Friday, January 31, 2014

Unlawful? So change the law... oh you can't it's an EU law...

No surprises when the Tory rebels failed to add an amendment to the effects of the Human Rights Act on UK law, still it was interesting that so many came out of the woodwork and embarrassed the Prime Minister who said such an amendment was unlawful.The amendment called for the clause 'the right to a family life' to be illegal for judges to use as an excuse for foreign criminals including child molesters, rapists and murderers to remain in the UK despite being convicted of such heinous crimes.
David Cameron’s authority has been called into question after he was forced to rely on Labour and the Liberal Democrats to block a Conservative backbench move to toughen human rights laws.
More than 90 Conservative MPs voted for an amendment intended to make it harder for foreign criminals to avoid deportation – even though Mr Cameron had said the plan was unlawful.
The amendment also split the Coalition, as Conservative ministers sat on their hands but Lib Dem ministers voted against it.
Mr Cameron was forced into his awkward abstention by the defiance of Conservative backbenchers over the Immigration Bill.
MPs wanted to use the bill to curb judges’ ability to block deportation because of a foreign offender’s family connections in the UK.
The “right to a family life” is enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights. Many Tories want to restrict the convention’s influence in British public life.
Almost 100 Conservative MPs had backed an amendment to the Bill tabled by Dominic Raab, a Tory backbencher, which would prevent most foreign criminals invoking family life to resist deportation.
The Government had refused to support the amendment, saying that official legal advice suggests it was unworkable and could be challenged in the courts.
In one sense Cameron is right, the way the HRA pervades current law would mean such an amendment could be challenged as illegal, but that presupposes the primacy of European law over UK law via the European Court of Human Rights. As our legal system is undermined by this court, the best way around it is to change the law which gives criminals access to it which of course means scrapping the HRA and withdrawing form the EU.
Anyone here think Cameron, Clegg or Milliband will go for that?
Essentially it means that foreign criminals have the right to stay here if they can show a family connection and only a leftard or Lib Dem would see that as common sense, the rest of us see it as madness and believe that if the family are so enamoured of scum then they can bloody well join them if they are deported should they so wish.
The HRA is too complex and covers too much in the way of frivolity, it should have stuck to basics such as no incarceration without trial, right to a fair trial, protection from torture to gain a confession. The right to a family life is no right at all, it's just wishful thinking on the part of namby pamby libtards and has been twisted beyond common sense to allow scum to remain in the UK against the wishes of its people.
This is why a vote for the big three political parties is a wasted vote, they have no intentions of taking us out of the EU or scrapping the HRA, it's just words to get votes.
A vote for Con/Lab/Lib is a vote to maintain the current system, frankly they don't deserve them.

2 annotations:

never60 said...

I could not agree more.

Mr. Morden said...

The only good thing that will come out of this that I can think of is, the little darlings in Westminster will now have to face up to the fact that they are no longer the supreme law makers in the land and, their days are, at last, numbered.