Member Info for Dorfan

PDK

“ Ah yes good old tommy, with his extensive criminal record that includes assault and fraud among others.”

Can we talk about the antics of the following two people, good for a laugh the pair of them, Mike Amesbury and Jared O'Mara.

1237

“ Surely that implies the consensus has shifted in favour of it not happening ?”

Has Reeves told you something we don’t know about then?

ASI

Can you ask your AI friend what the annual budget is for the Met police, also can you ask how many people it employs.

ASI

“ You’ve also implied that diverting police resources to monitor someone with a placard is considered more important than addressing serious crimes like rape, murder, or domestic abuse, while simultaneously questioning why the government hasn’t tackled grooming gangs yet.”

Where have I implied that in any post?

ASI

“ the Met’s operation likely cost between £10-£15million per day”

So if we split it and go down the middle that means each officer (1600) cost £7800 a day. So that means an annual cost of ££2.85M a year to keep a police officer. If the salary is reflected by the cost to keep an officer he must be living like a king.

And then your AI friend is saying that 60% of migrants are sent back. Yet the government is saying migrants will start to be sent back very soon.

I think you need to get a better AI friend to help you out in future. Also, don’t believe everything you read on a government website, there is no actual proof it is correct.

I asked for daily hotel costs, room only

ASI

“ One concern protestors in this instance is the amount of taxpayers’ money spent on feeding and housing illegal immigrants and asylum seekers”

So tell us how much those 30,000 in one month is costing us tax payers each day, then a month and then a year just for hotel costs. Then tell us how much it cost the police force for one day in additional overtime. A mere drop in the ocean and not worth measuring.

ASI

“ They should charge protesters for the security costs on the day. I bet they'd vanish in no time if they had to pay out of their own pocket”

Well I hope you are not being discriminatory to one sort of protester. If protesters should pay for security costs then it should apply to everyone and all events, even if considered low risk. Would help prop up the police force(s) coffers.

Talk about a bun fight. Starmer in the gutter trying to survive, the new kid on the block looking to usurp the old timer, you can’t make it up. Netflix to make a new drama series on the downfall of Labour after just 15 months.

Bring it on!

Labour MP Clive Lewis has said Sir Keir Starmer "doesn't seem up to the job" as anger grows over Peter Mandelson's appointment as an ambassador and the handling of his sacking.

Lewis, an outspoken voice on the Labour left, told the Radio 4's Week in Westminster: "It feels that he [the prime minister] has lost control within the first year".

Lewis said there was "a very, very dangerous atmosphere" among Labour MPs adding: "People are concerned, slightly downtrodden, a little bit browbeaten and feeling as if the party has seen better days".

Well he is right that Starmer isn’t up to the job, we knew that over a year ago. And he is definitely right that Labour have seen better days, that was apparent from day one.

ASI

So, here is the question , is the ECHR fit for purpose for all signatories and meets all of their needs 100%? The answer, it isn’t.

It is inaccurate to say the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) is "100% fit for purpose" or that it "meets all the needs" of its 46 signatory states. The ECHR system faces ongoing challenges, including criticisms, calls for reform, and issues with compliance from various member countries.

Challenges and criticisms of the ECHR

Concerns about expansion of rights: Some member states argue the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has engaged in "judicial activism" or "rights creep," overextending the interpretation of certain rights. A notable joint letter from nine European governments in May 2025 expressed concern that the court had gone too far on issues related to migration, asking for a debate on its interpretation of the Convention.

Slow-moving justice: A persistent issue is the backlog of cases and the lengthy delays in delivering judgments. The high volume of complaints, which has increased in recent years, puts a strain on the court's resources and can reduce the effectiveness of rights protection for applicants.

Issues with implementation: While signatory states are legally obligated to implement the court's judgments, inadequate or delayed compliance is a significant problem across Europe, particularly with "repetitive cases" where underlying issues are not resolved. The Committee of Ministers is tasked with supervising the execution of judgments, but some states have resisted or deliberately undermined the authority of the court.

Varying judicial approaches: Despite the push for harmonization, different countries can and do challenge the ECtHR's authority. For example, some constitutional courts have systematically challenged the court's rulings, which can create tension and further complicate implementation.

Political resistance: A number of political figures and movements across Europe have explicitly challenged the ECtHR. Russia, for example, was expelled from the Council of Europe in 2022 after its invasion of Ukraine and subsequently ceased to be a party to the ECHR. The UK has also seen repeated calls for withdrawal from the Convention, primarily centered on migration and national security issues.

Finally, a question for you and all I want is a single word reply, “yes or no” not your usual 1,000 words of deflection stating ‘how in the past in the year dot’

Do you believe it is fit for purpose for all signatories and meets all of their needs 100%? Then we can draw a line under this, my single word answer is no, so over to you now.

Well let’s be honest, I suspect most people that have an association with Epstein are potentially going to be batting on a sticky wicket if they get found out to have done something inappropriate.

I wonder if he was around much at parties when ‘Andrew’ was in town.

ASI

Where did I say it was going to be effortlessly? Pick the best that works for the UK, they may need some adjustments but then make them work for a solution.

With regards to “ Parliament being both judge and jury.” We have been there before, if it worked why not, even at the lower courts.

December 2020, DYOR

I have shown that it isn’t unilaterally working with everyone, so it has failed, either correct it so that EVERYONE agrees to it working in all areas or water it down so that each country has greater control in key areas that concern them.

Just because you may think it is perfect doesn’t mean everyone else has to accept it in a flawed.condition.

MV

“ All those illegal young men can now be taken to the nearest Army camp and kitted out .”

Well we know that won’t happen. They will immediately be going to the ECHR saying they don’t have a dog in this fight, they weren’t born here, not a naturalised Brit, scared of gunfire, too cold to fight in winter etc etc.

ASI

“ that you would want those protections removed, exposing yourself to repression, unlawful detention, false imprisonment, being silenced without recourse, and so on.”

You make it deliberately sound like we would be going back to the dark ages to prove that the ECHR is the best and only solution. Dare I say that if we came out there would be a UK HR version that would combine the best of the ECHR and additional elements that suit the UK, which is what I believe was suggested at some point in the past.

ASI - let’s say then that it isn’t harmonised in full with all 40+ participants. If there is disagreement, selective participation then it needs reform, so simply it isn’t fit for purpose by all.

Then we will be in an ever downward spiral until we crash, in more ways than one. But this is Labours answer, tax your way out to get growth. How many times have they tried this in the past and it fails every time.

ASI

Arguments that the ECHR is not "fit for purpose"

Judicial overreach and sovereignty concerns: Critics argue that the ECtHR has progressively expanded its own jurisdiction through "dynamic interpretation" of the Convention. This is seen by some as an encroachment on the sovereignty of national parliaments, which should have the final say on domestic laws.

Case backlogs and delays: The ECtHR faces a substantial backlog of cases, leading to long delays for applicants. Critics contend that this undermines the court's effectiveness, as "justice delayed can often equate to justice denied".

Inconsistent enforcement of judgments: Compliance with the ECtHR's rulings depends on the political will of member states. Some governments are accused of practicing selective compliance, implementing rulings they agree with while delaying or resisting others that are politically sensitive.

Political pressure and politicisation: The ECtHR faces political pressure from member states unhappy with its judgments. Some argue that this risks undermining the court's independence and impartiality. At the same time, others believe that judges are unaccountable and insulated from the democratic process.

Ongoing reform and debate

The debate over the ECHR's fitness has prompted various reform efforts and proposals:

Proposed UK reforms: Some politicians, including in the UK, have called for either leaving the ECHR or introducing domestic legislation to override its judgments, particularly on immigration and deportation issues.

Multilateral reform efforts: Concerns about migration and criminal deportations have led to calls for reform from other member states as well. In May 2025, nine European nations published a letter calling for the court to "restore the right balance" between migration and the ECHR.

Court procedure improvements: The ECHR system has also been subject to internal reforms. For example, mechanisms like "pilot judgments" are used to address repetitive cases, and amendments like Protocol 15 were introduced to affirm the principles of subsidiarity and the margin of appreciation.

The question of whether the ECHR is "fit for purpose" thus depends heavily on perspective and priorities. While supporters emphasize its vital role in upholding universal human rights standards, critics point to issues of democratic accountability, judicial interpretation, and procedural delays.

BB

“The key things the Tories/reform need to agree on are the abolition of the refugee convention”

The refugee convention I believe was geared for Europeans only after the war. The 1967 protocol basically widened it to scope in the rest of the world. This is the one that needs to be scrapped first and then work on the EHCR

ASI

“ I'm sure if war ever broke out here, plenty of our keyboard warriors would be scrambling for the nearest boat to safe harbour elsewhere”

Most if not all of these KB warriors are retired or too old to be in the front line. I believe the point being made is why would anyone from another country want to go to war and potentially die when they thought the country they fled to was a safe haven. They don’t have any allegiance to us, so why should they? Even a % of the indigenous people here with roots elsewhere from the past are probably going to be thinking the same.