Meeting of the Parliament 16 March 2016
I do not really understand the relevance of the member’s comment to what I was saying.
While we are talking about the Tories, I must correct the record following Alex Fergusson’s misleading and selective quoting of my words in his speech this morning in relation to the European Court of Human Rights. I am disappointed in him for making what I felt was a cheap point.
I actually said:
“That is a wider issue that will not be dealt with here today. The fact that the ECHR is written into the 1998 act needs to be looked at. That provision needs to be removed so that we have the same freedom in proposing legislation as any other legislature has. Legislation could still be challenged under the ECHR—as, say, UK legislation would be—in the European Court of Human Rights.”—[Official Report, Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee, 3 February 2016; c 56.]
I stand by that statement. The ECHR unfairly ties our hands, and the decisions in relation to compliance are untested and have not been subject to the full court process. That stifles debate in this place and unfairly restricts what we can do, and the same does not apply to Westminster.