Stuart Weir (Cambridge, Democratic Audit): We should welcome Gordon Brown's political predicament, for if he is regain the political high ground that he assumed on becoming Prime Minister, he now clearly needs to reassure liberal Britain that our liberties are safe in his hands. The government's plans for a 'British' Bill of Rights have caused concern because it was possible that here was another political issue on which there would be cross-dressing with Cameron's Tories, on a measure that would distinguish between 'citizens' and others in the protection of civil and political rights in the UK.
The government's early acknowledgement in the Governance of Britain that the Human Rights Act positively ‘provides a contemporary set of values to which all (my emphasis) our communities can subscribe' was reassuring and subsequently ministers have built on this positive approach by endorsing the protections already enshrined in the Human Rights Act. Ministers have described this as ‘Human Rights Act plus' - in other words, this should mean that none of the current protections that were ‘brought home' by the Human Rights Act would be weakened or taken away. The government ought now to begin the consultations necessary to forge a Bill of Rights that commands widespread public support by establishing three basic guarantees: all the human rights from the European Convention currently given force in the Human Rights Act will be included in any new Bill of Rights; as now, all people in the UK - regardless of citizenship or immigration status - will enjoy equal protection of these rights; and there will be no weakening - for example via procedural changes such as interpretive clauses, judicial guidance etc. - of the mechanisms in the Human Rights Act which protect these rights.
It is predictable that David Cameron will assault the absolute prohibition on torture that has caused great disquiet among leading members in the two major parties as a danger to public safety and national security in the face of terrorism. In fact, as human rights organisations all make clear, the prohibition is not only the mark of a civilised society, it serves to protect all people from inhuman and degrading treatment, be they terrorist 'suspects', older people in residential care; disabled people; children in care and women fleeing domestic violence. Paradoxically, however, as David Davies has reminded us, the Conservatives remain opposed both to the government's plans to introduce ID cards and also against the renewed government drive towards extending the period on which people may be held without charge in custody beyond the current 28 days. There is still no evidence that longer terms of detention are necessary.
Two further thoughts. One: Gordon Brown has made it clear that the new Bill of Rights will exclude the social, economic and cultural rights that could make civil and political rights meaningful for all people in this country. As successive polls for the Rowntree Reform Trust have shown, most people believe that important social and economic rights ought to be in a Bill of Rights, and they are right. Secondly, the government will have to raise the standards of its consultative processes if they are to match the significance of the debate which should now take place. The consultative processes that have taken place recently have been pretty superficial and shabby so far, especially that over nuclear energy. It is vital that discussion about a Bill of Rights is as inclusive as possible and encompasses all sections of society, including those who are not citizens.
