Steven Webb

I think this has to be my favourite photo, it was when I received the mayor's portrait. Very proud moment. #MayorOfTruro #ProudMoments #CelebrateMore

@atrupar Didn't he say he obliterated the Iran nuclear possibility just a few months ago?

Trump on when Iran would've had a nuclear weapon: "They think two weeks"

So when leaders talk about hitting Iran “to make the world safer”, we have to ask: safer for who? Last time, the void we left didn’t bring peace. It brought Paris (130), Brussels (32), Nice (86), Manchester (22), San Bernardino (14), Orlando (49). #Iran #NoMoreWar

In the US, San Bernardino 2015: 14 killed at a work event. Orlando 2016: 49 killed in a nightclub that was meant to be a safe place. All linked back to ISIS – a monster that grew in the wreckage we helped create. #SanBernardino #Orlando #ISIS

Is this really making the world safer? We were told that about Iraq. Instead, war smashed a country, left a power vacuum – and out of that void, ISIS grew. #Irán

Suella Braverman living her best life #ReformUK

Nadhim Zahawi once said he'd be "frightened to live in a country run by" Nigel Farage. I guess a seat on the Reform bandwagon is less scary than political irrelevance. #Farage #ReformUK

@johnkonrad No, I don't need a big warship to make my dick hard. Sorting out many of the world's other problems alongside allies instead of making enemies would be far cheaper and much more longer-lasting.

Come on, Dems. be honest. Deep down, isn’t there at least a tiny seedling-sized trace of testosterone left in your brain that looks at this BATTLESHIP video and thinks: “…okay, yeah, that’s kinda awesome” Be honest…

@PARoss22 @doveyymargeauxx isn't it funny how X marked yours as probable spam.

@doveyymargeauxx Since 1979, guess how many cases went before the Strasbourg Court of ECHR to stop the removal of an asylum seeker? 29 Guess how many the Government of the day won? 16! So, 13 people stayed whilst we were in the ECHR. I don’t think the ECHR is the problem.

I’ve seen a lot of MPs and people on here claiming that we’d lose our human rights if we left the ECHR… but this is directly from the House of Commons Library and it completely contradicts them. Our core rights.. life, liberty, fair trial, freedom from torture and slavery are already written into UK law through the Human Rights Act. UK courts recognise those rights. UK Parliament enforces those rights. Strasbourg doesn’t own them… Britain does. So I ask… why would Members of Parliament say something so clearly untrue? Is it ignorance? Or is it a deliberate attempt to mislead the public into believing we are dependent on a foreign court for our rights? You tell me. 🇬🇧 @reformparty_uk @Nigel_Farage @ZiaYusufUK @SarahForRuncorn @TiceRichard @LeeAndersonMP_ @danny__kruger @drdavidbull @policylaila @andreajenkyns

@MikeAng10471777 @doveyymargeauxx I'm against digital ID, although the companies and mobiles have way more than us. The US and China has more information than this government on us. But this government cannot infringe our human rights with the ECHR. Cannot change voting rights. PS we already have NI cards!

@_StevenWebb @doveyymargeauxx Steven, I share your concern about government overreach but more widely in view of this government’s intentions re digital id, voting age etc. Putting our faith in a foreign court seems like a far greater risk.

@mandy_butl38274 @doveyymargeauxx No, not necessarily. That only works if the government doesn’t change the voting rules first. The ECHR is what stops those in power from rewriting the rules that keep them accountable. We don’t have a constitution or a Bill of Rights to protect that.

@_StevenWebb @doveyymargeauxx The government is elected by the people to serve the people.. if they try to erode our rights, we vote them out.. simple

@doveyymargeauxx @A_T098 Without the ECHR, basic rights like privacy, protection from discrimination, and the right to protest could be changed by any future government. These are safeguards for all of us, especially young women who deserve their voices and choices protected.

Employee rights, privacy rights, protections against discrimination.. those are already protected in UK law. Parliament can strengthen them or expand them at any time. We don’t need Strasbourg for that. The only area where the ECHR can actually block what UK courts and Parliament have decided is immigration and border enforcement. That’s why the focus is there.. it’s the one place where a real foreign veto exists in practice. So leaving doesn’t weaken rights for British citizens.. it simply restores control over our borders. At the end of the day, this just comes down to how we see things politically. I don’t begrudge anyone for wanting to stay, and I appreciate honest, factual dialogue. That’s all I’m after. If we’re all working from the truth, then we can each vote our view democratically. What frustrates me is when politicians misrepresent the facts and fear monger.. we’ve seen that a lot, especially from the Lib Dems on this issue.

@doveyymargeauxx @A_T098 UK laws protect rights only for as long as Parliament allows. Without the ECHR there is no higher safeguard if a government weakens or removes them. The ECHR does not block democracy. It protects it from being rewritten by those in power.

@doveyymargeauxx @A_T098 I'm sorry, and this is a respectful conversation. But you are the one misrepresenting here. Or you are ignorant to the fact that our government without ECHR or any Constitution or Bill of Rights for example can literally change anything.

@doveyymargeauxx @A_T098 Without the ECHR, what actually stops a UK government from changing voting rights or even the way we elect them? We have no written constitution. No Bill of Rights. Just trust that those in power won’t rewrite the rules that keep them there.

It’s a “safeguard” with veto powers.. which is the issue. If the UK could enforce deportations and secure our borders while remaining in the ECHR, this conversation wouldn’t even be happening. A prime example was the Rwanda flights.. Parliament approved it.. UK courts approved it.. Then Strasbourg stepped in and blocked it. That’s not protecting rights.. that’s a foreign veto overriding British democracy.

@MikeAng10471777 @doveyymargeauxx In the US, the Constitution and Bill of Rights protect people from government overreach. In the UK, we have no such safeguard. Without the ECHR, nothing stops a government from changing the law, even the law on voting itself. Democracy alone isn’t protection.

@_StevenWebb @doveyymargeauxx The point here is that UK Law should be the backstop and as a democracy we have the right to vote to remove any government which tries to adversely affect our human rights. It’s an insult to our sovereignty to suggest that we need to be policed by an unelected foreign court.

@doveyymargeauxx @A_T098 You’re partly right. Parliament is sovereign on domestic law, yes. But the ECHR is not a foreign veto. It is the safeguard that stops any government from crossing the line on basic rights. Leaving it removes that protection, not just red tape.

@_StevenWebb @A_T098 On domestic rights, UK Parliament is already sovereign. It’s only on international matters.. like deportations and border enforcement where Strasbourg currently has the final say. Leaving the ECHR removes that foreign veto.

@doveyymargeauxx @xxtracy09xx and could be removed easily if say reform have a large majority and want to remove them out of UK law. And this is the point of having something sitting above protecting human rights. And why reform want to get out of it.

@xxtracy09xx That’s already protected in UK law.. well before the ECHR. Leaving doesn’t remove the right to marry or have a family. Those rights stay exactly as they are.