This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/dec/29/ministers-put-british-bill-of-rights-plan-on-hold-until-after-brexit

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Ministers put British bill of rights plan on hold until after Brexit Ministers put British bill of rights plan on hold until after Brexit
(about 2 hours later)
The government has accepted that it will have to put David Cameron’s plan to publish a British bill of rights on hold until after Brexit. Theresa May has accepted that she will have to put David Cameron’s plan to publish a British bill of rights on hold until after Brexit, and perhaps beyond the next general election.
But senior Conservatives are pressing Theresa May to go further, and fight the 2020 general election on a pledge to pull Britain out of the European convention on human rights. Cameron, May’s predecessor as prime minister, had planned to repeal the Human Rights Act, passed by the Labour government to enshrine the European Convention on Human Rights in domestic law, and replace it with a distinct and more limited British bill of rights.
Cameron, May’s predecessor as PM, had planned to repeal the Human Rights Act, passed by the last Labour government to enshrine the ECHR in domestic law, and replace it with a distinct, and more limited, British bill of rights. The justice secretary, Liz Truss, reaffirmed that policy in August; but No 10 has now accepted that it would create too much of a backlash among restive Conservative MPs. “We have got a lot on our plates at the moment,” said one Downing Street source.
The justice secretary, Liz Truss, has reaffirmed that policy since May arrived in Downing Street but No 10 has now accepted that it would create too much of a backlash among restive Conservative MPs as it battles with the challenge of Brexit. One critical backbencher said “she just wouldn’t get it through”, warning that a British bill of rights would be seen as a watering down of long-established guarantees.
However, some senior Conservatives would like to see May burnish her credentials as the champion of Brexit voters by pledging to pull Britain out of the ECHR, as she hinted she would like to do during the referendum campaign when she was home secretary. Some senior Conservatives would like May to take the more radical step of fighting the 2020 general election on a pledge to pull Britain out of the ECHR, as she hinted she would like to do during the referendum campaign when she was home secretary.
Leaving the ECHR would mean a British bill of rights would be enforced by the supreme court in London, rather than the European court of human rights in Strasbourg. During her leadership campaign, May said she would not pursue that objective immediately, because it would be “divisive”, and she would not win parliamentary support. But that would not prevent her from including it among future policy pledges in a manifesto. Leaving the ECHR would mean a British bill of rights would be enforced by the supreme court in London, rather than the European court of human rights in Strasbourg.
The ECHR, set up to safeguard basic human rights across the continent in the wake of the second world war, is separate from European Union membership, and May’s suggestion that Britain should leave, which was not government policy, sparked a furious row. During her Conservative leadership campaign, May said she would not pursue that objective immediately, because it would be “divisive”, and she would be unlikely to win parliamentary support. But that would not prevent her from including it among policy pledges in a future manifesto.
However, the plan would be unpopular among liberal Conservatives. Ryan Shorthouse, director of the Bright Blue thinktank, said: “The European court of human rights has strengthened human rights in more oppressive countries than Britain, such as the rights of illegitimate children, the right of fair trial and the rights of gay and lesbian people.
“Now, more than ever, we need Britain to be a global leader in defending international institutions and rules established after the second world war to maximise freedom, peace and prosperity across the world.”
The ECHR, set up to safeguard basic human rights across the continent after of the second world war, is separate from European Union membership. May’s suggestion that Britain should leave, which was not government policy at the time, sparked a furious row.
Michael Gove, then the justice secretary, who campaigned to leave the EU, said he would prefer Britain to remain a signatory to the convention, which is accepted by almost all European states.Michael Gove, then the justice secretary, who campaigned to leave the EU, said he would prefer Britain to remain a signatory to the convention, which is accepted by almost all European states.
Some ministers are pushing for the policy to be included in a future manifesto. But a Downing Street source said: “We have got quite a lot on our plates at the moment; we haven’t started writing that manifesto yet.” The ECHR was set up by 10 European states in 1949, with Britain as a founder member, and inspired by a proposal by the Conservative prime minister Winston Churchill for “a charter of human rights, guarded by freedom and sustained by law”. There are almost 50 signatories.
Had Cameron won the referendum, he had planned to begin repealing the Human Rights Act immediately – but the government has now accepted this is politically impossible, at least until after Brexit, and possibly until after the next general election, expected in 2020. But some Conservative MPs, including many Brexiters, believe the ECHR has overstepped its original purpose and interferes too much in domestic policy. Chris Grayling, now the transport secretary, is among those senior cabinet ministers who have criticised it.
The ECHR was set up by 10 European states in 1949, with Britain as a founder member, and inspired by a proposal by the Conservative prime minister Winston Churchill, for “a charter of human rights, guarded by freedom and sustained by law”.
But some Conservative MPs, including many Brexiteers, believe the ECHR has overstepped its original purpose, and interferes too much in domestic policy. Chris Grayling, now the transport secretary, is among those senior cabinet ministers who have criticised it in the past.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said: “We will set out our proposals for a bill of rights in due course. We will consult fully on our proposals.”A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said: “We will set out our proposals for a bill of rights in due course. We will consult fully on our proposals.”