Should the Human Rights Act be replaced with a New Bill of Rights?

Speaker(s): Professor Conor Gearty, Professor Francesca Klug, Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky
Recorded on 22 November 2012 in Sheikh Zayed Theatre, New Academic Building.
A debate on the value of the Human Rights Act against a British Bill of Rights.
Conor Gearty is professor of law at LSE.
Francesca Klug is a professorial research fellow at LSE and director of the Human Rights Futures Project.
Michael Pinto-Duschinsky is a senior consultant on constitutional affairs at Policy Exchange and was formerly a member of the UK commission on a bill of rights.

[@TheTomp224]

Professor Gearty spoke some harsh truths that England needs to hear

[@TheGingerBreadMoth]

that woman with the blue jacket and glasses was awsome

[@sustone6772]

I read bible and watch this because I am in a deep trouble ,my neighbours with my management company who have used many ways to doggy the account and none of England government want to do anything about it ,even I willing to donate money to children hospital as long as the justice can be done ,how many people believe in GOD in London Great Britain GOD teach people to be good and fair but why those people who have such privilege job and in power could not only allow and also encourage this kind of criminal be carrying on which has caused a pensioner had serious heart attacked and 2 stroked ,please teach me to be wise to deal with give £ 7,000 every year to those doggy people,this is a society like old day,rich only protects rich, thats why people chose briexit

[@TheGingerBreadMoth]

as you would all say it - absolutley propostorous!

[@gatekeeper9161]

Article 17 Prohibition of abuse of rights No State, group or person has any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth within The Human Rights Act. Simply by talking about conspiring to or attempting to change our rights is unlawful under Article 17.

[@TheAwesomeTolga198]

It doesn't matter though, because the Courts can't disapply primary legislation even if it is incompatible with the HRA 1998.

[@MrDAV991]

wy are they hiding the english bill of rites 1688

[@fredterv4401]

@@MrDAV991 The Bill of Rights 1688 is about the Rights of Parliament, not about the Rights of the People (except a few random bits about the right of Protestants to have militias etc.)

[@MrDAV991]

@@fredterv4401 so they will like you to believe people put government there they have no more rites than anyone else gov don't give rites and they can't take them away

[@fredterv4401]

@@MrDAV991 That is precisely how our government works though, they give rights and take them away and we get to vote them in/kick them out (the last bit was added later). That is our Constitution, that is the Bill of Rights 1688.

[@Paul_C]

It doesn't matter for the EU. However it will be devastating for the British people.

[@WB-14]

No, it's a way to whittle your rights away

[@alienbeingtakemetoyourdeal5455]

Watched 2min...2min won't ever get back

[@screengodess1]

1,6000 SUSPECTS IN SEX ABUSE CASE IN ROTHERHAM. Tues- 07-2016 the investigations into the Rotherham children sex exploitation now involves 1,600 Pakistani suspects.the National crime agency said it had contacted 400 hundred white English child victims since it was brought in after a report in 2014 detailed how 1,400 children had been raped and drugged by men of Pakistani origin over a 10 year period largely in the South yorkshire area the NCA added that the 400 are only about 5 percent of total possible victims

[@fionntracey835]

Where’s your proof?

[@MrDAV991]

what's wrong with the english bill of rites 1688 the constitution is the solution

[@Paul_C]

Make that 'rights'. However, you actually could be right... rite is actually word closely linked to faith. Please buy a thesaurus, it would help you...

[@rrstows3522]

Yes have no rights at all. No worries then

[@thebirdguardien.14]

the answer is no.