Michael Scott
@barleyman5.bsky.social
320 followers 190 following 3.5K posts
Trump is a twat
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
barleyman5.bsky.social
And other methods of immigration are also under the microscope
barleyman5.bsky.social
Are you sure? They can be "governed" indirectly.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Have a read back. It was a clear slight of hand talking about how many cases ended up being referred to the ECHR, as if those are the only cases affected.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Ah, now we have the accusation of racism.
No I do not think that. It is interesting, however, that you tried to use a slight of hand in your previous argument. I find that quite disappointing.
barleyman5.bsky.social
I don't confess to understand law fully and you may well be correct. Let's leave NI out of the discussion for the moment since it isn't the main point people are complaining about. "What rights would you be happy to lose?" Seems to be the main line of attack here for the more liberal folk.
barleyman5.bsky.social
I'm not convinced by that. And as I suggested NI could stay in ECHR if it so wished. Eire would see far more immigration then.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Are immigration decisions in the UK not based on laws dictated by ECHR though? Cases do not have to go all the way to the ECHR to be affected
barleyman5.bsky.social
I'm not sure. I'm sure the Irish would be even more upset about immigration rates though.
barleyman5.bsky.social
They have other Brexit exemptions
barleyman5.bsky.social
Then it might not apply there. The Irish are getting more and more upset about immigration rates these days though as well.
barleyman5.bsky.social
My response to that would be, as little as possible whilst allowing more control over immigration rates and returning people who have entered the UK by unofficial channels back to the country they came from.
I think that's a valid response.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Why the question mark response?
barleyman5.bsky.social
Well that's an assumption. "Oh it won't be, it will be terrible". It's not a great argument.
Instead why not talk about how it could be achieved effectively?
barleyman5.bsky.social
It depends what we adopt to replace the ECHR. I mean, it's only specific areas people are finding problematic.
barleyman5.bsky.social
40s UK is very different to today. Today's world is very different to today. A lot of the push for change is due to the high rates of immigration we are seeing nowadays. The ECHR is seen as something which is restricting adequate control of immigration rates.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Does altering mean giving up?
And let's face it, 95% of people do not understand the ins and outs of it fully. They rely on people who do to explain it, and there will be some of those people in favour of changing it and others opposed. So very difficult to have proper debate involving everyone.
barleyman5.bsky.social
It's been altered a great deal since the days of Churchill, as you've already pointed out. Has it not?
barleyman5.bsky.social
Or it could be replaced by a UK version.
Reposted by Michael Scott
staylorish.bsky.social
Another mauling for John Swinney on his ludicrous currency proposals. This time, all he can do is accuse Martin Geissler of being overly gloomy, and suggest that Scotland’s renewables will somehow come to the rescue. Desperate and embarrassing stuff.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Why do you punch prostates?
barleyman5.bsky.social
I just let it pop in the microwave.
barleyman5.bsky.social
Do they need to report on it? It's obvious just watching and listening to him.