I want to scrap the Human Rights Act but Clegg won't let me, says the PM


The Prime Minister claimed yesterday that he wants to scrap the Human Rights Act immediately – but Nick Clegg won’t let him.

David Cameron was forced to speak out after the Home Secretary warned that the legislation had become a charter for foreign criminals and terrorists.

Theresa May called for it to be ditched so the Home Office could be freed from its shackles.

David Cameron has said that he would scrap the Human Rights Act if he could
Mr Clegg, alongside colleague Chris Huhne, has steadfastly refused to allow the act to be scraped

Different views: Mr Cameron said yesterday that he would axe the Act if he could but Mr Clegg has steadfastly refused to consider scrapping the laws

Put on the spot, Mr Cameron said he, too, wanted the hugely unpopular Act – passed by Labour in 1998 – to be axed and replaced with a British Bill of Rights.

But he said that being in coalition with Mr Clegg’s Liberal Democrats was making him go ‘slowly’.

He was asked: ‘If the Conservatives had their way, if you were governing by yourself, you would get rid of the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights?’

Comments: Theresa May forced Mr Cameron to speak on the issue after saying she wanted the unpopular act, introduced in 1998, to be abolished

Comments: Theresa May forced Mr Cameron to speak on the issue after saying she wanted the unpopular act, introduced in 1998, to be abolished

‘Yes,’ he replied. ‘Would I like to go further and faster? Yes, I have said so.’

His comments will inflame back-bench Tory MPs angry at the way the Lib Dems – despite their poor standing in the polls – are being allowed to frustrate sensible policies.

They also risk opening a new row with Mr Clegg and Chris Huhne – who stubbornly refuse even to consider scrapping the Act.

Labour said the failure by the Tories to act made the party look ‘weak’ and engaged in ‘fantasy politics’.

Mr Cameron had to debate the thorny issue on day one of the Tory Conference because of Mrs May’s overnight intervention.

She had told a Sunday newspaper: ‘I’d personally like to see the Human Rights Act go because I think we have had some problems with it.’

Mrs May added: ‘I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, the sort of problems we have in being unable to deport people who perhaps are terrorist suspects. Obviously we’ve seen it with some foreign criminals who are in the UK.’

The Daily Mail has repeatedly highlighted how human rights law is demolishing every aspect of Britain’s immigration controls.

Every year, thousands of foreign criminals, failed asylum seekers and EU ‘benefit tourists’ are using the legislation to thwart Home Office attempts to remove migrants – or stop them arriving in the first place. The majority of cases cite the controversial Article 8, ‘the right to a private or family life’.

In the last three months of 2010, 99 foreign prisoners successfully claimed that deporting them would breach their right to a family life in Britain.

Last week, the Mail revealed how 11 convicted terrorists who should be deported are walking our streets. But, despite the flagrant abuses of the Act, the Liberal Democrats are refusing even to consider its abolition.

At last month’s party conference in Birmingham, Mr Clegg said: ‘Let me say something really clear about the Human Rights Act. In fact I’ll do it in words of one syllable: It is here to stay.’

The Prime Minister insisted yesterday that, in some cases, it was the way the HRA was being interpreted that was causing the problems.

He highlighted a farcical case last week when a prison van was sent almost 100 miles to take a suspect to court in Banbury, Oxfordshire, because it was claimed that walking him in handcuffs for 60 yards could breach his human rights.

Mr Cameron said: ‘The Human Rights Act doesn’t say that’s what you have to do. It’s the sort of chilling effect of people thinking, “I will be found guilty under it”.’

We won't budge on planning, say ministers

Outspoken: Francis Maude has attacked the National Trust over their stance towards the Government's planning reforms

Outspoken: Francis Maude has attacked the National Trust over their stance towards the Government's planning reforms

A senior Tory accused the National Trust yesterday of talking ‘b****cks’ about the Government’s controversial planning reforms – as David Cameron insisted the changes would breathe new life into the countryside.

In an outspoken attack, Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude accused the NT and other countryside campaigners of spreading ‘misapprehension’ about the reforms, which introduce a new ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’. More than 1,000 pages of planning guidance is being replaced by just 50. Ministers claim that ‘unblocking’ the planning system will boost the economy and ease the housing crisis.

But critics, led by the NT, warn it will end protections for beauty spots and bring Los Angeles-style urban sprawl to Britain.

Asked whether he had any sympathy with the NT campaign, Mr Maude said: ‘No. I mean our position is right. I think this idea that creating a presumption in favour of sustainable development is somehow a massive erosion on the ability to conserve is b****cks, frankly.’

The NT condemned Mr Maude’s comments as ‘the latest in a string of insults’ by Government ministers.

In a separate interview yesterday, Mr Cameron insisted the changes would be good for the countryside and help young families buy their first home. He said it was ‘nonsense’ for campaigners to claim that councils would be unable to block ‘unsightly developments’.

The Prime Minister said he cherished the ‘incredible countryside’ of his own Oxfordshire constituency, adding: ‘I would no more put that at risk than I’d put my own family at risk.

‘I love our countryside. But I think everybody knows we have a planning system that’s incredibly bureaucratic, incredibly complicated.’