Post subject: Do we have a thread for British topics?
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:44 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am Posts: 7189 Location: CA
Does Britain have something akin to the ACLU? If so, I would think they'd be all over this. A Bill of Rights seems like it'd be handy when discussing such things:
New rules could make it easier for police to stop and search suspects Prime Minister Gordon Brown is planning to give police the power to stop and search people without giving a reason, sources have told the BBC. It comes as Tory leader David Cameron urged greater use of stop and search to combat gun and knife crime.
The two leaders clashed earlier in the Commons with Mr Cameron urging Mr Brown to scrap forms officers must fill in when they stop someone.
Mr Brown said the Flanagan Report on the issue will be published next week.
Labour has been locked in a war of words with the Conservatives over stop and search, with the two parties promoting apparently similar policies.
In the Commons, Mr Cameron challenged Mr Brown to scrap the "stop and account" forms officers must fill in when they stop someone, which he said were a "colossal waste of police time".
Young black and British Asian kids...are being stabbed and shot and the rules are getting in the way of protecting them
David Cameron Conservative leader
How much red tape is there?
Mr Brown told him to wait for the publication of the Flanagan report next Monday, adding: "We are taking the action that is necessary and you should be supporting us."
In an interim report published last year, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, the chief inspector of constabulary in England and Wales, said police were bogged down in red tape and afraid to use their own judgement.
In a separate move, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is expected to announce in the next few days that more police officers will be given the power to search people without giving a reason, the BBC understands.
Police 'racism'
The powers - which have been trialled in four pilot areas - will be limited to a 24 hour period within specific area where there is reason to believe serious crime is being committed.
Mr Cameron told the BBC he would back such a move - and he dismissed claims that it would harm community relations.
Mr Cameron said the rules had been brought in to protect black and Asian communities from racist police officers but were now harming the communities they were meant to help.
It's one thing to cut down on bureaucracy - quite another to use powers as a blunt instrument which alienates more young people than it protects
Shami Chakrabarti Liberty
Under Tory proposals, police sergeants would be able to authorise the use of stop and search of pedestrians and vehicles in a specific area for up to six hours - or 48 hours if permission is granted by a senior officer.
Mr Cameron said concern about a return to "sus" laws - one of the factors behind inner city riots in the early 1980s - were misplaced and the police were no longer racist.
"We need to make sure the police behave properly but I think there is a big change in policing since the 1980s and they understand concerns about racism, concerns about targeting particular groups," Mr Cameron told BBC News.
He said black and Asian communities would have to accept more stop and search but that it was necessary to combat the growth of violent crime in those communities.
"It may mean more stopping and searching - it should mean more stopping and searching - but I think that has to happen," added Mr Cameron.
Government figures suggest black people are six times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people, while Asians are almost twice as likely.
Laws 'must go'
Speaking earlier, in an interview with The Sun, Mr Cameron said: "Stop and search rules were put in place to protect young black and Asian British kids.
"Now it's the young black and British Asian kids that are being stabbed and shot and the rules are getting in the way of protecting them."
He said a Conservative government would need to work out whether the rules on "reasonable suspicion" should be scrapped altogether or replaced with the "say-so of an inspector or sergeant or lower".
"But those current laws, be in no doubt, have to go."
He added: "This is not about race. It's about stopping crime and reducing the number of victims of crime.
"The statistics are undeniable and it's clear by carrying out more stop and searches it is the black and Asian communities who will benefit most."
Director of human rights group Liberty, Shami Chakrabarti, said: "We look forward to Sir Ronnie's detailed report and less political bluster on stop and search.
"It's one thing to cut down on bureaucracy - quite another to use powers as a blunt instrument which alienates more young people than it protects."
Lib Dem Home Affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said he backed more intelligence-led stop and search but would resist Tory and Labour efforts to scrap data gathering.
"The police need good relations with all our communities. Stop and search is currently used six times as much with ethnic minorities.
"That is why records must be kept and reviewed, and why we will resist any Tory or Labour attempts to remove these safeguards."
Davis resignation: Unlikely hero of liberal Britain shocks the political establishment
By Andrew Grice Friday, 13 June 2008 David Davis became an unlikely hero of liberal Britain yesterday by sacrificing his political career to launch a one-man crusade against the Government's plan for suspected terrorists to be detained for 42 days without charge.
The former SAS reservist, who supports the death penalty for premeditated murder, shook Britain's political establishment to its roots by announcing he would stand down as an MP to fight a by-election to stop the "slow strangulation of fundamental British freedoms".
The former shadow home secretary's bombshell left David Cameron and many Tory colleagues seething. But outside the Westminster village, the reaction was very different. Mr Davis's Commons office was flooded with telephone calls and emails from members of the public praising him for putting his principles before his career.
While Tory MPs queued up to denounce Mr Davis as "barmy" and "mad", the reaction of the party's grassroots was more favourable. A poll of 1,200 Tory members by the ConservativeHome website showed that 65 per cent of them were "inspired" by his decision. Only 24 per cent share Mr Cameron's anxiety that the Tories need to be careful not to get on the wrong side of public opinion on 42-day detention, while 72 per cent disagreed. Some 70 per cent of Tory members want Mr Davis to be reinstated as shadow home secretary if, as expected, he wins a by-election that neither Labour nor the Liberal Democrats will contest.
The findings pose a headache for Mr Cameron, who tried but failed to talk Mr Davis out of his move after MPs voted narrowly to support 42 days' detention on Wednesday. The Tory leader has no intention of restoring Mr Davis to his former post. Cameron aides made clear last night that he could not leave such an important position on hold when issues such as knife crime had to be addressed. They said the appointment of Dominic Grieve, the new shadow Home Secretary, was a permanent one.
Ironically, after 21 years in Parliament, the prospect of a seat in the Cabinet finally beckoned for Mr Davis, with the Tories enjoying a commanding lead in the polls. Some will find it bizarre that he has almost certainly given it up even though, as home secretary, he would have had enjoyed much more power to defend civil liberties than he would as a mere backbencher.
Mr Davis knows that. He thinks it is more important to make a stand now; that 42-day detention is such an infringement of our liberties dating back to Magna Carta that his ambitions must take second place. It may sound pious in the Westminster village but it may play well in the real world, where people have switched off from political parties – the MPs and MEPs who fiddle their expenses and do grubby backroom deals, as Mr Brown did to squeak through 42-day detention with the votes of nine Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) MPs who are normally natural bedfellows of the Tories.
It was the manner of Mr Brown's hollow victory that pushed Mr Davis over the edge. He was spitting blood that the Prime Minister had resorted to offering "30 pieces of silver" to the DUP to overturn civil rights enjoyed in Britain for 800 years.
The political cross-dressing has been extended by Mr Davis's announcement. The Ramadhan Foundation, a Muslim youth group, said: "His principled defence of civil liberties and the rule of law is an inspiration for the nation. We look forward to a debate based on the issues and evidence and not jumped-up proposals for political benefits."
Mr Davis is already planning his campaign for an "anti-Big Brother by-election" on 10 July. He wants to start a debate on aspects of Britain's "surveillance society", including what he regards as "the most intrusive identity card system in the world" and the scale of the DNA database.
Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, backed Mr Davis. "I think it is right from time to time to signal as a party leader that we are capable of setting aside the pursuit of narrow party-political advantage in the name of that wider principle," he said.
"The name of my constituency is Haltemprice and Howden – [which] is derived from a medieval proverb meaning noble endeavour. Until yesterday I took a view that what we did in the House of Commons – representing our constituents was a noble endeavour because for centuries ... we defended the freedom of people. Well, we did, up until yesterday.
"This Sunday is the anniversary of Magna Carta, a document that guarantees the fundamental element of British freedom, habeas corpus. The right not to be imprisoned by the state without charge or reason.
But yesterday this house allowed the state to lock up potentially innocent citizens for up to six weeks without charge. The Counter-Terrorism Bill will, in all probability, be rejected by the House of Lords very firmly. After all, what should they be there for, if not to protect Magna Carta?
"But because this is defined as political, not security, the Government will be tempted to use the Parliament Act to overrule the Lords.
"It has no democratic mandate to do this since 42 days was not in its manifesto. Its legal basis is uncertain ... but, purely for political reasons, this Government is going to do that. Because the generic security argument relied on will never go away – technology, development complexity, and so on – we'll next see 56 days, 70 days, then 90 days.
But in truth perhaps 42 days is the one most salient example of the insidious, surreptitious and relentless erosion of fundamental British freedom.
"And we will have shortly the most intrusive identity card system in the world. A CCTV camera for every 14 citizens, a DNA database bigger than any dictatorship has, with thousands of innocent children and millions of innocent citizens on it.
"We have witnessed an assault on jury trials, a bolt against bad law and its arbitrary use by the state. And short cuts with our justice system, which will make our system neither firm nor fair and a creation of a database state opening up our private lives to the prying eyes of official snoopers and exposing our personal data to careless civil servants and criminal hackers. The state has security powers to clamp down on peaceful protest and so-called hate laws to stifle legitimate debate, whilst those who incite violence get off scot-free. This cannot go on... and for that reason today I feel it is incumbent on me to take a stand.
"I will be resigning my membership of this House and I intend to force a by-election... I will fight it, I will argue this by-election against the slow strangulation of fundamental British freedoms by this Government.
"Now, that may mean I have made my last speech to the House ... But at least my electorate and the nation ... would have had the opportunity to debate and consider one of the most fundamental issues of our day... And if they do send me back here, it will be with a single message – that the monstrosity of a law that we passed yesterday will not stand."
_________________ Oh, the flowers of indulgence and the weeds of yesteryear, Like criminals, they have choked the breath of conscience and good cheer. The sun beat down upon the steps of time to light the way To ease the pain of idleness and the memory of decay.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
