a UK bIll of Rights

It has become apparent that the Human Rights Act that the Labour Government signed us up to has become something of a joke. I am no legal expert but even if the HRA was working in the way it was designed then it is still a mess. It is a mess because its implementation has allowed the type of stupid cases that originate from Europe on a regular basis.

It has become the fear of the HRA that is the worse aspect.There was the recent case of the roof top protester who "had" to be given Kentucky Fried Chicken because not to feed him was against the Human Rights Act - there are many more examples. We are now afraid not to feed the chap because he might sue someone.

So why should Britian not have its own Bill of Rights? Germany have one so why not us?

But there is another issue. The HRA enshrines in UK law the right of Judges to argue that parliament, in setting a law, has acted in contravention of the HRA and therefore the law should be changed. I accept that Parliament frequently makes a pig's ear of framing new laws but the idea that a democratically elected institution is not able to make law unless the judiciary decides is absurd.

Before the HRA the system operated that EU Judges could decide whether new law was in contravention of the Convention on Human Rights and the Minister in London could decide what he was going to do about it. It seemed to work quite well and during the period between 1975 and 1996 only 316 cases were considered and in 16 of them a change was made. In the 18 months after the UK implemented the Human Rights Act some 431 cases were considered and in 316 of them the outcpme was affected.

At least a UK BIll of Rights would allow us the opportunity to clearly define what are the rights and responsibilites of UK citizens.

BBC NEWS | Politics | Tories want a UK Bill of Rights