Devizes MP speaks out over vote rights (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

President of the ECtHR Jean-Paul Costa said:"The only country which denounced the Convention was Greece in 1967 at the time of the dictatorship of the colonels. I cannot imagine even if I can understand some irritation that the UK, which is a great country, could be in the same situation as the colonels in 1967".

"It is inconceivable that you could have a Bill of Rights that was not subject to judicial review," he says.

"Historically there is an example of such a thing - in the Soviet Union".

So, Claire Perry is advocating that the UK becomes like a Greek dictatorship or former USSR tatalitarian regime?

If the constituents of Devizes desire a democracy they should de-select Claire Perry at the first available opportunity.

Come on - talk about exaggeration.
No-one is advocating any such thing - and well you know it.
Once they have been convicted and sentenced to prison - why can't the right to vote be suspended - they've lost a number of their other rights through their own (criminal) actions ?
When you've stamped all over the rights of others - and ended up in prison - why should you be entitled to the right to vote?
Prisoners should be made to earn the right to live among human beings - and expect the rights they have.
Perhaps you're not sick and tired of seeing the victims afforded less support & understanding than the criminals that blight their lives - but I am.

Jailhouselawyer wrote:
President of the ECtHR Jean-Paul Costa said:"The only country which denounced the Convention was Greece in 1967 at the time of the dictatorship of the colonels. I cannot imagine even if I can understand some irritation that the UK, which is a great country, could be in the same situation as the colonels in 1967".

"It is inconceivable that you could have a Bill of Rights that was not subject to judicial review," he says.

"Historically there is an example of such a thing - in the Soviet Union".

So, Claire Perry is advocating that the UK becomes like a Greek dictatorship or former USSR tatalitarian regime?

If the constituents of Devizes desire a democracy they should de-select Claire Perry at the first available opportunity.

The single European state is moving towards communism every day, where do you think most of their policies come from? The UK is a sovereign Nation and most of the Voting public do not want to be governed by unelected commissioners in Brussels. Why do you think the political elite will not give the British public a referendum? they know the majority do not want to become a province of a single European state. Giving prisoners the vote is ridiculous i strongly support Claire Perry's view. Prisoners certainly have not got a right to vote, its about time we had a government who will stand up to the ultra liberal communitarian bile coming out of Brussels.

Badpuss: Wake up and smell the Costa coffee.

The human right to the vote cannot be suspended precisely because it is a human right, and is not dependent upon the good conduct of the human being possessing it. There is no link between a prisoner's crime and the franchise. The only right a prisoner loses is the right to liberty.

Prisoners do not lose their status as human beings. The view that they are sub-humans is akin to that expressed by Hitler under the Nazi regime in relation to Jews, etc, and led to the Final Solution. Churchill said that how civilised a society is measured by how it treats prisoners, by this test UK society is very uncivilised.

It is a fallacy to state that the victims of crime are offered less support and understanding than criminals. You have been blinded by The Sun too much! Under the HRA prisoners denied the vote are the victims of State abuse. Prisoners as a group are the most vulnerable in society because they have no voice in Parliament.

freddie_W wrote:

Jailhouselawyer wrote:
President of the ECtHR Jean-Paul Costa said:"The only country which denounced the Convention was Greece in 1967 at the time of the dictatorship of the colonels. I cannot imagine even if I can understand some irritation that the UK, which is a great country, could be in the same situation as the colonels in 1967".

"It is inconceivable that you could have a Bill of Rights that was not subject to judicial review," he says.

"Historically there is an example of such a thing - in the Soviet Union".

So, Claire Perry is advocating that the UK becomes like a Greek dictatorship or former USSR tatalitarian regime?

If the constituents of Devizes desire a democracy they should de-select Claire Perry at the first available opportunity.

The single European state is moving towards communism every day, where do you think most of their policies come from? The UK is a sovereign Nation and most of the Voting public do not want to be governed by unelected commissioners in Brussels. Why do you think the political elite will not give the British public a referendum? they know the majority do not want to become a province of a single European state. Giving prisoners the vote is ridiculous i strongly support Claire Perry's view. Prisoners certainly have not got a right to vote, its about time we had a government who will stand up to the ultra liberal communitarian bile coming out of Brussels.

The Council of Europe comprises 47 Member States and the European Union 27 Member States, and the UK is but 1/47th and 1/27th respectively, so it is ridiculous to refer to the European State as though it is a single entity. The objective of both institutions is closer harmony for the common good. When Member States sign up they agree to surrender their national sovereignty. Recently Claire Perry attended a debate and vote at PACE in relation to the UK's failure to fully comply with the ECtHR ruling. She raised the issue of sovereignty of the UK in relation to prisoners votes and she lost the debate and vote. If giving prisoners the vote was a ridiculous idea, the highest court in Europe would not have ruled in favour of it. Claire Perry's view is from the Dark Ages. Prisoners certainly have got a right to vote. The only bile I have detected comes from the mouth of the likes of David Cameron.

Jailhouselawyer wrote:
Badpuss: Wake up and smell the Costa coffee. The human right to the vote cannot be suspended precisely because it is a human right, and is not dependent upon the good conduct of the human being possessing it. There is no link between a prisoner's crime and the franchise. The only right a prisoner loses is the right to liberty. Prisoners do not lose their status as human beings. The view that they are sub-humans is akin to that expressed by Hitler under the Nazi regime in relation to Jews, etc, and led to the Final Solution. Churchill said that how civilised a society is measured by how it treats prisoners, by this test UK society is very uncivilised. It is a fallacy to state that the victims of crime are offered less support and understanding than criminals. You have been blinded by The Sun too much! Under the HRA prisoners denied the vote are the victims of State abuse. Prisoners as a group are the most vulnerable in society because they have no voice in Parliament.

J. - you wrote: "Prisoners as a group are the most vulnerable in society because they have no voice in Parliament."
I'm perfectly happy with that, I honestly am - I don't know what it's got to do with the Sun - but it is an honest belief I hold. (In those prisons are the vile creatures who have blighted the lives of the REALLY vulnerable in our society - time and again.)
The fact that prisoners don't lose their status as human beings - even temporarily - is a crying shame.
You say that the view that Prisoners should earn the right to live back among the human beings who's rights they were happy to trample - is akin to the views expressed by Hitler under the Nazi regime? I think I asked you not to exaggerate once before.
No - it is absolutely NOT a fallacy that we as a society offer less support to victims of crime than the perpetrators - and the benefits of being a criminal are offered long-term.
You make statements about the HRA, Nazis and Churchill & civilised nations - this is just emotive nonsense used simply to muddy the waters.
Let's talk about how it really is - encouraging our society to treat criminals as criminals.
Until we can do that - crime pays, folks.

String 'em all up - they won't need the vote then!!

goodpuss wrote:

Jailhouselawyer wrote:
Badpuss: Wake up and smell the Costa coffee. The human right to the vote cannot be suspended precisely because it is a human right, and is not dependent upon the good conduct of the human being possessing it. There is no link between a prisoner's crime and the franchise. The only right a prisoner loses is the right to liberty. Prisoners do not lose their status as human beings. The view that they are sub-humans is akin to that expressed by Hitler under the Nazi regime in relation to Jews, etc, and led to the Final Solution. Churchill said that how civilised a society is measured by how it treats prisoners, by this test UK society is very uncivilised. It is a fallacy to state that the victims of crime are offered less support and understanding than criminals. You have been blinded by The Sun too much! Under the HRA prisoners denied the vote are the victims of State abuse. Prisoners as a group are the most vulnerable in society because they have no voice in Parliament.

J. - you wrote: "Prisoners as a group are the most vulnerable in society because they have no voice in Parliament."
I'm perfectly happy with that, I honestly am - I don't know what it's got to do with the Sun - but it is an honest belief I hold. (In those prisons are the vile creatures who have blighted the lives of the REALLY vulnerable in our society - time and again.)
The fact that prisoners don't lose their status as human beings - even temporarily - is a crying shame.
You say that the view that Prisoners should earn the right to live back among the human beings who's rights they were happy to trample - is akin to the views expressed by Hitler under the Nazi regime? I think I asked you not to exaggerate once before.
No - it is absolutely NOT a fallacy that we as a society offer less support to victims of crime than the perpetrators - and the benefits of being a criminal are offered long-term.
You make statements about the HRA, Nazis and Churchill & civilised nations - this is just emotive nonsense used simply to muddy the waters.
Let's talk about how it really is - encouraging our society to treat criminals as criminals.
Until we can do that - crime pays, folks.

In those prisons are human beings. Many are vulnerable as individuals.t would help prevent re-offending if prison works and the conditions suffered by prisoners were vastly improved.

It is not a crying shame, but a good thing. Baroness Butler-Sloss has said that it is a national disgrace that the UK has not fully complied with Hirst v UK (No2) in over 5 years. That is a crying shame.

I don't exaggerate. The dehumanising of humans for a policy is not acceptable

It is a fallacy propagated by The Sun, Daily Mail and Daily Express for their own ends.

Far from emotive nonsense, it is giving parallels by analogy, to clear the muddy waters stirred up by the media.

Criminals are treated as criminals. Unless they are expenses fiddling MPs then only a handful are prosecuted. One stole £250,000 and was only asked to repay £5,000; in this sense crime certainly pays!

who dat? wrote:
String 'em all up - they won't need the vote then!!

Perhaps if I gave you enough rope you could lead by example?

JHL, I believe that a prisoner forfeits most of their rights whilst inside. When the sentence is served, then they're back with the rest of us. But they should have no vote whilst serving the sentence.

A friend sent me this little thing the othr day. It's a little OTT, maybe, but the fundamental point remains. "Let's put the pensioners in jail and the criminals in a nursing home.

This way the pensioners would have access to showers, hobbies and walks.
They'd receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc and they'd receive money instead of paying it out.
They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped
instantly, if they fell, or needed assistance. Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them. A guard would check on them every 20 minutes and bring their meals and snacks to their cell. They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose.
They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling,
pool and education. Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ's and legal aid would be free on request. Private, secure rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens. Each OAP could have a PC a TV radio and daily phone calls. There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the guards would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to. The "criminals" would get cold food, be left all alone and nsupervised.
Lights off at 8 PM, and showers once a week. Live in a tiny room and pay £900.00 per month and have no hope of ever getting out. Justice for all we say."

Parallels by analogy. Statistics - more quotes from "experts". (Can't you form your own basis for argument - perhaps it's you that's been braiwashed by reading liberal pap for too many years?)
Irrelevant "tosh" about dishonest politicians not being imprisoned - perhaps that's because they can afford a better legal defence than the average Joe Bloggs? (Again - that's the way the legal system has been in this country for hundreds of years - and has nothing to do with this item.)
And I really don't care for your opinions on the above named
national newspapers - again irrelevant - most of the populace are capable of forming independant opinion - I'm one of them.
You miss my point. It's about belief.
I may not be able change the direction of the "expert" tide - the cottonwool- wrapping support given to the vilest in our society whilst they are incarcerated - but I would like to - I truly believe that incarceration is a PUNISHMENT above all. And well deserved. And should include the suspension of the right to vote/freedom of association/to have a family etc. Not the right to life.
(And please - no liberal, nonsensensical "expert" quotes on the fact that the imprisonment is the punishment - and that the punishment ends with imprisonment.)
I'm telling you what I BELIEVE. All the media-bashing episodes, "expert" quotes, and statistics you are so fond of bleating about won't change what I BELIEVE.
And as for that crass remark about leading by example - unecessary.

Of course JHL is right; prisoners lose no rights except liberty. The bile spouted by people who seem to have little understanding is a shame.
Our own government now wishes to ignore the legal ruling of a court, and also says it will ignore a ruling by our own Supreme Court on another matter.
Just who do these ministers think they are, just like fiddling their expenses, the law and justice is for everybody else but they are above it.
We are now in the 21st century, most prisoners have actually done less on a scale of fiddled expenses than MPs. Of course they are human, of course they should vote.
If pensioners suffer abuse and deprivation at the hands of the state that is another matter. I hope the correspondent is actively campaigning to improve the lot of pensioners (probably not). The way forward is to improve everything for everybody not pick on minority groups (a la Hitler).

"The way forward is to improve everything for everybody not pick on minority groups (a la Hitler)."
Stop bandstanding - your sycophantic pandering to the likes of JHL is sickening.
"if pensioners suffer abuse"..... is that a pre-cursor to "pensioner abuse is just a media fallacy"? Or would "what do they expect - they've HAD their lives... suit you better?
You appear to have - among others - a blinkered obsession with protecting and increasing the rights of those who should lose them until they've earned them back by completeing their prison sentences.
UNTIL you get the criminal minority to RESPECT, not abuse - the vulnerable minority - lock up the criminals and zealously curb their human rights.

Sometimes I can even spell completing.

To Goodpuss:
Isn't it amazing how people with extremist views can never put their points in a calm and reasoned way.

JHL is actually doing something for what he believes in (whether or not you think him right); you just pontificate. get out there and help the pensioners, and the children living in poverty, and the women who are forced to sell their bodies to feed their children (many who end up in jail - those you want to exclude).

If we want a good world we have to care about everyone and that includes those who make mistakes; there are 85,000 reasons a person ends up in prison and we are not party to those reasons but many have mental illness, learning difficulties or have suffered at the hands of bad parents or carers.

If we want people to change we have to support them and part of supporting them is to understand how things go wrong in people's lives, and not judge and pigeon-hole people when we know nothing about them.

Pawisu wrote:
To Goodpuss: Isn't it amazing how people with extremist views can never put their points in a calm and reasoned way. JHL is actually doing something for what he believes in (whether or not you think him right); you just pontificate. get out there and help the pensioners, and the children living in poverty, and the women who are forced to sell their bodies to feed their children (many who end up in jail - those you want to exclude). If we want a good world we have to care about everyone and that includes those who make mistakes; there are 85,000 reasons a person ends up in prison and we are not party to those reasons but many have mental illness, learning difficulties or have suffered at the hands of bad parents or carers. If we want people to change we have to support them and part of supporting them is to understand how things go wrong in people's lives, and not judge and pigeon-hole people when we know nothing about them.

So - what's not calm & reasoned - a response not liked by jhl & his ilk?
Look carefully - who's doing the name-calling?
I'm trying to tell you - this is something I believe in strongly.
When it comes to human rights abuses - I don't believe this country is anywhere approaching the worlds worst offenders.
And despite platitudes to the contrary from some of Europes' "experts" I don't believe that a prisoner is damaged or abused in any way by being denied the right to vote in a world from which they have - to all intents and purposes - been removed from because they've abused it. Let them earn the right by completing their sentence.
You claim I simply pontificate - what do you know about me...... and why do you think that I believe passionately in the rights of VICTIMS of crime...
We can do all the supporting and understanding of these crimials once they're locked up - and we can do that WITHOUT giving them right to vote.

The irony of this matter is that so many offenders wilfully exclude themselves from the electoral roll they aren't able to vote anyway.