4 ms·
> To British eyes, the whole process seemed bizarre. Rules had been drawn up in the clearest language that lawyers could devise. Yet, the moment they became inc
by objclxt 13y ago
> To British eyes, the whole process seemed bizarre. Rules had been drawn up in the clearest language that lawyers could devise. Yet, the moment they became inconvenient, they were ignored.
I find it very difficult to take this seriously coming from a Conservative MEP (I note the article makes no mention of his party affiliation), mainly because his party is proposing to do the exact same thing with the EU Convention on Human Rights.
To wit, the Conservative Party has upon numerous occasions frequently chosen to ignore their legal obligations, such as trying to deport people who have been charged with no crime on the basis of evidence gained under torture, denying some prisoners the right to vote, and retaining DNA of those arrested but not charged with a crime indefinitely. All of which are, according to the EU courts, illegal.
So when faced with these 'inconvenient' laws, the tories are proposing to ignore them, tear them up, and replace them with a 'British' bill of rights that largely duplicates what's already enshrined in EU law (a pointless exercise).
I also think it's rather disingenuous of the article to gloss over the fact that Daniel Hannan is not without his critics, and that his positions on issues such as immigration are not, in my view, particularly enlightened. I leave it to other commenters here to determine whether it's really 'racist garbage' (as someone else suggested), but whatever he's pining for something that simply doesn't and cannot exist anymore.
- pg 13y agoCan you give an example of a specific sentence or passage in the essay that you believe is false?
- objclxt 13y agoI quoted one. He suggests the British found it bizarre that Germany would ignore its treaty obligations to preserve Eurozone fiscal stability. I don't think that's true, especially since his own party is doing the exact same thing (ignoring EU treaty obligations), just with human rights instead of fiscal responsibility. If he found it so bizarre why would he do it himself? He is attempting to project his own Euroscepticism onto the UK as a whole by making blanket statements about what it means to be 'British'. I think these assumptions are false. Whilst there are vocal Eurosceptics in Britain they are not representative of the whole (if they were, his own party would have a majority, but they don't - they're in coalition).
- jond3k 13y agoSomething that is true of a group he is a part of isn't necessarily true of him. However, if he did want to change parties over this he'd have to drop out of mainstream politics entirely.