SNP hopes to kill the "Snoopers' Charter" and save the Human Rights Act, as party takes third-party - Polidicks

[url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/11597756/SNP-planning-to-kill-off-Snoopers-Charter.html[/url] [quote]Scottish National Party MPs are already plotting to bring down flagship Conservative legislation by courting Tory backbenchers, The Telegraph can disclose. Nicola Sturgeon's Westminster MPs want to block the so-called Snoopers' Charter by courting "libertarian" Tories who have previously opposed Theresa May's terrorist surveillance plans. They also believe they can gather enough cross-party support to kill off Tory plans to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. ... SNP opposition would likely be matched by Labour and the Lib Dems, meaning only a few dozen Tory rebels would be enough to block the flagship manifesto pledges.[/quote] It's still sinking in how weird it's going to be having the SNP as Britain's third party, instead of the Lib Dems: [quote]The SNP has been granted official third-party status which brings a series of parliamentary perks that it can use to influence government policy, including an estimated £8 million in short money until 2020. The SNP will have an MP on every Commons committee and the right for Westminster leader Angus Robertson to ask two questions every Prime Minister’s Questions. The party also hopes to get the chairmanship of the Scottish Affairs Committee and possibly one other.[/quote]

Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough[/QUOTE] They want to use their own probably so they can snoop on us. The current EU bill doesn't allow them to do that. That or deport refugees/asylum seekers.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough[/QUOTE] because belgium blah blah inaudible euroskeptic bollocks

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough[/QUOTE] They are replacing the current bill of rights with a bill of rights where they decide what rights people are allowed i.e. the ones that don't get in the way of what they want which entirely defeats the point of a bill of rights.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough[/QUOTE] The more cynical believe it's so that the government can spy on everyone, when in actual fact it's more so that the UK can govern itself and use a wider range of powers without being overruled by the EU all the time. I was all for it until the Snooper's Charter appeared. I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want, but these two pieces of legislation go together a bit too well.

[QUOTE=Memobot;47714971]I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want[/QUOTE] that's a terrible view on privacy tbh

[QUOTE=Memobot;47714971]The more cynical believe it's so that the government can spy on everyone, when in actual fact it's more so that the UK can govern itself and use a wider range of powers without being overruled by the EU all the time. I was all for it until the Snooper's Charter appeared. I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want, but these two pieces of legislation go together a bit too well.[/QUOTE] The "Snooper's charter" wouldn't allow the Government to read your e-mails anyway, regardless of how little you have to hide.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights? Just curious as to why this is an area of contention, shouldnt the human rights act which I think is the basis of your rights, be more than good enough[/QUOTE] They want to make it harder for people to challenge breaches of the ECHR. Prior to the act becoming law someone would have had to go to Strasbourg if they if they thought the convention was being breached. The problem is there is a lot of misinformation (a lot of it deliberate) about the HRA leading to people to think it allows people to do all sorts of things or restricts the police from doing others. [url=https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/human-rights-act/human-rights-act-myths]This article explains some of the myths[/url] [editline]13th May 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Memobot;47714971]I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want[/QUOTE] I hate to do this because its a bit cliché, but sure you might not have anything to hide now but what happens in 5 years? 10 years? What happens if something you are happily doing now becomes illegal.

[QUOTE=Memobot;47714971]I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want[/QUOTE] That may be true for many people and in an ideal world I'd have the same attitude but that assumes you can trust everyone doing the "spying".

[QUOTE=Sableye;47712622]Why would you replace your "bill of rights" with a bill of rights?[/QUOTE] To replace a bill of rights enforced by a foreign country with one enforced at home. They don't like having their legal system answer to the EU.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47715643]To replace a bill of rights enforced by a foreign country with one enforced at home. They don't like having their legal system answer to the EU.[/QUOTE] Nono, it's a bill of rights enforced by [b]a collection of countries of which we are a member[/b], not another country. In fact it's not even that. It's a bill of rights [b]written and agreed upon[/b] by a collection of countries of which we are a member, but [b]enforced[/b] by British courts in Britain. The European Court of Human Rights is made up by one representative of each country that has signed it. It is negotiable. It is a totally separate body to the European Union. Even if it was the European Union, the EU isn't a foreign bloody country. Again, it is a collection of countries. It has a [b]democratically elected[/b] parliament of representatives. It has representatives from all countries within it. It is a very good piece of legislature. The rights detailed should be universal, it shouldn't matter where they're from or who wrote them. The very fact that we're withdrawing from it would suggest that our government doesn't believe those should be our rights, and they're using the wave of "euroskepticism" to justify it, and to actually get people on board with giving up some of their rights. It's appalling.

i think it's important to note that Brussels is in fact not secretly running the world, it just has to be headquartered somewhere central, which Belgium is. Between France and Germany, the UK and the Netherlands.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47715643]To replace a bill of rights enforced by a foreign country with one enforced at home. They don't like having their legal system answer to the EU.[/QUOTE] It has nothing to do with the EU. Even with the changes they are proposing the ECHR would still be enforced but to contest breaches people would have to travel to Strasbourg to challenge it. Prior to 1998 it was costing people on average £30k to do it. IMO it is an attempt to make it harder for people to challenge breaches of their rights. Its easier than leaving the ECHR.

[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;47715068]that's a terrible view on privacy tbh[/QUOTE] I'd just like to add to this with a brilliant quote from David Cameron [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32714802[/url] "For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone',"

[QUOTE=Memobot;47714971]The more cynical believe it's so that the government can spy on everyone, when in actual fact it's more so that the UK can govern itself and use a wider range of powers without being overruled by the EU all the time. I was all for it until the Snooper's Charter appeared. I've got nothing to hide, they can check me emails all they want, but these two pieces of legislation go together a bit too well.[/QUOTE] Having something to hide doesn't mean you shouldn't have the right to hide something. Why do you think we have doors and blinds and curtains and locks? Why do I close the door when I have a shit and why do I have a password on my phone?

[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;47715764]I'd just like to add to this with a brilliant quote from David Cameron [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32714802[/url] "For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone',"[/QUOTE] So now, if you have nothing to hide, you should still be scared anyway?

[QUOTE=Jamsponge;47716155]So now, if you have nothing to hide, you should still be scared anyway?[/QUOTE] If we obey, we will still be watched and monitored as if we are criminals is what I inferred from that.