is getting determinedly drunk. I love Armenia

    I also see that they also have their own competition for Weston-super-Mare pier. Looks a lot more fun, actually.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,562
    I'd bring it wholesale into British law and then make British courts the arbiters of it.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 22,503

    I'd bring it wholesale into British law and then make British courts the arbiters of it.

    Surely the DM and Ms Patel?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,562
    Carnyx said:

    I'd bring it wholesale into British law and then make British courts the arbiters of it.

    Surely the DM and Ms Patel?
    Yes, good idea. Final verdicts handed down by Jan Moir.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.
    There's nothing to appeal.
    It's an injunction with about two weeks to run until the case gets a full hearing before a UK court.

    Leon's just being his usual provocative self.
  • TresTres Posts: 964
    edited June 19
    Leon said:

    So “Armenia’s most popular beach” is the weirdest beach in history

    It’s sunny and clear yet we’re by a lake and we’re at 2000 metres altitude so the air is cold and the water is murderously cold


    And everyone is getting determinedly drunk. I love Armenia

    Talking of weird beaches, a few years ago I was visiting Japan and came across a beach in Shikoku which was virtually deserted apart from a group of smartly dressed Japanese schoolboys all playing Pokemon Go on their phones.

    I think next time I will visit Galicia.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 16,562
    edited June 19
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    So you were watching the birdie instead of eyeing up the birds?
    The climate at that time of year was too cold for great tits; it was mainly blue tits.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    So “Armenia’s most popular beach” is the weirdest beach in history

    It’s sunny and clear yet we’re by a lake and we’re at 2000 metres altitude so the air is cold and the water is murderously cold


    And everyone is getting determinedly drunk. I love Armenia

    I also see that they also have their own competition for Weston-super-Mare pier. Looks a lot more fun, actually.
    It has the tragic, bathetic air of a beach in northern England. Except the women are much lovelier and the buildings much uglier. And yet, like a beach in northern England, everyone is contriving to have fun. It’s slightly inspiring
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    Yep, a bit like that paedo / paediatrician coincidence.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,051
    edited June 19

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    Yes, I am recently back from seven weeks in Italy, and the principal difference - which most tourists would never clock - is that people here, and in Germany, and in the US, think it worthwhile to engage with our local political processes as and when we feel the need to complain or seek improvements or otherwise make our views known about some problem, local or national.

    Those actively involved in politics are a minority, but many more people will step up if something catches our eye, be it a planning application in our own street or an online petition we can sign about some national issue or other. Deep down, we hang onto the belief that our view might change things in the political arena, and that decisions are mostly made objectively and fairly.

    In Italy, people really don’t bother; there is almost total disengagement with politics both national and local; most try to get on with their lives minimising any interaction they might have with local politics and any arm of the government - to such an extent that you wonder how those actually involved in politics renew their numbers (except, in Italy, you know the answer - from the families and connections of those already involved).

    Whenever I despair of our politics I get solace from the Italian experience - their voters are desperate to elect anyone who appears opposed to the semi-corruption they are forced to endure - Berlusconi, Cinque Stelle - yet nothing really changes and the gravy train continues to flow and the wheel continues to spin. You can almost forgive them for creating fascism in the 20s, if by accident.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,634

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    Christ you're dense, it's the flag of the Council of Europe which predates the EU/EC

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Europe
    Of course it is. Nothing to do with the EU. The identical flag is just a massive coincidence. It’s not like the EU has busily spent the last 30 years blurring the boundaries between itself and the ECHR, so as to give itself a legal identity and a readymade body of human rights law, tantamount to a Constitution
    You know Georgia. You've just been there. They use the same red cross on a white background as we do. So if we use your rationale I assume that Georgia is England.
    There you go again with your simplistic arguments ... that Leon can't refute.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,237
    Leon said:

    Carnyx said:

    Leon said:

    So “Armenia’s most popular beach” is the weirdest beach in history

    It’s sunny and clear yet we’re by a lake and we’re at 2000 metres altitude so the air is cold and the water is murderously cold


    And everyone is getting determinedly drunk. I love Armenia

    I also see that they also have their own competition for Weston-super-Mare pier. Looks a lot more fun, actually.
    It has the tragic, bathetic air of a beach in northern England. Except the women are much lovelier and the buildings much uglier. And yet, like a beach in northern England, everyone is contriving to have fun. It’s slightly inspiring
    From a telegram channel..
    A shootout took place on the Azerbaijani-Armenian border near Vardenis. According to preliminary data, an Armenian soldier was killed.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,156
    Nigelb said:

    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    On topic, it is increasingly difficult to say what this chaotic government will do while they flail about seeking to divert attention from the overflowing too hard tray but this would be particularly stupid.

    Yes, the ECtHR can be annoying at times, yes there is an argument that they have extended HR law far beyond what the Convention originally intended, yes the decision on the Rwanda flight was, well, a bit weird, but jeez. If we replace it with a new Convention with different wording we will then spend another decade trying to work out the finer details that has been largely ironed out on the current Convention.

    The Rwanda judgement was outrageous interference. For that alone, we must leave

    This is why Brexit

    Also, for those low-watt slow learners who think the European Court of Human Rights has “nothing to do with the EU” here’s the courtroom:



    You don't leave a legal system because you get one stupid decision. You appeal it and get it overturned. But we have so many more important things to deal with.

    Leon's just being his usual provocative self.
    +1
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,599
    edited June 19
    So this govt wants to exit ECHR because it can't get a deportation policy through, which it isn't serious (or indeed honest) about because it only exists "to own the libs".

    The dysfunction of this pack of charlatans grows by the day.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 3,156

    dixiedean said:

    Off topic.
    Anecdotally know shedloads with Covid right now.
    What happened to the booster programme? I thought we were meant to get it after 6 months? Or aren't we?

    Covid is over. Boris defeated it. So why have a booster programme?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-61857789
  • gettingbettergettingbetter Posts: 336
    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,318
    edited June 19

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    So you were watching the birdie instead of eyeing up the birds?
    The climate at that time of year was too cold for great tits; it was mainly blue tits.
    Just be thankful they weren't penduline tits.....

    EDIT: Oh, and the best bird name of all time is the rough-faced shag.....
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 27,307

    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.

    Columbian politics is remarkably like Peruvian politics - it's not so much the corruption, as the combination of Idiocracy level stupidity with incompetent corruption.

    They can't even steal money well....
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 17,030
    Lord Sumption in today's Sunday Times says we could leave the ECHR without any problems as far as are our commitment to human rights is concerned.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 13,599
    edited June 19
    Russia is cutting off gas supplies to Europe. It aims to use fuel supplies as leverage, but paradoxically it doesn't work. Russia's value to Europe is as a reliable supplier, as it was throughout the Cold War. Russia is simply ensuring Europe cuts dependence on Russia quicker and more painfully for Europe.

    But Europe is also in denial. There just won't be enough gas this winter. It needs to reduce demand for gas, by rationing if needed, and switch back to coal, at least temporarily.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,051

    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.

    The fact that so many of us are glued to following every twist and turn of the Colombian presidential election is surely why the rate of posts today in PB is more sluggish than is usual for a sunny Sunday?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 18,498
    Andy_JS said:

    Lord Sumption in today's Sunday Times says we could leave the ECHR without any problems as far as are our commitment to human rights is concerned.

    Sure - we can police ourselves. But the point of having an *international* agreement and oversight is so that countries can't pick and choose which humans deserve which rights. So if we are trustworthy then the EHCR would never need to intervene.

    But we aren't trustworthy.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 6,012

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    This. People of quality run, not walk, away from politics.

    I've mentioned before a relative. PhD. Started his own business, from sole trader up to the point he has enough time to do other things now. Coached at national level in the sport he was into. Organised various charitable endeavours - planning, getting funding, planning permissions etc etc.

    In times past, he would have been dragged onto the local council. At least.

    Hasn't got the slightest interest in the Farcebook/Twatter version of politics.
    That's some of it. But it's not just about top quality people. It's also the broader sweep of people with unformed but decent instincts... what old Tories would have called "bottom". As the technology of winning elections has grown more sophisticated, they've just wandered off, and who can blame them?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,440
    If we leave the ECHR, it won't be just because of their latest ruling - there is a long history of interference in matters which aren't obviously in the domain of "human rights". Banning whole life tariffs for prisoners and trying to enforce voting rights for prisoners are the two that spring to mind, but I'm sure there are others.

    Membership of the ECHR offers no guarantee against a future tyrannical UK government whatsoever, for the simple reason that it would be very easy for said government to just take us out the ECHR if they wanted.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,728

    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.

    QTWTAIN.

    But it sounds like our loss, TBF.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 2,236
    edited June 19

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    This. People of quality run, not walk, away from politics.

    I've mentioned before a relative. PhD. Started his own business, from sole trader up to the point he has enough time to do other things now. Coached at national level in the sport he was into. Organised various charitable endeavours - planning, getting funding, planning permissions etc etc.

    In times past, he would have been dragged onto the local council. At least.

    Hasn't got the slightest interest in the Farcebook/Twatter version of politics.
    About 6 years ago I got involved in local politics and got to know the local Councillors. There were two who were very impressive, one who was a great leader, and the other who was a boffin who used to be a Council official and was able to master technical detail. They were the leader and deputy leader. The other Councillors were by and large unimpressive, they seemed to be involved for the social life more than anything else, and were just herded around by the two smart guys.

    I don't think this is a new problem and I don't think the absence of good people in local politics it is entirely to do with twitter etc. I think it is because local government is not particularly appealing, it has been set up in such a way that you are just the fall guy for central government policies. Smart people can see that and just avoid it. The most impressive community activists I have come across have decided to work outside of the Council and have probably achieved more that way.

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,487
    Andy_JS said:

    Lord Sumption in today's Sunday Times says we could leave the ECHR without any problems as far as are our commitment to human rights is concerned.

    Lord Snooty in The Beano says no we couldn't.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,460
    darkage said:

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    This. People of quality run, not walk, away from politics.

    I've mentioned before a relative. PhD. Started his own business, from sole trader up to the point he has enough time to do other things now. Coached at national level in the sport he was into. Organised various charitable endeavours - planning, getting funding, planning permissions etc etc.

    In times past, he would have been dragged onto the local council. At least.

    Hasn't got the slightest interest in the Farcebook/Twatter version of politics.
    About 6 years ago I got involved in local politics and got to know the local Councillors. There were two who were very impressive, one who was a great leader, and the other who was a boffin who used to be a Council official and was able to master technical detail. They were the leader and deputy leader. The other Councillors were by and large unimpressive, they seemed to be involved for the social life more than anything else, and were just herded around by the two smart guys.

    I don't think this is a new problem and I don't think the absence of good people in local politics it is entirely to do with twitter etc. I think it is because local government is not particularly appealing, it has been set up in such a way that you are just the fall guy for central government policies. Smart people can see that and just avoid it. The most impressive community activists I have come across have decided to work outside of the Council and have probably achieved more that way.

    Interestingly, and contrarily, locally to me at least the age of councillors has noticably decreased in recent elections, with a move away from merely being people who are doing it as they have retired and need something to do. There's still many of those around, but they are not as dominant.

    But it is certainly the case that there are some very able ones able to achieve a lot and drive things, inasmuch as one can within local goverment anyway, and many others who just go along with things.

    It is still very apparent that parties really don't tell prospective candidates much about what the role entails, and not merely the ones who they expect to be paper candidates only. You can tell the ones who are shocked at the limitations of the whole affair.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,051

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famous raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    So you were watching the birdie instead of eyeing up the birds?
    The climate at that time of year was too cold for great tits; it was mainly blue tits.
    All readers will at least appreciate that tit population of Armenia is currently elevated by one, at least temporarily.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,878
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Withdraw tomorrow

    Not only is it morally the right thing to do, it would be politically savvy - it will enrage the Remoaner Left, and they will expend all their energy pointlessly railing against it

    "....both sides are eagerly pouring on the gasoline..."

    Sure.
    False equivalence - it's just lying with table manners.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 28,878
    Endillion said:

    If we leave the ECHR, it won't be just because of their latest ruling - there is a long history of interference in matters which aren't obviously in the domain of "human rights". Banning whole life tariffs for prisoners and trying to enforce voting rights for prisoners are the two that spring to mind, but I'm sure there are others.

    Membership of the ECHR offers no guarantee against a future tyrannical UK government whatsoever, for the simple reason that it would be very easy for said government to just take us out the ECHR if they wanted.

    Prisoners cease to be human then?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 33,475

    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.

    I await the first ‘it will annoy all the right people’ if El Trumpez wins.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,051
    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    This. People of quality run, not walk, away from politics.

    I've mentioned before a relative. PhD. Started his own business, from sole trader up to the point he has enough time to do other things now. Coached at national level in the sport he was into. Organised various charitable endeavours - planning, getting funding, planning permissions etc etc.

    In times past, he would have been dragged onto the local council. At least.

    Hasn't got the slightest interest in the Farcebook/Twatter version of politics.
    About 6 years ago I got involved in local politics and got to know the local Councillors. There were two who were very impressive, one who was a great leader, and the other who was a boffin who used to be a Council official and was able to master technical detail. They were the leader and deputy leader. The other Councillors were by and large unimpressive, they seemed to be involved for the social life more than anything else, and were just herded around by the two smart guys.

    I don't think this is a new problem and I don't think the absence of good people in local politics it is entirely to do with twitter etc. I think it is because local government is not particularly appealing, it has been set up in such a way that you are just the fall guy for central government policies. Smart people can see that and just avoid it. The most impressive community activists I have come across have decided to work outside of the Council and have probably achieved more that way.

    Interestingly, and contrarily, locally to me at least the age of councillors has noticably decreased in recent elections, with a move away from merely being people who are doing it as they have retired and need something to do. There's still many of those around, but they are not as dominant.

    But it is certainly the case that there are some very able ones able to achieve a lot and drive things, inasmuch as one can within local goverment anyway, and many others who just go along with things.

    It is still very apparent that parties really don't tell prospective candidates much about what the role entails, and not merely the ones who they expect to be paper candidates only. You can tell the ones who are shocked at the limitations of the whole affair.
    If you told people what it really involved, before they stood, few of them would agree.

    I was speaking to someone just last Friday who was telling me that a fair few of the new Labour councillors in Wandsworth, who she knows - newly Labour controlled - were told they wouldn’t get elected and currently have next to no idea what their new job will involve.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,460

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    Harsh, but fair. Yes the parties may offer unappealing fare, but we complain endlessly about activists being an unrepresentative and often loony bunch, and as you suggest if that is what political life has come to its because collectively we;ve let it happen.

    There's plenty of the older type of member left, and in local government you can still see it a lot, as the ones who act like national politicians and activists on twitter stand out like sore thumbs. It can be faintly embarrassing.
  • Rail strikes: Not for government to intervene - Shapps

    So what is the point in you then?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 17,030
    O/T

    Has anyone seen the film Men starring Rory Kinnear? It looks interesting, to put it mildly. (Having seen the trailer, not the film).
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,460
    edited June 19
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    IanB2 said:

    What sin did we ever commit, to deserve such a miserable government inflicted upon us?

    What most of us did was leave politics to the hardest of hardcore activists.

    Go back N years, and your average Conservative member was a decent chap/chapess who wasn't keen on taxes but was more than happy to contribute to the local orphanage's Flag Day. A typical municipal socialist didn't want world revolution, but was keen that the town lido was properly looked after.

    Now, both parties have been left to the nutters. And that's down to those of us who couldn't be bothered to stop them taking over. The remarkable thing is how quickly and how far Labour came back from their brink.
    This. People of quality run, not walk, away from politics.

    I've mentioned before a relative. PhD. Started his own business, from sole trader up to the point he has enough time to do other things now. Coached at national level in the sport he was into. Organised various charitable endeavours - planning, getting funding, planning permissions etc etc.

    In times past, he would have been dragged onto the local council. At least.

    Hasn't got the slightest interest in the Farcebook/Twatter version of politics.
    About 6 years ago I got involved in local politics and got to know the local Councillors. There were two who were very impressive, one who was a great leader, and the other who was a boffin who used to be a Council official and was able to master technical detail. They were the leader and deputy leader. The other Councillors were by and large unimpressive, they seemed to be involved for the social life more than anything else, and were just herded around by the two smart guys.

    I don't think this is a new problem and I don't think the absence of good people in local politics it is entirely to do with twitter etc. I think it is because local government is not particularly appealing, it has been set up in such a way that you are just the fall guy for central government policies. Smart people can see that and just avoid it. The most impressive community activists I have come across have decided to work outside of the Council and have probably achieved more that way.

    Interestingly, and contrarily, locally to me at least the age of councillors has noticably decreased in recent elections, with a move away from merely being people who are doing it as they have retired and need something to do. There's still many of those around, but they are not as dominant.

    But it is certainly the case that there are some very able ones able to achieve a lot and drive things, inasmuch as one can within local goverment anyway, and many others who just go along with things.

    It is still very apparent that parties really don't tell prospective candidates much about what the role entails, and not merely the ones who they expect to be paper candidates only. You can tell the ones who are shocked at the limitations of the whole affair.
    If you told people what it really involved, before they stood, few of them would agree.

    I was speaking to someone just last Friday who was telling me that a fair few of the new Labour councillors in Wandsworth, who she knows - newly Labour controlled - were told they wouldn’t get elected and currently have next to no idea what their new job will involve.
    Perhaps, and in my experience a lot will drop off instead of going for a second term as a result (those that stick around will probably be around for decades), but people also don't even ask questions about it, since many don't know they will receive an allowance, which is the first thing I would ask.

    I know people who held senior positions who admitted they got started as a paper candidate, outright told they had no chance of being elected.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 33,475
    edited June 19
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    tlg86 said:

    Leon said:

    I hope this isn’t as embarrassing as the time I went avidly birdwatching on a Galician beach, seeking out migrating rarities and famousaid raptors, and then when I put down my binoculars I realised that I, a fully dressed middle aged man with a pair of binoculars, was surrounded by about 300 naked Spanish girls in their late teens, with their boyfriends (or not)

    A famous nudist beach, as it turned out

    An honest mistake, I am sure.
    It really WAS

    The embarrassment was excruciating. I negotiated it by pretending “not to notice” and fiercely and continuously watching a fascinating seagull through my binos as I walked extremely quickly to a less nude bit

    So you were watching the birdie instead of eyeing up the birds?
    The climate at that time of year was too cold for great tits; it was mainly blue tits.
    All readers will at least appreciate that tit population of Armenia is currently elevated by one, at least temporarily.
    I think he may have said something mildly positive about Tony Blair once, but a tit of the deepest blue would be a fair description.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,460

    Is anyone else on here following the Colombian presidential election?
    The second round is today. The broad left candidate, Gustavo Petro, got 40% in the first round , with the second placed pseudo independent, Rodolfo Hernández, standing as an anti-corruption candidate, 12 points behind at 28%. The dismal candidate of the governing right wing kleptocratic party scored just 24%.
    The 77 year old misogynist businessman made his fortune constructing unsafe houses sold on usurious finance terms to poor people. He is astonishingly ignorant, and although he has been compared to Donald Trump, though he makes the latter look like a genius. Hernandez famously claimed to be a follower of Adolf Hitler, apparently confusing him with the similarly named Albert Einstein, and had never heard of Vichada, one of the 32 Colombian departments (like US states). And you could not make this up: this saintly anti-corruption candidate has dozens of legal cases running against him for embezzlement and breaches of employment laws, involving his construction business and family members whilst he was mayor of Bucaramanga, and the one of them is due to be heard on 21st July.
    Anyway despite all this the governing party has thrown all its efforts to switch its support to Hernandez to prevent Colombia’s first left-wing president. So much so that the national registrar (i.e. electoral commission), in a superb display of impartisanship, has publicly told Petro that he has to respect the result of the election.
    SMarkets has Hernández around 65% chance to win, to Petro’s 35%. Which is unfortunate, because if ever a country is crying out for a dose of socialism and decent government, it is Colombia.
    I very much hope the market is wrong and have bet accordingly.

    Columbian politics is remarkably like Peruvian politics - it's not so much the corruption, as the combination of Idiocracy level stupidity with incompetent corruption.

    They can't even steal money well....
    If there are places where pretty much every president is eventually conivicted or impeached for corruption I wonder if that is both good and bad, in that at least they keep trying to convict peopel for that behaviour, even if they are all at it.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,448
    Andy_JS said:

    Lord Sumption in today's Sunday Times says we could leave the ECHR without any problems as far as are our commitment to human rights is concerned.

    Obviously absurd. The ECHR is the origin of all our human rights. Those other English-speaking Parliamentary democracies Australia, New Zealand and Canada aren't in the ECHR and they are notorious totalitarian tyrannies, as we were before 1950.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,460
    edited June 19
    Fishing said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Lord Sumption in today's Sunday Times says we could leave the ECHR without any problems as far as are our commitment to human rights is concerned.

    Obviously absurd. The ECHR is the origin of all our human rights. Those other English-speaking Parliamentary democracies Australia, New Zealand and Canada aren't in the ECHR and they are notorious totalitarian tyrannies, as we were before 1950.
    People go a bit far with the claims of what would would happen without the ECHR, and I think that does not help the case against the government's intentions (or at least possible intention, which they are floating to see how it goes). Nor does every nominal signatory act well all the time, so it is not as though it ensures it - if we do not trust government x to do y, it is not greatly affected by some procedure or law saying they should do y.

    Nevertheless, the benefits of such a move are not particularly apparent, being principally theoretical. Are the problems of the ECHR really so fundamental that it is worth the hassle and aggravations leaving it would cause? Or is it merely that governments do not like court rulings they disagree with sometimes?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,440
    edited June 19
    kinabalu said:

    Endillion said:

    If we leave the ECHR, it won't be just because of their latest ruling - there is a long history of interference in matters which aren't obviously in the domain of "human rights". Banning whole life tariffs for prisoners and trying to enforce voting rights for prisoners are the two that spring to mind, but I'm sure there are others.

    Membership of the ECHR offers no guarantee against a future tyrannical UK government whatsoever, for the simple reason that it would be very easy for said government to just take us out the ECHR if they wanted.

    Prisoners cease to be human then?
    It's the "rights" bit that's poorly defined.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,440
    Cyclefree said:

    I do love those who claim that we should leave the ECHR because British judges can enforce those rights.

    Well, yes, they could. Indeed, bringing the Convention home was exactly the point of the Human Rights Act, an Act which the Tories opposed at the time and which they have repeatedly said they want to abolish or water down. So colour me sceptical about this claim that this is all about wanting to give British judges the power.

    Bollocks it is. This is just the first step in eliminating or watering down those rights, first from some groups or only some rights, step by step until eventually the executive will be able to do whatever it wants without any restraint or control or scrutiny by anyone.

    Then there is the second group who claim that Britain has had all these rights for 1300 years and so doesn't need the Convention. Which would be lovely if true.

    But it isn't: for pretty much all that time most people in Britain did not have any or all of these rights. The right to vote, to free expression, to hold property, not to be discriminated against and so on were denied to the vast majority of the population for most of that time. It is hard to avoid the impression sometimes that a significant set of Tory voters would quite like to go back to those times when they did not have to worry about women or ethnic minorities or other minorities or the poor demanding to be treated equally and as human beings worthy of respect and dignity. If a majority vote to be nasty and horrible to people and deprive them of their rights, that's all right because democracy. It's as if they've not noticed the 20th century and what happened in Europe during it.


    So some questions:-

    1. If a government passed a law expelling all British Jews from the country, is that ok because it is as a result of democratic vote?
    2. If not, why not?
    3. If British courts stopped it because of the prohibition against it in the ECHR, would that be ok?
    4. And if the British government then passed a law disapplying the Convention and any other laws protecting Jews so that the expulsion goes ahead, is that OK?
    5. If not, why not?

    You can substitute your own minority or group of choice for Jews in these examples.

    Speaking as one, if the only way Jews get to stay in this country is because of ECHR intervention, then it's long past time to leave. So, while I sympathise with the point being made, the specific example given is moot.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 20,968
    Cyclefree said:

    I do love those who claim that we should leave the ECHR because British judges can enforce those rights.

    Well, yes, they could. Indeed, bringing the Convention home was exactly the point of the Human Rights Act, an Act which the Tories opposed at the time and which they have repeatedly said they want to abolish or water down. So colour me sceptical about this claim that this is all about wanting to give British judges the power.

    Bollocks it is. This is just the first step in eliminating or watering down those rights, first from some groups or only some rights, step by step until eventually the executive will be able to do whatever it wants without any restraint or control or scrutiny by anyone.

    Then there is the second group who claim that Britain has had all these rights for 1300 years and so doesn't need the Convention. Which would be lovely if true.

    But it isn't: for pretty much all that time most people in Britain did not have any or all of these rights. The right to vote, to free expression, to hold property, not to be discriminated against and so on were denied to the vast majority of the population for most of that time. It is hard to avoid the impression sometimes that a significant set of Tory voters would quite like to go back to those times when they did not have to worry about women or ethnic minorities or other minorities or the poor demanding to be treated equally and as human beings worthy of respect and dignity. If a majority vote to be nasty and horrible to people and deprive them of their rights, that's all right because democracy. It's as if they've not noticed the 20th century and what happened in Europe during it.


    So some questions:-

    1. If a government passed a law expelling all British Jews from the country, is that ok because it is as a result of democratic vote?
    2. If not, why not?
    3. If British courts stopped it because of the prohibition against it in the ECHR, would that be ok?
    4. And if the British government then passed a law disapplying the Convention and any other laws protecting Jews so that the expulsion goes ahead, is that OK?
    5. If not, why not?

    You can substitute your own minority or group of choice for Jews in these examples.

    Oh god what a load of arse-ache
Sign In or Register to comment.