15th SEPTEMBER 1999
Introduction
1. I took over responsibility for human rights during the summer. But I am no stranger to the subject. I helped Jack Straw put the legislation together. And I helped him pilot it through the Commons. More than that, I count myself a life-long supporter of human rights. Many of us came into politics precisely because we care about the rights of ordinary people. And care about balancing rights fairly. The Human Rights Act is a major step forward in enhancing rights. So I feel proud to be associated with it - and to have been asked to spearhead implementation for October 2000.
Keynote 1: valuing and prizing the HRA
2. My talk today is billed as a keynote address. I have two keynotes to offer for your conference. And a general theme about the need to prepare.
3. The first is an upbeat, positive note. It is about recognising and celebrating the Human Rights Act as a really big and important change in the way we handle rights in the United Kingdom. It is a change which will benefit the whole of society and for generations to come. I want you - and these words are addressed especially to those of you representing public authorities - to accept and embrace your role in this. To respect the new duty to act compatibly with the Convention rights. And to put it right at the centre of your concept of public service. Above all to see the Human Rights Act as a tool to help you do your job even better. In short, the Human Rights Act is a law to be valued and prized.
Keynote 2: Understanding what the HRA is about
4. My second keynote may seem rather different to the first. But it harmonises well, I think. It is about learning what the Act and the policy behind it are really about. Part of this is to do with mugging up on detailed Convention points and considering what impact they might have on specific areas of business. That's my preparations theme. But there is an important, wider aspect to understanding this subject.
5. First and foremost, we need to understand that, though the Human Rights Act is about rights, it is also very much about balancing rights against each other. Just look at the articles in the Convention. Take Article 8 - respect for private and family life, and Article 10 - freedom of expression. Rights for the balancing. That thread runs right through the Convention. Nearly all of the individual rights come with a detailed statement of the rights of the state which may limit exercise of the individual right. For example, national security, public safety, the protection of health or morals. The ECHR is, so far as I know, unique in that approach. Of course, most international statements of rights contain some kind of general statement about limitations. You find it in the preamble or at the beginning. But the ECHR sets the limitations out in considerable detail - and in the specific context of the individual right. That is significant.
6. What we are looking at here is rights and responsibilities going together, hand in hand. Rights don't really make a lot of sense unless you get a culture where people respect the rights of others and are aware of their responsibilities. It is a question of awareness and, above all, balance. That is what the Convention rights are about. We have to remember that. That is what we are incorporating into our domestic law.
7. When we announced the Human Rights Bill, we said that it should be seen as a floor, not a ceiling. We also said that we saw it playing a major part in building a human rights culture in this country. Some people got the wrong idea about that. They had an old fashioned view of rights. That's the view based on mistrust of the state. It is about turning subjects into citizens with negative rights. Negative rights they can bear against public authorities.
8. What kind of society or culture does that imply? What they are talking about is a culture of challenge and conflict. They are really talking about a litigation culture. And their emphasis is on getting more and more individual rights. Precious little, if anything, is said about responsibilities and citizenship. Precious little is said about the need to balance rights.
9. I do not see a human rights culture in those terms. Nor do I believe that the European Convention and the Human Rights Act lead unavoidably to those conclusions. My point is a simple one. Rights don't really make much sense unless you see them within a framework of rights and responsibilities-
11. Pie in the sky? I don't think so. It is a vision of the future, certainly. But leadership is about vision. I expect that some of you will have heard people say that, whatever the Government's vision or policy about all this, the Human Rights Act is an invitation to party. An invitation to party for anyone who thinks he or she has a grudge against the State. And an invitation to feast for the lawyers. I don't agree. The Human Rights Act should not be seen as a jemmy to prise open each and every hinge and clasp of our existing arrangements.
12. We are not expecting the statute book to be rewritten overnight on 2 October 2000. How could we be, when the UK has been fully signed up to the Convention for nearly 50 years? And where ECHR-proofing of new legislation has been a continuing and deepening process throughout that period. We can, I think, also draw some reassurance from the experience of other countries with similar legal systems that have gone through the incorporation process - Canada and New Zealand, for example. Life there did not stop. Of course there were teething problems. But by and large the judiciary was sensible. And if they went too far at implementation, they tended to draw back and balance the situation later on. And look at Scotland, where devolution has meant that some Convention points are already being heard there this year. The Courts are not rolling over whenever a devolution-based Convention point is raised.
13. Please don't get me wrong. I am not saying that the Human Rights Act will change nothing. The Convention has already brought changes to this country's arrangements. There will doubtless be more. The Convention is a living instrument. Standards change. I accept too that there may be a lot of challenges, particularly in the period around implementation of the new Act.
The mere fact of litigating human rights in the UK courts is itself a big change.
14. What I am saying is that you should not be too ready to withdraw and cancel established practice or procedure just because somebody says that it raises a Convention point. The fact of the matter is that are very few matters of public business which cannot be said to raise some Convention point or another. And there are very few Convention points which cannot be argued at length in either direction - and which do not involve the need to balance rights against other rights. You need to be sensible and realistic - and not lose sight of what the Convention is trying to achieve. And that, in two words, is balance and fairness. Those are not new concepts to British administration. Don't let anyone try to tell you that they are.
Why the HRA is important
15. So, let me go back to my first keynote, and the question why am I asking you today to celebrate the Human Rights Act - and put it at the centre of your public service ethos. Why is this Act so important? The Human Rights Act wasn't an accident. We haven't got it because of some court case or following an edict from elsewhere. The Human Rights Act came directly from our manifesto. It was, and is, a positive and deliberate statement of this Government's commitment to building a culture of rights and responsibilities.
16. Nor should it be seen as a contentious one-party measure. The LibDems worked quite closely with us - Lord Lester of Herne Hill deserves a special mention here. And, by the Third Reading stage, near the end of the parliamentary process the Conservative front bench gave the legislation as much cross-party support as one could reasonably have hoped for. In short, we have on the statute book an Act that is likely to last at least for the lifetime of anyone in this room. It is here to stay.
17. The main purpose of the Act is to give further effect to peoples' rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. That is exactly what it does.At the most basic level that means allowing the Convention rights to be enforced in the UK courts. That change should help avoid the time, trouble and cost of having to "go to Strasbourg" to get your rights.
18. But there is more to it than that. The Act seeks to weave the Convention rights deep into the legal and administrative fabric. It does that in four main ways.
Preparing for the HRA
20. As I said earlier, I do not think that we need to get too spooked about this. The principles and thought processes should not be so unfamiliar to us. It would be surprising if they were, given the major role played by the UK in drafting the Convention. But we all need to recognise
(2) that the Strasbourg authorities have had nearly 50 years to elaborate the rights and to build a systematic and methodical way of considering arguments and balancing rights.
21. I believe that our Human Rights Unit has put in our Conference packs a chart with a checklist about Convention issues. There is other material available today about the framework and methodology for thinking these things through. I hope that everyone will study this and make good use of it. Please do not think that this is something for the lawyers. It is for you. And it is an opportunity for you to work within a rational, common framework for resolving issues and balancing rights. Opportunity is the right word. The Human Rights Act should be seen as an opportunity, not a threat.
22. What we are talking about here is applying the elements of Convention thinking to the policy-making process. About developing and applying a good general awareness. Since the Convention is going to provide a bottom line for our work as public authorities it must make sense for all of us to know how the line is likely to be drawn - indeed, we all need to be involved in drawing it.
23. Please do not leave yourselves or your staff in the position where you have nothing to say when a Convention point is raised by someone outside your organisation. Public service professionalism now requires that you have an answer, or at least that you know what they are talking about
and how to get an answer. In short, we all need to get ready for the Human Rights Act.
24. I know that the Head of the Home Office Human Rights Unit will be speaking after me about good practice on preparing for implementation and where you can get guidance and help. I have also had briefing from Gareth Williams about the work of the Human Rights Task Force. He has told me how much has already been done. But I know too that there is a lot remaining to be done.
25. One particular area he mentioned was public authorities outside Whitehall. It is very encouraging to see so many such organisations represented here today. It shows that the message about the need to prepare for the Human Rights Act is getting through.
26. You are not on your own. The Task Force has produced some excellent guidance and leaflets for you. Make use of it. And the Department responsible for the legislation under which you operate has - or will shortly - be opening a dialogue with you about getting ready for the Human Rights Act. But you don't need to wait for that. Open the dialogue yourself. Good communications with and between public authorities are what preparations for the Human Rights Act are all about.
27. I hope that everyone here today will do what he or she can to pass on that message to others. I also hope that they will add to the message something of the wider context I have given this morning. Chair, Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for listening to me. I think that there are a few minutes left for some questions.
Mike O'Brien
15 SEPTEMBER 1999