There are a number of reasons why the idea of the British Bill of Rights is so controversial. We currently are under the Human Rights Act of 1998 which was made in the European Court of Human rights and since the UK is in the European Union this means that we are under the Human Rights Act. The Human Rights is a statute which set out individual rights and freedoms under the law. The proposed British Bill of Rights will replace the Human Rights Act and withdraw the power give to the EU by the Westminster Parliament and place a new law to replace the Human Rights Act. However there are a number of reasons why some are against idea of a British Bill of Rights. The relation between the UK and the EU would possibly break down resulting in economic backlashes, immigration may decrease as it would seem to be an anti-EU policy. The concern may be limited as the new Bill of Rights will be very similar to the Human Rights Act. It could be argued that the potential break of the UK and EU relations are the main reasons why it is such a contraversial issue.
The relation between the UK and the EU could break down if we were to introduce the British Bill of Rights as this would mean that we are removing ourselves from the EU and we are no longer under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights. The repercussions of this would be felt economically as Europe is the main trade partner with the UK and could mean that the UK's deficit may increase. The British Bill of Rights was initially proposed by a Labor government but is now being proposed by the Conservative government. The risk is particularly disliked by the Thatcherites or free marketeers who are the part of the Conservative party who are very concerned about the economy and would not wish to put the economy in such a dangerous position. However it could be said that businesses may be more productive and efficient as many laws which could be deemed as excessive and unnecessary would be removed meaning that the UK could be more competitive in the market. An example of this kind of law is, 'It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees'. Even though this is so people remain safe it could be said that some of the things are too cautious. Yet this still remains controversial as the risk to the UK economy is very major and if things were not to go to plan in our Economy we would be in major trouble.
Secondly, the rights of the individual may be undermined if we were to change to a British Bill of Rights. The Human Rights Act is meant to protect the right of the individual and has many bits to keep the rights of the worker protected. Under the Thatcher government the power of the Unions were cut and if the Human rights Act is removed the power of the normal worker may also decrease. Some trade unions and workers believe that this will happen, leading to them being exploited by their employees and by the Government. This is why some are against the idea of a British Bill of Rights. Furthermore in terms of power some see it as the Government gaining even more power than it has already as there will not be anyone in effect who could review laws they pass. This is due to the UK having a fused government and the Judiciary not having much power.
Another reason why this British Bill of Rights is so controversial as many immigrant's rights in the UK could be changed. This is because Human Rights tend to belong to people on the account of their humanity, whereas Bill of Rights tend to only protect those who are citizens of the country. This would be so controversial as many of the immigrants from eastern European countries may be put off coming to the UK to work as it is not guaranteed that their rights will be protected on the grounds that they are human. The Bill of rights may only be applicable to those who are citizens of the UK, meaning that the rights of non-citizens who are coming to the UK to work may not necessarily have to be treated properly when working in this country. Furthermore it may be seen as an anti-EU policy so it will furthermore widen the gap between the EU and the UK. However there is an answer to this problem. This would be to introduce social and economic rights into our law and to extend the minimum protections of humane life to anyone living in the country.
However the British Bill of Rights may not be seen as a concern as it will be very similar to the Human rights act apart from certain things will be changed and there will be a larger emphasis on 'Britishness'. For example many unnecessary and excessive laws will be removed from it. This will be beneficial to both the government and to employees as such things they would currently have to comply with would be gotten rid of, so therefore wasting less time and making sure that business will not be prohibited by such legislation.
Furthermore the British Bill of Rights may be more beneficial to society as it will be less about rights which the human rights act is mainly about and more about the individual's duties and responsibilities to society. It is often suggested that the Human Rights Act puts the rights of criminals above those of the victims. Two examples of this is the killer of the head teacher Phillip Lawrence in 2007 and more recently the attempts to deport Abu Qatada. The killer of head teacher Phillip Lawrence was not deported to Italy after being released from prison, as under Article 8 which states the right to private and family life, he could not be deported as he lived in Italy up til the age of 6 years old. Also the recent attempts to deport Abu Qatada, who was convicted of in-sighting terrorism and extremist Islamic views was rejected. This was because the evidence accumulated against him in in his home country of Jordan was obtained through torture, and since it is totally against the Human Rights to deport a criminal knowing that there is a chance that they will be tortured or that torture has been used to obtain evidence. Both of these cases show how the rights of the criminals are put at the top, above those of the victims. Thus showing that the British Bill of Rights may be seen as controversial by those who are very pro Human Rights and will be seen as beneficial by many people in Britain.
In conclusion it can be seen that the most important reason why the British Bill of Rights is so controversial is that many are fearful of the effects it will have on our economic and political relationships with the EU. Furthermore with our already stressed relationships with the EU over the aid package for Greece, it could be said that changing to a British Bill of Rights could break relations with them.
