Posts Tagged ‘Theresa May’

Why the Grenfell Tower Blaze stands as a monument to Tory austerity measures

June 30, 2017

Why the Grenfell Tower Blaze stands as a monument to Tory austerity measures

By Dark Politricks

I am writing this one handed as I currently have a broken right arm which really makes it hard to blog at the moment, however after another sleepless night of watching YouTube I thought it necessary to at least post some of my views on the austerity measures that have been inflicted on the poor people of the UK.

Whilst our Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn gets attacked daily in the mainstream news like Bernie Sanders has been in the US, at least with his progressive agenda that many people thought would wipe the party out, he actually increased Labour’s vote in the recent unnecessary general election. The Democrats seem happy to have a Republican in power than a progressive politician at any cost.

Our Prime Minister Theresa May has fought her last election and will probably be gone soon. However the performance of Labour showed us how many people are crying out out for more progressive policies and have had enough of the Tories austerity measures which have cut disability benefits to people who need them, increased rent on social housing if  you had a spare room and cut funding for many local authorities which has seen the closure of police stations (two in two towns near me), plus much much more.

Instead of boosting her power before BREXIT negotiations it has weakened them as she has gone from a majority government to a minority government propped up by the terrorist linked UDP. This is a party who are linked to the UDA terrorists in Northern Ireland.

As the Independent headline puts it in a recent article.

The UDA is a violent loyalist paramilitary group, which is still active today. Just weeks ago, it murdered a man in broad daylight in Northern Ireland – he was shot dead in a Sainsbury’s car park in front of horrified shoppers and his three-year-old son.

People in the UK are slowly realising that a Corbyn Labour government would not be as bad as the Blairite’s and MSM would have you think and when he explains his policies they are not so crazy after all.

You van see this at any Corbyn rally which sees huge crowds of people turn out, just like Sanders in the USA, and his compassion after the recent Grenfell Tower Block fire which killed 79 people.

Grenfell Tower Block after fire
The aftermath of the Grenfell Tower Block fire

Whilst Jeremy Corbyn was walking with the victims and bereaved people from the local community. The Prime Minister Theresa May was being booed and shouted at by a held back police line as she refused to meet residents and victims and had to be protected by police from the local community who shouted “coward” at her.

Jeremy Corbyn with victims of the Grenfell Tower Block blaze
Jeremy Corbyn comfits the victims of the Grenfell Tower Block blaze

 

Theresa May refuses to meet victimd and residents of Grenfell
Police protect PM Theresa May from residents shouting coward at her for refusing to speak to them

Personally I think this stands as a monument to the Tory austerity measures which had including “Cutting Red Tape”. In this instance it meant that no sprinklers were on each floor and no fire extinguishers. Instead the local government decided to plaster the building in flammable cladding around the tower block to make it look “nicer” to the more affluent residents of the borough who can afford the extortionate prices of housing in the area.

Whilst rich Chinese and Russians buy up huge swathes of London housing pushing up prices and closing local communities whose local shops now have no customers due to the purchasing of these properties as a way of tax avoidance rather than being used as actual homes. The people of London have no choice but to move out of the areas their families have lived in for years to more cheaper areas, making it more costly to travel in to work each morning.

People such as nurses, carers, police, firemen, and many other important jobs that are needed for running London should not have to travel miles into the city due to foreigners buying up extremely expensive apartments and houses that kill local communities. Instead they should be given a government discount on any home they wish to buy to keep them in the city.

If I had my way there would be a law that if you did not live in your property for at least half of the year then it becomes a “usable government asset“, one in which homeless people from Grenfell could go and stay in whilst waiting to be re-housed.

Why should we let London become a home purely for the rich and overseas businessmen to “stash their cash” by buying up housing.

There is not enough new houses being built in the UK and especially in London.

We used to have council estates but Thatcher sold many of the homes off which was good in some situations but not in others, as the people who couldn’t afford private ownership or rent had a dwindling supply of homes to live in as they were not being replaced.

We now have housing associations which mean many areas are filled with a mixture of private and council owned owned housing. This means that the rich live next door to the poor and we have a more integrated living arrangement. The problem is the people building new flats and homes want to sell them for high prices which the council cannot afford.

In some boroughs there is no housing available, even if you are homeless. You are given a list of private landlords who will take Housing Benefit cheques from the government. Guaranteed money and usually guaranteed dumps to live in.

Many of their homes are run down and need fixing, yet they let people who they know won’t complain too much due to being scared of eviction, with guaranteed housing benefit cheques from the government. Many of these landlords will take out a mortgage, buy a block of flats or a house, turn it all into bedsits with shared bathrooms and kitchens and then rent it purely to people on state benefits. The mortgage is paid off in a year or less due to it being guaranteed rent money and few complaints about leaky taps and the landlord gets to live in a nice big mansion.

So housing is big problem in one of the most over crowded countries on the planet and the Tories only seem interested in allowing foreign investors to ruin communities by buying property as assets and not using them as homes, plus building private housing where a one bedroom flat could be as much as £300k+.

I’m not kidding some private flats and houses just went up near me and in the space where there used to be a few houses with big gardens they have managed to squash in dozens of houses and flats with walls so thin you could probably hear rows three flats away. I was given a brochure for this new housing area which stated I too could own a new two bedroom house for as little as £350,000!

Personally I think the burned out shell of Grenfell Tower should stand as a reminder to what austerity does to normal people due to the burden of the banking crisis being placed on the backs of the poor  instead of the Banksters who caused it.

 

By Dark Politricks

View the original article at www.darkpolitricks.com

© 2017 Dark Politricks

Advertisements

Make sure you vote tomorrow in the UK Elections

June 7, 2017

The UK Election 2017

By Dark Politricks

It’s the UK’s snap general election tomorrow.

No-one really expected our great leader and Donny Trump fan Theresa May, called it after pulling out of the EU by implementing article 21 (The Lisbon Treaty).

Many are predicting a landslide victory for the Tories who have not jailed a single bankster from the 2008 crisis and trebled the national debt. The deficit may have shrunk a little but that is of no importance when the debt we owe in total has trebled clearly showing that austerity measures don’t work.

Putting the “payback” on the poor instead of the rich has been decried by many as unethical and even evil.

Why should a disabled granny lose a chunk of her benefits to pay for gambling by coke snorting banksters who took grannies pension and played roulette with it.

I don’t know and neither do the millions of poor and kids hoping to go to go to university only to realise they cannot afford it without incurring thousands in debts.

Following the USA around the world in the Axis of War has cost us trillions of pounds over the last decade, and even more since 9.11.

Wars in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan and undeclared wars or incursions following the USA who is using drones or planes in 7 countries at the moment that we know of. This just wasting money we desperately need at home and stirring up the UK Muslim community who have attacked us successfully 3 times in the last 3 months.

More war!

More drone strikes!

More death is what you vote for when you vote for the Tories, and when you are next on the Tube nervously looking at a man with a back pack on then don’t cry when more of your civil rights and liberties are removed from you.

Currently I am probably being watched by a very bored GCHQ member of staff through my web cam at the moment and if you vote Tory you vote for more terror and more spying on the citizens of this country through your TV, Computer, Phone, Tablet and now even cars they could hack into and control.

Wasn’t it George W Bush that said after 9.11 that they attacked us because “they hate us for our freedoms”. It seems the terrorists are winning if we just hand our freedoms over. I guess that’s what false flag attacks and drumming up fear of whole communities of people is about.

Then we have opposing the hot favourites to carry on ruining the country, a real “Feel the Bern” revolution for Jeremy Corbyn. Hundreds of thousands of new Labour supporters have joined since Corbyn took over. Even more joined when their failed coup went ahead. It seems every time the Blairites try to get rid of Corbyn he gains another 100,000 Labour members at least.

At least if Tony Blair does succeed in creating his own get out of jail party in the aftermath of a Labour slaughtering at the polls he can be shouted down and abused in the house  as the war criminal he should be treated as.

Can we really blame Blair for his 4 wars, bringing the party into the centre from the left leaving progressives with no alternative, considering the Lib Dems were wiped out last time.

The Lib Dems lied about abolishing University fees in their last manifesto and got a lot of young people’s votes only to renege on the promise for a chance to spend 5 years in the back of ministerial cars.

Nick Clegg got his chance to sit at the top table and then to hell with the Lib Dems. He got 5 years of the high life, that’s what type of politicians we are voting in.

The Lib Dems may have some good ideas but they have lost the people’s’ trust and it’s not as is if we can exactly trust any other party anyway. At least with Jeremy Corbyn you get the feeling he will try and implement his policies. Whether his party back him or not is another matter. He and Bernie Sanders would get on well over a pint I think.

So the young have looked at the fixes in US politics and how the candidates were chosen before hand in the Democratic party. Anything to get Hillary as their candidate and Bernie blanked out.

Just think of all those wasted hours standing in line to vote for Bernie when the fix was already in.

BREXIT is going ahead due to a referendum, true peoples democracy.

You may not like it but I doubt voting for a progressive alliance between Labour and the SNP will reverse the process. Once article 21 is implemented I doubt the rest of Europe will allow us to change our minds, we may try, and Germany may want us to stay,  but France is French and to an Englishman that says it all.

So compared to Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn is far more to the left showing you just how centrist US politics really is. They fix their primaries so Bernie cannot run despite having the votes and the support and if he dare mentions the word socialist they think he is Mao Zedong.

At least Corbyn can mention socialism and not get bananas and other vegetables thrown at him from FOX News, and as they say any news is good news.

Bernie was hardly mentioned in the US news media, a 6 company monopoly that all spew COINTELPRO propaganda whether supposedly left-wing like MSBC or right-wing like FOX. Here we have multiple political programmes where people ask a range of politicians and public people what they think about political decisions and issues of the day.

Bernie got about 10 minutes coverage in all the primary campaigning whilst Clinton and Trump owned the airwaves for free. They shouldn’t have really spent all those billions on election adverts when they had the news channels to let them spew their hatred instead.

That’s one good thing about UK elections we don’t have to suck off lobbyists to get the money to campaign only to pay them back once in power.

In the US they usually have to have multi millions of dollars to even consider running for Congress or the President. Then they leave the House to go and work for a lobbyist firm or a company they had a hand in helping by voting for  in government.

So whether you like Corbyn’s charity shop suits or not, or you are hoping to see Labour wiped out so that you can rush to join Tony Blair’s threat of a new neo-con, neo-liberal, war mongering, Banksters fun time party, you have to vote tomorrow and vote with your conscience.

If you don’t want more war, to see Blair in cuffs, more money spent on schools and hospitals and less US ass licking then Labour are the only real choice for progressives. If you want the opposite, more war, bigger bombs dropped on schools and hospitals and blowback that turns UK born kids into murdering Jihadists then vote Tory.

If you want your vote to count for nothing then there is always the Green party and UKIP despite whether their ideas are good or not but as they say you should vote with your conscience whether it makes a difference or not.

Just make sure you vote.

By Dark Politricks

© 2017 Dark Politricks

Please write to your MP about the unfair Clare’s Law which splits our justice system into two!

December 3, 2013

Please write to your MP about the unfair Clare’s Law which splits our justice system into two!

By Dark Politricks

If you read my latest article you will know I was a bit annoyed about the new Clare’s Law which was being brought into the UK nationwide.

This law would let women ask the local Police for any criminal history about their new partner. The new law would not apply to men who make up 40% of all domestic abuse victims.

The disturbing thing about this law is that it divides our judicial system into a sexist one where one law exists for men and another for women.

Also the police are able to give out “suspicions” and “allegations” to the inquisitive woman which might not be truthful or correct.

How many vindictive women are out there which would claim that their ex partner beat or abused them because they are upset or jealous that they split up?

I don’t know, but I do know that we have had recent court cases where a women has been prosecuted and jailed for making false claims of rape against men. The most recent one being the case of Natasha Foster who was jailed for 3 years for making up a claim of rape against an ex boyfriend.

Therefore if you think this new law couldn’t in any way affect you then think again.

Not only could your current partner lie and make a false claim of abuse but just by alleging an offence took place, even if it didn’t result in a court case, it could still be treated as an “allegation” serious enough to be given out to future partners.

Also old crimes that should be “spent” after a period of time under the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act will still be eligible for the Police to give out to future partners even if the crime happened many years ago. This goes against the whole point of the 1974 law as the crime is not even supposed to be on your record any more.

This turns the whole concept of our criminal justice act on its head. Supposedly, under this law, once you have spent your crime you are “rehabilitated” and therefore allowed to not mention it on job application forms of other legal documents that ask about criminal convictions. This new Clare’s Law, like the Criminal Records Bureau checks before it, have totally negated the nature of the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and could throw any chance of rehabilitation away for ex-offenders.

For example if you had a fight with a man 20 years ago this should supposedly be “spent” and no longer on your record. You should be able to apply to jobs and not even mention the event.

However under Clare’s Law the police could give this information out if they felt it was “relevant”. This in itself is leaving a very important matter up to a low-level Police officer rather than a Judge or Magistrate.

Here is what is “supposed” to happen when you have committed a crime and then “spend” it by passing a specified length of time which is dependant on the seriousness and nature of the offence.

I quote directly from the Home Offices own page on the law:

Subject to subsection (2) below, where an individual has been convicted, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, of any offence or offences, and the following conditions are satisfied, that is to say—

(a)he did not have imposed on him in respect of that conviction a sentence which is excluded from rehabilitation under this Act; and

(b)he has not had imposed on him in respect of a subsequent conviction during the rehabilitation period applicable to the first-mentioned conviction in accordance with section 6 below a sentence which is excluded from rehabilitation under this Act;

then, after the end of the rehabilitation period so applicable (including, where appropriate, any extension under section 6(4) below of the period originally applicable to the first-mentioned conviction) or, where that rehabilitation period ended before the commencement of this Act, after the commencement of this Act, that individual shall for the purposes of this Act be treated as a rehabilitated person in respect of the first-mentioned conviction and that conviction shall for those purposes be treated as spent.

Read the full law here: The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

Therefore after my earlier rant I wrote to my local MP about this matter and I got a response back telling me that he will raise the matter with the Home Secretary.

Here is the letter I received:

Dear Mr ….

Thank you for your email in which you pose some interesting questions which I shall submit to the Home secretary.  I shall let you know when I have a reply.

Best wishes

Sir Gerald Howarth MP
Member of Parliament for Aldershot
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

Therefore I suggest anyone else, male or female, who is concerned about our whole criminal justice system being split into two – one for men and another for women, complain to their MP, or directly to the Home Secretary ASAP.

You can find your local MP and contact them directly online here > http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/

Here is the letter I sent to my own MP. If you cannot think of your own version feel free to copy it and change wording as you see fit.

Dear [YOUR MP’s NAME],

Can I enquire about the introduction of the new “Clare’s law” which is apparently going to be rolled out across the country.

From the news reports it seems that this law is only going to apply to women even though a reported 40% of victims of domestic violence are now men.

I quote directly from a report made from Home Office statistics which was reported in the Observer > http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

“About two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men, contradicting the widespread impression that it is almost always women who are left battered and bruised, a new report claims.

Men assaulted by their partners are often ignored by police, see their attacker go free and have far fewer refuges to flee to than women, says a study by the men’s rights campaign group Parity.

The charity’s analysis of statistics on domestic violence shows the number of men attacked by wives or girlfriends is much higher than thought. Its report, Domestic Violence: The Male Perspective, states:

“Domestic violence is often seen as a female victim/male perpetrator problem, but the evidence demonstrates that this is a false picture.”

Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in
2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.”

Therefore can I ask you the following questions:

-Will men be able to find out if potential new female partners are violent and in this age of supposed equality surely any law should be equally applicable to men and women?

-What actual information will be given out to women enquiring about their partner?

-How does this new law effect the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 in which convictions are supposedly “spent” after a number of years. For example if I was arrested and convicted for a street fight against another man when I was 18 will that information be given out?

-What about if a women had made a false claim of rape against me which led to no charge or conviction? From the reporting it seems that even “accusations” true or not can be given out. How would that effect men who have been falsely accused of rape or other violent crimes.

-How are you going to handle “deliberate” misleading reports of domestic abuse by former partners who are upset that their relationships have broken up. I can see no better way for an annoyed ex to get back at me than claim to the Police that I hit or abused her and therefore ensure any future partner I might have could be told about it. It could potentially ruin relationships and allow manipulative women to purposefully ruin lives.

Also I would like to state that in a country where we are all supposedly innocent until found guilty the only way guilt is proven is by a conviction in a court of law.

Therefore giving out “accusations” and “rumours” goes against a supposed long standing maxim of our country that all are equal under the law until proven guilty.

Can you please ask the Home Secretary how she can claim we live under the rule of law when it is not applied equally to all?

Surely in this day and age of female equality when websites exist that let women brag about beating men up >
http://www.likelike.com/pollcommentary/2408 we should all be equal under the law, rather than having two sets of laws dependant on the sex you are born as.

Yours sincerely,

[YOUR NAME]

Hopefully if enough of us can get questions raised in Parliament or MP’s actually thinking about the consequences of their new laws they may think again.

I have no problem with sensible measures to protect women from horrible domestic abuse.

However any law in a democratically country should be equally applied and it should not negate previous laws in doing so.

Please help our politicians understand this.

 

View the original article on Clare’s Law an unfair law to be rolled out across the country here on the main site www.darkpolitricks.com

Read the The response from my MP to Clare’s Law on my main site: http://www.darkpolitricks.com

Great news as the UK grows a pair and prevents Gary McKinnon from being sent to the USA

October 17, 2012

Gary McKinnon not being sent to the USA for trial over alien hacking scandal

By Dark Politricks

We heard great news yesterday as the UK suddenly grew a pair of balls and stood up to America for once – almost an unheard of event in this day and age.

What was it that caused the government to finally grow a pair?

Well the Home Secretary Theresa May decided to keep Daily Mail readers and the majority of the UK public happy by not sending Gary McKinnon to the USA.

They had always promised pre-election to do this and re-balance the unfair extradition treaty between our two countries but no-one really believed them until yesterday.

This was an extradition order in which he was facing up to 60 years in prison for hacking insecure US military computer systems on his hunt for an alien cover up. He was a loner with a UFO fix that needed scratching and he did all of his hacking with easily obtainable tools and open to attack US military computers.

However compared to the Goldman Sachs banksters who have hooked their  super computers into the Wall Street stock exchange so that they can manipulate the DOW Jones, front run trades and actually steal billions from pension funds and personal investors he was incomparable.

If anyone needs locking up for 60 years it is these “hackers” who have been given a free run by both the Bush and Obama governments to steal from the public without risk of fine or punishment.

As the BBC News site said:

British computer hacker Gary McKinnon will not be extradited to the US, Home Secretary Theresa May has announced.

Mr McKinnon, 46, who admits accessing US government computers but claims he was looking for evidence of UFOs, has been fighting extradition since 2002.

The home secretary said there was no doubt Mr McKinnon was “seriously ill” and the extradition warrant against him should be withdrawn.

Mrs May said the sole issue she had to consider was his human rights.

She said it was now for the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starmer QC, to decide whether he should face trial in the UK.

Mr McKinnon, who has been diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome, faced 60 years in jail if convicted in the US.

This is great new for Gary who has always admitted the charge and wanted to face justice where the crime took place. Here in the UK  not in some US court where he would have surely ended up in an orange jumpsuit in a federal prison somewhere.

A person like Gary would not have lasted long in a hardcore US Federal prison where he would have faced beatings, rape and even death due to his gentle nature. All for his crime of “hunting for aliens” on insecure US military computers.

Therefore the Human Rights Act, which the Daily Mail and Tories attack so often, was used legitimately to protect a UK citizen who was vulnerable to suicide from a horrible fate in a US prison. I just hope these right wingers will now see how the Human Rights Act can benefit us all – not just the terrorists and scroungers that are constantly used as straw men to attack it for protecting their human rights.

We have just extradited a number of terrorist suspects to America including hook handed Abu Hamza who is charged with setting up a terrorist training base in America and attacks in Yemen.

These people are real terrorists not people suffering from autism like Gary McKinnon who just wanted to look for signs of an alien cover-up.

In reality Gary McKinnon did the US a favour as despite what the US claim, that he committed the most serious hacking attack ever faced by the USA. In reality all he did was reveal that multiple US computers were open to the easiest of hack attempts.

He wasn’t some brilliant computer genius who hacked his way pass numerous hyper secure firewalls using viruses and trojans but instead he used a basic port scanning tool to find open computers within various US military installations that “forgot” to use secure administrator passwords.

If he and anyone else could do this with free downloadable tools from the Internet then China and Russia surely would have already got much further than him and probably already have along with many other countries.

These computers should have had been super secure but as Gary has said in his interviews they were totally vulnerable to even the most untrained hacker and he was able to access numerous computers in his hunt for signs of an alien cover up and claims to have succeeded in his task.

If you watch the interview below you will actually see that Gary McKinnon claims to have found proof of alien spaceships just as he was being caught.

He also claims that there is a whole department in NASA that “cleans” photos that contain any signs of alien spacecraft or other objects before sending them off to universities and other scientists for use in the public domain.

It is clear from other hacking cases that the country who has been hacked is willing to take on the expertise of the hacker in lieu of punishment and then use their skills for their own nefarious activities e.g Stuxnet or the new Flame virus – both viruses that use multiple zero day exploits to work their way round the middle east destabilising Iranian nuclear plants.

However because Gary took advantage of such an easy method to gain access to these US computer systems there was little benefit in offering him such a choice as he wasn’t a “super hacker”. Instead they have been chasing him for a decade for the misdeed of revealing how vulnerable their computer systems were to attack and his life has been made a misery because of the threat of spending the rest of his days in a US prison.

In reality the US government should be thanking Gary for helping to shore up their security but instead they have chased and harassed a man with Aspergers syndrome for the best years of his life.

I only hope this is the end of the matter and Gary McKinnon can get on with his life in peace without ending up in some sort of “accident” such as a double shot to the head suicide.

Here is Gary McKinnon’s interview about what he saw and how he accessed the US computers with a basic port scanner tool.

Within the interview Gary talks about:

  • Why the American government want him so much and how the Labour government seemed to capitulated without a fight.
  • How he was a clueless hacker who didn’t cover his tracks whilst investigating US computer systems.
  • How he gained access to high grade military and NASA computer system through unsecured administrator accounts without passwords.
  • How the US government claims that he caused $5,000 of damage to every computer he accessed which coincidentally is the minimum amount required by US law to be charged with the crimes he has been.
  • Why he believes that the US government has access to alien technology such as free energy which should be distributed to the people of the world.

Any Tory Bill of Rights would be worse than the current Human Rights Act

October 7, 2011

By Dark Politricks

The Tory conference has come to an end and once again the Tories (supposedly, a new enlightened and more liberal bunch) were once again attacking the Human Rights Act, claiming it was being abused, misused and that we should get rid of it as soon as possible.

At the Tory conference we had Theresa May reel out a list of reasons why we should abolish the Human Rights Act including a minority of cases in which she felt the act had been abused or misinterpreted by Judges. This included the case of a Bolivian born criminal who couldn’t be deported because he had a cat and the emotional trauma caused by the loss of the pet would breach Article 8 of the HRA (the right to family life).

Forgetting that this “fact” was total baloney the right wing media jumped all over it as a sign of “political correctness gone mad” and we heard all the usual jibber jabber that people who only obtain news from places that re-enforce their pre-determined views like to spout once they think they know something even when it’s not true.

The Tories repeatedly like to claim that what Britain needs is to leave the Human Rights Act and create it’s own Bill of Rights so that we can decide for ourselves how harshly to punish our criminals without those interfering Europeans telling us what to do.

Forgetting the fact that it would be almost impossible to remove ourselves from the European Convention of Human Rights without first leaving the EU, which depending on the Sovereign Debt crisis might happen sooner than we think. I cannot see the current government coalition even attempting to extract itself from a central plank of EU law whilst the Lib Dem’s are still the “tail wagging the dog” as many Tories like to think.

We seem to forget that the Human Rights Act is not some alien concept forced upon by us by those conniving foreigners as many Daily Mail readers seem to think but rather it was a concept devised by English Lawyers under consecutive Conservative governments and therefore it’s a totally English concept that we should be proud of.

Yes you heard that right. We devised the European Convention on Human Rights in the 1950’s to give to our war torn fellow European countries that had been ruled by dictators and illiberal regimes a set of rules, common standards and a list of basic human rights that all of us could abide by.

We don’t have a Bill of Rights that protects our basic freedoms and liberties and whilst I agree that we should have such a legally binding document. I have a sneeking feeling that any Bill of Rights that came into being would only be a watered down version that would protect nothing of value apart from enshrining the right of Parliament to do whatever the fuck it wants.

We certainly don’t want to end up in the same situation that the USA is now facing where their once great experiment in liberty and freedom has become a joke. What is the point of a Constitution and Bill of Rights when it can be ignored and circumvented whenever the rich and powerful want to do something it prohibits.

The US Bill of Rights is a beautiful document that should bind every politician to the most fundamental law of the land and it would be great to replace our ancient Bill of Rights that does nothing but limit the powers of the crown with a similar document that enshrines the supremacy of the people over government but I doubt that will ever happen.

The Tories are only dangling the carrot of our own Bill of Rights as a way to gather support for any eventual change to the Human Rights Act but until we see a draft document I won’t even attempt to hold my breath.

Politicians are like addicts. They accumulate power in the same way junkies collect diseases and we should always be wary of any politician who wants to remove any form of legal protection that we currently enjoy.

If the last Labour government taught us anything it was that our liberties are only a vote away from abolishment and our MP’s hold the right of protest, the right to assemble and the right to speak your mind in as much contempt as some hold for the current Human Rights Act.

Therefore we should be very careful when discussing any measure that might end up leaving us with less rights than we currently enjoy and that aint many!

The Human Rights Act might not be perfect and people will always play the system if the system allows for it but we shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater and the Human Rights Act is one of the few pieces of legislation that exists to protect us “commoners” and “subjects of the crown” from the excesses of government.

We should applaud not deride this fact and until something is created that is stronger and better in terms of protecting our precious few civil liberties we should be glad that the Human Rights Act exists.