Teresa May & The Convention Of Human Rights

[Khandro]

She now says, despite having said the opposite earlier, that she wants to remain with the people who have prevented her from deporting so many terrorists.
Wasn't removal from their jurisdiction, part of the reason for many voting for Brexit?


http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/685158/Theresa-May-ditches-plans-Britain-out-European-Convention-Human-Rights-Tory

[Svejk]

Yes, gromit, looking at her supporters, that would seem to be the idea. But they must know, that would gift millions of votes to UKIP at the next election.

[Gromit]

The problem with UKIP voters is that they are too scattered.
4 million votes for 1 MP.

The Tories could afford to lose 20 seats, if UKIP damaged Labour by the same or more.

[mikey4444]

Metaphysicalus.....(09:09)....lol !

I think Gove's little brother was on "University Challenge" a couple of months ago. Chap named Clegg...he was a right know-all.

https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/clegg-2.png

[Svejk]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIMQ1FuWoAAwv-S.jpg

[Old_Geezer]

I can't see the public accepting too much, Gromit. I can understand, as an example, an agreement to, say, default any scientist on an official multinational project to get a visa/green card/whatever (apart from any special case exceptions whom we decide are unwelcome). That'd stop a lot of the moaning from the science community about the EU projects not getting allocated because those in charge are playing silly beggars. But as a general rule, the borders HAVE to be under control of the nation. No excuses.

[Gromit]

OG,
An amendment to the EU agreement which says
[i]members agree to Free movement between member states. Countries with a population density over 250/Km2, can set a quota of migrants they want to accept. [i]

That would let us bar anyone we want, but would not apply to everyone. Is Belgium and Netherlands could cut migrants, if we wanted, but the rest couldn't.

[Old_Geezer]

I'm unsure that the population density is a good measure, as it implies that if a country manages to get their population down they lose control once more. I can see it is useful to compare countries, and show some have more room than others in which to place incomers, but that's about it.

Also what is the definition of a quota ? It should describe a limit, but who dictates how that is applied ? Can a nation say they will take no more than 100, and end up after vetting each application allowing only 5 in, since that was not over the limit and so within quota ? Or does the EU demand that since the quota was 100 they will force the nation to take 100 whether the nation likes it or not ? Which, of course, is unacceptable.

I suspect it would be read not as a limit, as it should, but as an obligation. That control of one's own borders would be more or less an illusion for all practical purposes. But anyone who agreed to such a scheme would almost certainly claim to have achieved something, but would only fool themselves, and probably not even themselves.