Following on from her [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/04/theresa-may-cat-human-rights-actI'm not making this up[/url speech at the tories' 2011 conference, Theresa May now intends to introduce legislation to ensure [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21489072most foreigners guilty of serious crimes are deported[/url. All I can see is a massive increase in cases going before the ECHR in Strasbourg and a bonanza for HR lawyers.



Mind you, she has already said she'd like to [url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15140742scrap the Human Rights Act[/url

Step forward Cherie B'liar', should ease those mortgage repayments!

Personally i think all foreign criminals should be deported to country of origin regardless. If you fear the country you're from so much, don't commit crime in this country, simple.

So, what do we do with people with dual nationality, saw them in half?

Obviously give them a choice of which one of the two countries they belong to, if they refuse then we choose for them.



If they have dual here and somewhere else, then obviously they stay here

If I traveled to a foreign country and committed a serious crime, I would expect to be deported.



I don't see the problem with these proposals.

A Tory suggested them, therefore they must be a bad idea.

I think you'd be severely disappointed then to find that you'd probably be tried and incarcerated in that foreign country rather than deported.

Labour have pressed for legislation too according the BBC article.



But yes, 'Tory Policy = Automatically Bad'.

Not automatically bad, just often not thought through correctly with attention to detail or consideration for all aspects and effects, we have had government by soundbites for far too long, of all colours.

Sentencing guidance was issued last year to judges. May is unhappy that some judges appear not to have followed her guidance, so now she proposes new primary legislation. Completely ignoring the fact that no two cases are the same, especially in regard to the personal circumstances of defendants. This is a proposal to interfere with the independence of the judiciary and is bound to end in the drafting and implimentation of even worse law.



There will be two outcomes:



1) more cases will end up at Strasbourg, with all the associated costs and time delays



2) the government can add the judiciary to the long list of professions, including teachers, nurses, doctors & surgeons, that they have managed to alienate through their dogmatic attempt to appeal to the lowest common denominator

A bit like Brown's decision to scrap the 10% tax rate!!



Even these pesky reds make bad decisions?