What about the ECHR?

The issue of the European Convention on Human Rights seems to be coming to a head as the Tories and Reform call for the withdrawal of the UK. The European Movement has posted an open letter to Hilary Benn, the relevant minister, calling on him to support the UK’s continued membership. The ECHR issue offers easy prey for the brexiteers in their project to widen the gulf between the UK and the EU. Withdrawal from the ECHR would certainly produce that result, both in generally, and also specifically in relation to the position of Northern Ireland under the EU-UK Trade and Co-operation Agreement, and the Good Friday Agreement. It would be a damaging move, so please sign the open letter.

Its clear that the debate around the ECHR has been inflamed by the involvement of the European Court of Human Rights in asylum appeals. Given the extent of small boats anxiety in the UK, there is a danger of a hostile head of steam building up toward the ECHR among people who are not otherwise anti-Europe; something that has not been widespread hitherto. This could be a problem for the rejoin movement.

What is NOT being widely publicized is the fact that the UK government is pressing for ECHR rules to be amended to reduce the likelihood of the court’s appeals decisions undermining  UK government efforts with regard to illegal immigration. According to LBC this proposal to reform the ECHR is already supported by 16 European states (out of 25 signatory states) and has good prospects of success. But it needs to cut through to public awareness. The ECHR performs a very positive role in many areas, and its far better for the UK to push on with reforming it, rather than yet again pull out of an important European institution. As LBC points out, the only country so far to have left the ECHR is Russia. That should give us pause for thought.

Youth Mobility: the story goes on.

The headline on the Daily Express website four days ago gives a flavour of the loathing felt by some Brexiteers for the nascent EU-UK Youth Mobility Scheme. But why such antagonism?

The background to this is that the Youth Mobility Scheme, at present being negotiated between the UK and the EU, would allow a specified number of young citizens aged between 18 and 30 from each (UK and EU) to spend time working, studying or travelling in the other. The time-period is under negotiation, and looks likely to be somewhere between 2 and 4 years.  Numbers are also under negotiation and a ceiling of 50,000 has been quoted, though the talk is that Starmer still wants to negotiate that down; perhaps not by a great deal, but he needs to be seen to limit immigration whenever he can.  And Youth Mobility is vulnerable in that respect. The pressure on him from the Brexit press is unremitting. The main pressure-point around immigration -small boats- presents him still in a role of near- helplessness.  So Youth Mobility- one of the most positive possibilities of the recent rapprochement with the EU –  is in danger of falling victim to the small boats crisis.

There is too much to lose here. More than ever, we need grass-roots contact between British and EU citizens to combat the growing nationalist mood in the UK;  and we particularly need it among the young. Reform is making a successful pitch for support among young men, and there needs to be a counterbalancing experience that tells a positive story about Europe and Europeans. Of course contact with Europeans will not purify all our youth of the taint of nationalism – some of our young visitors will support the AfD and the RN – but the experience of international dialogue will nonetheless open many minds. No wonder the Express doesn’t like it.

So we can’t afford to lose on Youth Mobility. It needs to be decoupled from immigration in the public mind, presented in a different frame, associated with the positive connotations of European cities and friendly visitors. Its all about presentation. The Brexit press know that, and that’s why they are doing their best to kill it.