Podcasts about british bill

Recorded at the Battle of Ideas festival 2023 on Sunday 29 October at Church House, London. ORIGINAL INTRODUCTION Most people acknowledge that there is an issue with Britain's borders. The question is: who or what is to blame? For many, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and its courts in Strasbourg, has become the focus – either as the bulwark against anti-refugee sentiment, or the block on democratic process. With deportations being halted on the grounds of ‘human rights', one's view on membership of the ECHR has become shorthand for where you stand on the issue of refugees, asylum seekers and illegal migrants. Rows over the ECHR have been brewing for some time. In 2000, the Human Rights Act made the Convention an integral part of domestic law, that individuals could enforce in British courts. Since then, many, particularly on the Right, have questioned the wisdom of what they increasingly refer to as Labour's Human Rights Act. In recent years, the Conservative Party has been committed to reforming human rights by replacing the HRA with a British Bill of Rights. But no such legislation is forthcoming – and many have pointed out that, as long as Britain remains signed-up to the ECHR, a British Bill of Rights would be superfluous. Much like the European Union, the ECHR seems to have split the Tories. Some MPs hope to cut ties completely – nearly 70 Tory MPs, many from Red Wall seats, backed quitting the ECHR in a vote on a Private Member's Bill last year. Others – like Tom Tugendhat's Tory Reform Group – remain concerned about what a Brexit-style exit might do to the UK's international reputation. In the aftermath of the Second World War the European Convention on Human Rights was seen as a protection against the tyranny and oppression that some European nations had recently endured. Nowadays, those who support it stress the importance of human rights as setting a minimum standard which democracies should guarantee. Is the problem therefore simply one of European judicial overreach, or is it essentially about the very notion of ‘human rights' themselves? Are human rights and democratic, collective action doomed to forever be at loggerheads? With courts in Strasbourg and London ruling to impede government plans to stop small boats crossing the Channel, are human rights making popular government impossible? Or is the ECHR being scapegoated for inadequacies in our own backyard? SPEAKERS Steven Barrett barrister, Radcliffe Chambers; writer on law, Spectator Jamie Burton founder and chair, Just Fair; barrister (KC), Doughty Street Chambers; author Three Times Failed: why we need enforceable socio-economic rights Luke Gittos criminal lawyer; author, Human Rights – Illusory Freedom; director, Freedom Law Clinic John Oxley writer, New Statesman, Spectator,and UnHerd; consultant; barrister Angelica Walker-Werth writer, editor and programmes manager, Objective Standard Institute CHAIR Jon Holbrook barrister; writer, spiked, Critic, Conservative Woman

The protection of people's rights and liberties is a key part of the UK's constitution, dating all the way back to the twelfth century. In recent years, and with the Covid pandemic seeing unprecedented restrictions on people's everyday lives, the debate about what rights should be protected – and how – has been reignited. The government has confirmed that it will bring back the British Bill of Rights, but it is likely to face challenges from politicians of all parties – some of whom think it goes too far, and others who think it does not far enough. So does the government need to reform how people's rights are protected in the UK? What questions have been raised about the right to protest after the focus on how the public could show dissent during King Charles III's accession? And what role should international institutions play in upholding human rights? Panellists: Rt Hon Baroness Chakrabarti CBE, former Shadow Attorney General Estelle Dehon KC, Public Law Barrister at Cornerstone Barristers Lord Faulks KC, former Minister of State for Justice Professor Colm O'Cinneide, Professor of Human Rights Law at UCL This event was chaired by Jess Sargeant, Senior Researcher at the Institute for Government. #IfGhumanrights We would like to thank Cornerstone Barristers for kindly supporting this event.

PM's energy plan: Liz Truss vows ‘never again' on exorbitant energy bills | Explained: How the price cap freeze could change your energy costs | Live blog: Latest updates from Westminster and reaction throughout the day | British Bill of Rights shelved: Liz Truss faces pressure to sideline ECHR | New No 10 dress code: End of the era of ‘dress-down Dom' | Liverpool: Problems exposed by rampant Napoli on chastening night | Royals: Cambridge gang arrives for first day at new school - pictures | Read all these articles and stay expertly informed anywhere, anytime with a digital subscription. Start your free one-month trial today to gain unlimited website and app access. Cancel anytime. Sign up here.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Shortly before the current turmoil in Westminster, a new British Bill of Rights was introduced in Parliament. This Bill seeks to repeal and replace the 1998 Human Rights Act, which incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. Rosalind English discusses the proposed Bill with public law expert Andrew Warnock QC.

For more than decade, justice secretary and deputy prime minister Dominic Raab has wanted to ditch the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. Now he's finally got his chance. We examine what's in the proposed Bill, and The Times' legal editor dishes out the controversy ratings.This podcast was brought to you thanks to the support of readers of The Times and The Sunday Times. Subscribe today and get one month free at: thetimes.co.uk/storiesofourtimes. Guest: Jonathan Ames, Legal Editor, The Times.Host: Luke Jones.Clips: Times Radio, BBC, ITV, Convention on Modern Liberty. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Can the proposed British Bill of Rights be compatible with international law? Joshua Rozenberg speaks to Mark Elliott, Professor of Public Law and Chair of the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge. How can law firms become more welcoming to people with disabilities? Law in Action's Octavia Woodward tests the wheelchair access at Barristers' Chambers 7 Bedford Row. Plus barristers Holly Girven and Disability's Not a Bar co-host Haleemah Sadia Farooq share their experiences of disability and the law. Do we need a change in the law to bring more cases of corporate fraud to court? The Director of Public Prosecutions sets out his plans. Also what makes a good judge? "If the party that loses pays you a compliment, then I feel that's a job well done." Lady Rose of Colmworth, justice of the UK Supreme Court talks about balancing fairness and empathy. Presenter: Joshua Rozenberg Reporter: Octavia Woodward Sound: Neil Churchill Production Coordinators: Maria Ogundele and Helena Warwick-Cross Producer: Diane Richardson Editor: Hugh Levinson

Tonight on Farage, as inflation increases but wages are not following this same trajectory, Nigel asks if it would be a better prospect for those on low wages to simply not work and receive benefits. And, as Dominic Raab yesterday unveiled the British Bill of Rights, will this package finally allow the UK to rid itself from the commitments of the European Court of Human Rights?Nigel talks with rapper Fumez The Engineer to debate whether or not drill music promotes voilence as the CPS decided that drill rap videos can be used as evidence in gang cases. Then, on Talking Pints, Nigel is joined by Campaign for Real Education chairman, Chris McGovern. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

• Religious ‘infection' rate reveals dying churches • Christian factory worker fired on the spot for refusing to take off cross • Migrants entering UK illegally to lose ECHR protections under British Bill of Rights • Archaeologists discover...

Political commentator Mike Indian looks at this week's rail strikes, marvelling both at the Government's lack of engagement and Labour's silence on the issue. With inflation hitting a 40-year-high, he considers what policy responses are available as the prospects of stagflation loom every larger. And he looks at the Government's Rwanda policy and the proposed British Bill of Rights. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of Dewbs & Co.Director of the Academy of Ideas - Baroness Claire Fox, Deputy Leader of the Reclaim Party Martin Daubney, and the Founder and CEO of PLMR - Kevin Craig join Michelle to look at all the today's big stories.Six years since the country voted to leave the European Union - was it worth it? And can we fairly judge this given all we've been through since the vote? The potential new British Bill of Rights - should human rights be conditional on good behaviour? And more and more young people are sending explicit photos of themselves to other and asking for them from others - should this be made illegal? All that and more on today's episode of Dewbs & Co. Our GDPR privacy policy was updated on August 8, 2022. Visit acast.com/privacy for more information.

TalkTV International Editor Isabel Oakeshott kicks off today's show to discuss the shocking cost of living crisis in the UK as prices soar across the country when it comes to fuel, heating bills etc. Conservative MP Marco Longhi joins shortly after to discuss Dominc Raabs newly proposed British Bill of Rights and this may assist in the UK's efforts to go forward with the Rwanda Migrant Plan despite the ECHRs best efforts to thwart this from going ahead. Independent Statistician Jamie Jenkins returns to The Independent Republic to discuss surgeries struggle as 20,000 GPs plan to quit the NHS,and Christopher Snowdon from the IEA closes the show to discuss how during the lockdown, despite all the restrictions, pubs closed, less ads, etc. there was a 19% increase in alcohol related deaths. All that and so much more, so tune in! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

It's been a minute, but after a short hiatus Radio 43 is back on the airwaves. Thank you for your patience and apologies for the period of silence from Radio 43!Sadly, personnel changes at HNH mean that in the intervening period we have waved a fond farewell to both Roxy and Jake. We wanted to get them on the show before they left, but for various reasons we couldn't make it work. We hope that you'll join us in sending them love and all the ebay for the future.Nick and Joe are still here though, and on this new episode they sit down to discuss a few details contained within HNH's new Britain First report and some ins-and-outs regarding the Wakefield by-election, as well as giving a few reflections on the forthcoming “British Bill of Rights” which will see the Conservative Party water down existing human rights legislation which protects us all. Given our severe over-capacity at the moment we will be moving to a fortnightly show for a while, please bear with us! If you have the means and are able to chip into our security fundraiser, you can do so here: https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/hope-not-hate-under-attackSolidarity with the RMT!

On this episode of Dewbs & Co. Former Editor of The Sun - Kelvin MacKenzie, Political Commentator - Jo Phillips, and Journalist and Author - Harriet Sergeant join Michelle to look at all the today's big stories.Michelle talks with former Detective Constable with the Greater Manchester Police, Maggie Oliver who quit the force to expose the Rochdale grooming scandal. Michelle asks about the failings of the police when tackling grooming gangs. Whatever side of the political fence you sit on, something that we must all agree on is that you need to have a strong and effective opposition party. Michelle asks whether the Labour Party fulfils this requirement. As the Conservatives try to pass through the British Bill of Rights to give more control over human rights law, who should have control - the UK government or the European Court of Human Rights?All that and more on today's episode of Dewbs & Co. Our GDPR privacy policy was updated on August 8, 2022. Visit acast.com/privacy for more information.

A transformative electionThe overwhelming majority of citizens on this island want our future to be different from what went before. Those who voted last Thursday want those they have elected to represent their interests, to make power sharing work and to shape a new future.Attacks on Human Rights laws must be opposedThe British government confirmed this week that it plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights. In a letter to Boris Johnson over 50 human rights groups warned of the “dire consequences” this move will have particularly in respect of the Good Friday Agreement.

On this episode of the BTC, Janelle and Vicky dive into two stories of absolutely horrible people. Enough said.You can check out Murder Road Trip here!: https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/murder-road-trip-545869Research links here!: https://www.badtastecrimecast.com/podcast/episode-130---the-british-bill-cosby/

In this episode, we examine whether the case for further constitutional reform has become overwhelming. We examine topics that have been covered on the podcast before and bring them under one roof to help you answer a general question on this topic. Should the constitution be codified? Is there a case for further devolution in England and ought the Human Rights Act to be replaced with a British Bill of Rights? If you find the podcast useful, think about pre-ordering my revision book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/My-Revision-Notes-Pearson-Politics/dp/1398325538/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=nick+de+souza&qid=1617877782&sr=8-1

For episode 10 Tyler is joined by Alexis "MuteBanshee" Stringham and they watch Volcano, a movie that both cured racism and gave 11 year old Alexis nightmares for decades. I said I would and I always deliver here is a link to "All That". Don't forget to tweet using #Volcanoes4Rachel Like Final Fantasy VII and donating to organizations that help people? Then check out friend of the show, British Bill's, Final Fantasy VII Materia Lockdown for MNDA. Check out this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbiZSfEI0ME to learn all about it and follow Bill on Twitter @RPGyears to keep up to date with the event. If you've got a movie you are passionate about I would love to have you as a guest hit me up at any of the below: Twitter: @2Young4thisHit Email: TooYoungforthisHit@gmail.com Tyler's Social Medias: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram: @JaxCatCult Alexis's Social Medias: Twitter: @MuteBansheeD3 Also check out Alexis's D&D blog https://mutebansheedice.tumblr.com/, listen to her podcasts Stories From Eorzea and Banshee & Skullboy, watch her stream on Twitch, and join her Discord server. If you've read this far tweet Alexis and tell her, "I just found out they stopped making Blueberry Acai Diet Coke #Volcanoes4Rachel" Other Mentions: I was on an episode of "The Best Animated Shows Ever... So Far" where I watched an episode of The Legend of Zelda animated series with Troy and M.C., go check it out! Please: https://basesfcast.pinecast.co/ The Network: This podcast is a production of the We Can Make This Work (Probably) Network follow us below to keep up with this show and discover our many other podcasts! The place for those with questionable taste! ProbablyWork.com Twitter, Facebook, Instagram: @ProbablyWork Email: ProbablyWorkPod@gmail.com Last but not least if you’d like to do me a solid consider purchasing something through my Amazon Associates Link: https://amzn.to/2UaatwO Costs nothing extra for you and I get a cut of Amazon’s profit. Normally as a bonus, clicking that link will reveal the film we are watching on the next episode, but my guest has not selected a film. Therefore clicking the link will drop a big hint at who the next guest is...

In this episode, Leanne Cochrane who is a PhD student at Queen's University Belfast, maps out the current human rights situation in the UK. She looks at the implications of Brexit on human rights protections and the possibility of a new British Bill of Rights. The paper she presents is co-authored with Dr Katie Boyle (who appears in a later podcast).

In this episode, Leanne Cochrane who is a PhD student at Queen’s University Belfast, maps out the current human rights situation in the UK. She looks at the implications of Brexit on human rights protections and the possibility of a new British Bill of Rights. The paper she presents is co-authored with Dr Katie Boyle (who appears in a later podcast).

In this episode, Leanne Cochrane who is a PhD student at Queen's University Belfast, maps out the current human rights situation in the UK. She looks at the implications of Brexit on human rights protections and the possibility of a new British Bill of Rights. The paper she presents is co-authored with Dr Katie Boyle (who appears in a later podcast).

DECLARATION took place at the Centre for Contemporary Arts (CCA) in Glasgow from 3-6 March. The festival was the result of a unique partnership between NHS Health Scotland, the Mental Health Foundation, the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland (the ALLIANCE) and the Centre for Health Policy at the University of Strathclyde. The programme featured 30 events - a mixture of film screenings, performances, debates, workshops and provocations, each one inspired by one of the 30 articles in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with a focus on how human rights and the right to health come alive in Scotland today. Article 28: Right to a Social and International Order The UK government is planning to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. While First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has vowed to block the move in Scotland, the plan has provoked a huge, ongoing debate about how human rights are best protected. We gather together a panel of experts to debate the issue – and consider what replacing such an important piece of human rights legislation could mean in general and also for our right to health in Scotland. Chaired by Joyce McMillan, theatre critic, journalist and campaigner for democracy and human rights, the panel also features Naomi McAuliffe, Amnesty International's Programme Director in Scotland and Dr Iris Elliot, Head of Research and Policy at the Mental Health Foundation.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals:First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act's repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms?In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament's capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government's room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner.Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university.For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals:First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act's repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms?In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament's capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government's room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner.Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university.For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals: First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act’s repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms? In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament’s capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government’s room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner. Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university. For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty.

Prior to the 2015 general election, the Conservative Party undertook in its manifesto to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and to enact a British Bill of Rights. In this video, Mark Elliott addresses three key questions raised by these proposals: First, what lies behind the desire of some politicians to secure the Human Rights Act’s repeal? Second, how might a British Bill of Rights differ from the present legislation? And, third, what constitutional obstacles might lie in the way of the implementation of these reforms? In relation to the last of those three issues, the argument is developed that although the UK Parliament has the legal power to legislate for the proposed changes, the increasingly multi-layered nature of the British constitution limits Parliament’s capacity to exploit its sovereign legislative authority. In particular, the constraining effects of international law - in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights - and the devolved nature of the modern British constitution are likely to limit the UK Government’s room for manoeuvre. As a result, it is likely to be difficult to deliver upon the manifesto commitments that were made in a legally coherent and constitutionally legitimate manner. Dr Mark Elliott is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St Catharine's College. His main research interests are in the fields of constitutional and administrative law. Dr Elliott's recent publications include Elliott and Thomas, Public Law (2nd ed OUP 2014); Elliott, Beatson, Matthews and Elliott's Administrative Law: Text and Materials (OUP 2011, 4th edition); and Forsyth, Elliott, Jhaveri, Scully-Hill and Ramsden (eds), Effective Judicial Review: A Cornerstone of Good Governance (OUP 2010). Dr Elliott was the 2011 Legal Research Foundation Visiting Scholar at The University of Auckland, New Zealand. In 2010, he was awarded a University of Cambridge Pilkington Prize for excellence in University teaching. He writes a blog - http://publiclawforeveryone.com/ - which includes information for people applying, or thinking of applying, to study Law at university. For more information about Dr Elliott, you can also refer to his profile at http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/people/academic/mc-elliott/25 Law in Focus is a collection of short videos featuring academics from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law, addressing legal issues in current affairs and the news. These issues are examples of the many which challenge researchers and students studying undergraduate and postgraduate law at the Faculty. This entry provides an audio source for iTunes U.

Next year marks 800 years since the signing of Magna Carta. While the build-up to its anniversary has been dominated by arguments about whether it should be taught in schools as part of lessons on ‘British values’ aimed at tackling ‘Trojan Horse’ extremism, others have strongly suggested Britain needs a contemporary equivalent. Whilst the coalition’s Commission on a Bill of Rights produced ambivalent conclusions, leading Conservative politicians have pledged that it will be a key part of their general election manifesto. Yet while the original brief for the Bill of Rights was for a document ‘which incorporates and builds on Britain’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights’ such a move is widely seen as a potential replacement for the Human Rights Act with Britain leaving the ECHR altogether. Supporters see a British Bill of Rights as an important move in regaining control over key areas of national sovereignty, threatened by increasingly activist judges based in Strasbourg. Many opponents, including leading civil-liberties campaigners, charge the proposal as being a return of Tories as ‘the nasty party’ keen on limiting individual and worker protections enshrined under the Human Rights Act. In any case, it is not clear what immediate gains a UK government would make from leaving the ECHR, given the increasing willingness of British courts to challenge government policies – for example, on workfare - and the need to meet Western standards around universal human rights. Some see the British Bill of Rights as an opportunity to rethink our contemporary attitude to rights. Historically, many see a rights culture as standing in a British tradition dating back to the Magna Carta of 1215 and embracing the 1688 Bill of Rights. Others see sharp distinctions between the natural-rights tradition dating back to John Locke and that which culminated in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man in the wake of the French Revolution and the American Bill of Rights of 1791.  Is it significant that these documents that talk the language of natural rights tend to seek freedom from the state whereas the human rights tradition embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the European Convention on Human Rights (1950) tend to seek the state’s protection? Could a British Bill of Rights represent a more democratic alternative to the ECHR, or simply greater powers for unelected judges in Britain rather than their counterparts in Strasbourg? Does it represent an opportunity to safeguard civil liberties and national security, as various supporters hope, or risk sacrificing hard-won rights to contemporary opportunist politicians? What advantages would it hold over the existing framework provided by the Human Rights Act? Would its introduction be a triumph for democracy or populism? Who should we trust to make our laws? Speakers Jon Holbrook barrister and writer on legal issues for spiked and the New Law Journal Martin Howe QC barrister; member, Commission on A Bill of Rights Helen Mountfield QC barrister, Matrix Chambers, London; trustee, Equal Rights Trust Rupert Myers barrister and writer Adam Wagner barrister, 1 Crown Office Row Chair Claire Fox director, Institute of Ideas; panellist, BBC Radio 4's Moral Maze

This week on ATGN, Peter Welpton (@peet2 on Twitter) stopped by to talk tech with us. We talked about the WiiU, and what it will do for the evolution of gaming. We also talked about the iPhone5 announcements, and how much that will impact the phone and mobile device world. Mobile Devices are ever changing, yet the Gaming Consoles aren't. Would you agree? Check out the stream and leave us comments to let us know what you think! If you're interested in joining in gaming with us, you can check us out here! Naki: @1nerdycupcake on Twitter, BakaNaki on XBL and Steam, or OneNerdyCupcake.com Chris: @RoundTableNerds on Twitter, Spidey616 on XBL or NerdsOfTheRoundTable.com Adahy: @TheAdahy on Twitter, TheAdahy on Steam, or TheAdahy.com Don’t forget to check out Peter on twitter @peet2 or his web-site http://www.ivegotthenews.net.  Check out The Geek Out for all the nerdiness! Next week’s Rumble Pit pairs the main cast of Borderlands agains the main cast of Borderlands 2.  Leave us a message on Facebook and Twitter about who you think will win or call our Google voice 304-806-ATGN. Thanks for tuning in! We'll see you next week, we stream live on Sundays at 11am Eastern/10am Central. Our guest host is Carly Spade, which you can check her out on Twitter at @carlyspade. This week’s shownotes are available on Google Docs: http://goo.gl/jqNe2