Good news on human rights:
Lib Dems thwart Tory hopes of human rights convention withdrawal
Decision will infuriate Tory rightwingers unhappy at what they believe is Strasbourg judges’ interference in UK rights
Chris Rennard writes in The Guardian:
Those seeking a fairer voting system may be rather more dismayed if the Guardian is correct that there are difficulties getting Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg working together in support of the referendum. Political rivalry over other issues should not prevent all supporters of reform from campaigning for a cause on which they agree. Lessons should be learned from the Scottish referendum in 1997 when Labour had to campaign with its great rivals in the SNP (as well as the Liberal Democrats) to secure a Scottish parliament.
An update on Tessa Munt and her council tax, via the Daily Mail:
Barely weeks after winning the Somerset seat of Wells, Liberal Democrat Tessa Munt,52, was facing her own accusations of sleaze amid claims that she improperly claimed council tax benefits on her constituency home … Mrs Munt tells me: ‘Inquiries into my claims for single person discount on my council tax began more than a year ago. I felt the inquiry was not progressing, was wasting taxpayers’ money and council resources.
‘Without any new request from the council, I recently decided to pay the contested amount in full.
‘As I have said in a number of public meetings in Somerset, I did not claim or receive any benefits, with the exception of child benefit during my long campaign.’
And finally news from Redcar on the other big local issue:
Leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Redcar and Cleveland Council, Councillor Chris Abbott, confirmed that if they win control of the council in the May elections, they will abandon the controversial plans for an 80ft vertical pier on Redcar seafront.
Labour currently control the council with 25 councillors. There are 16 Lib Dems, 11 Conservatives, five Independents and two East Cleveland Independents.
The £1.8m building has polarised opinion since it was first announced in 2009.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Manuela Perteghella, Stratford-on-Avon and John Profumo
The "Just War" tradition
Our kids need a lorra, lorra, larffs!!
West End Ward Tuesday Surgeries #dundeewestend
Roland
Michael BG
Simon R
David Sheppard
17 Comments
The first one’s a great reminder of the importance of the LibDems in this coalition.
“Nick Clegg has won a battle to prevent the inclusion of total withdrawal from the convention in the terms of reference of an expected seven-strong commission of inquiry in UK human rights law.”
Shame. 🙁
The first one is a great reminder of the one big issue on which I am sorry that the Liberal Democrats are tempering Conservative policies – that of the EU and all its implications for the sovereign rule of Parliament at Westminster. Damn the Liberal Democrats’ automatic, built-in and nowadays unthinking EU-toadyism!
The ECHR is to do with the Council of Europe, not the EU.
“Adam”
Yes, but I believe that it is more embedded in our system because of the EU. Perhaps someone will put me right, but I did read that somewhere, and it upset me.
If you think human rights are ‘EU-toadying’ then you are welcome to disagree with me anytime @Dane.
Human rights are, quite frankly, not the consequence of democracy. That is why I am a Liberal Democrat and not a democratic liberal: no power, howsoever elected or selected, should be able to infringe a group of rights which I think are fundamental building blocks to a fair and just society.
@ Dane
Could you find the evidence for why you think the ECHR is enforced by the EU?
The EU itself has the option to decide to follow the jurisdiction of the ECHR following the Lisbon Treaty and it seems likely in the future that it will become a member of the Council of Europe itself as well once its integrated itself under the ECHR.
The ECHR and council of Europe are quite distinct from the EU which has its own courts of justice.
whether it is an integral part of the EU is a distraction, what matters is that it constituent make-up cannot be perceived as legitimate as it struggles to portray itself as both accountable and representative given the arbitrary judgements it has given out.
worse still, this lack of accountability has caused it to grow its defining remit, and its lack of representativeness has caused the people to disparage its judgements.
it is leading to a contempt for the law as a consequence for our contempt for it.
Christ, some Eurosceptics do just sound like bloody broken records. I can’t even be bothered today.
BlahBlah – With respect, that is part of the problem. It is possible to take a sceptical view of the ECHR and still be pro-European. I would describe myself in those terms.
I may not agree with every criticism. But it is true to say that the court has massively expanded its remit with not much by way of oversight. Now practically every law has to be seen through the prism of the court’s rulings. It is a massive centralisation of power and one that I would have thought Lib Dems would find uncomfrotable.
It is not the place of a human rights court to overrule national immigration systems, say whether religious symbols can be displayed or extend the vote. To say as much does not make me some sort of swivel-eyel little Englander.
I tend to agree with Dane Clouston. We’re too happy to say that everything coming from the EU is good.
@ David from Ealing
Agreed. A little more constructive criticism about how things should be changed, with the emphasis on the word “criticism” would go a long way towards improving our image on European matters.
“Lib Dems thwart Tory hopes of human rights convention withdrawal”
Hardly news – since the Coalition agreement was quite clear about remaining within the convention. Or can we presume that the Tories are now free to challenge other parts of the agreement, perhaps with the encouragement of certain LibDems in Govt. If so perhaps the poor electorate could be told in advance.
Does it by any chance worry the LibDems that they are in coalition with a party that would appear to seriously contemplate withdrawal from the Convention (so that we could join Belarus as the only European nation that did not sign up to it), breaking the Coalition agreement in this regard, and as a result falling in breach of the conditions of EU membership. If Nick Clegg is really spending his time having to fight such proposals one wonders at what stage he will think it appropriate to withdraw his support for the coalition.
“Does it by any chance worry the LibDems that they are in coalition with a party that would appear to seriously contemplate withdrawal from the Convention so that we could join Belarus as the only European nation that did not sign up to it”
[Yes, I am selectively quoting you, but its your own fault for playing the man and not the ball……..]
No, what worries me is the fact that we have out-sourced responsibility for maintaining our own civil and legal institutions.
Whether it is an integral part of the EU is a distraction. What matters is that its constituent make-up cannot be perceived as legitimate as it struggles to portray itself as both accountable and representative to the British people given the arbitrary judgements it has given out.
Worse still, this lack of accountability has caused it to grow beyond its defining remit, and its lack of representativeness has caused the British people to disparage its judgements.
It is leading to a contempt for the law as a consequence of our contempt for it.
“No, what worries me is the fact that we have out-sourced responsibility for maintaining our own civil and legal institutions.”
Get used to it – some of us happen to believe that the nation state is not the always the best defence of individual human rights (as well as a belief this is also a fact based observation) and that the existence of multi or pan national bodies which seek to uphold those rights is necessarily a bad thing (that doesn’t mean that those bodies always act sensibly – but neither do nattion states). There are also rather a lot of matters that cross national boundaries which can only be considered sensibly/democratically by bodies other than the nation state. I daresay that Mr Lukashenko also has a lot of convincing arguments as to why he doesn’t want the ECHR to interfere into how Belarus conducts its own human rights.
You also conveniently ignore that there is no electoral mandate within the UK for withdrawal from the Convention and it is specifically ruled out in the coalition agreement. Allowing a minority to determine what is and isn’t in the national interest doesn’t have a very good record I’m afraid – but this doesn’t seem to worry you.
“You also conveniently ignore that there is no electoral mandate within the UK for withdrawal from the Convention and it is specifically ruled out in the coalition agreement.”
On the contrary, as an advocate of FPTP I am a supporter of manifesto politics, so while the Tories went into the election with the commitment to; opt out from the charter of fundamental rights, i can accept that it did not survive into the coalition agreement.
http://jedibeeftrix.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/opportunity-or-threat-3-%E2%80%93-has-the-coalition-scuppered-camerons-eu-plans/