Introduction
Can I begin by passing on the Home Secretary's and Lord Williams' apologies for absence - and their best wishes for this Conference?
The ECHR and the Human Rights Act is central to most Home Office business, including mine. So I am delighted to be with you today.
The LGA and your sponsors, Rowe and Maw, deserve special congratulations for putting on this event.
You have picked the very week when we have announced the date for the Human
Rights Act to come into force. It
will be on 2 October 2000.
It will be a day that will go down in our constitutional history as a major step-change, creating a culture of rights and responsibilities.
Never underestimate the importance of what this Act does. We have never underestimated its potential for a major impact on creating new access to rights and we are very proud of it.
The second reason for congratulation is to do with your "joined-up" approach.
What we have there is central government, local government and NGOs working together, in partnership, to help each other prepare for the Human Rights Act.
The Human Rights Act will be a major factor for local government, no less than for central government, over the coming years.
So you need not just to know the agenda, but to help shape it.
My agenda today is simple.
I have three items with one common theme.
First, I want to explain what the Human Rights Act means - and what the Government wants from it for all our citizens.
Second, I want to give you my view of how local government should prepare for the Human Rights Act.
Finally I want to say something about educating the public.
My common theme is that, though there is no need to panic about the Human Rights Act, we all need to take it very seriously, and to prepare for it carefully.
I. Meaning of the Human Rights Act
I turn to the first item on my agenda
What does the Act mean?
Legally, the Human Rights Act means that basic human rights from the European Convention on Human Rights will become part of our domestic law.
The UK ratified the Convention forty years ago and has sought to comply with it ever since. But, when we bring the Act into force, any citizen will be able to rely on the Convention rights in the UK courts. And he or she may get damages and other remedies where any public authority violates them.
The Human Rights Act also means that public authorities - including councils - are placed under an entirely new statutory duty to act compatibly with the Convention rights.
Incorporating the ECHR means integrating a rights-based approach into the whole legal system.
It is about buttressing English law with new principles.
General permissive principles.
And we are talking about legal thinking based on that approach getting first place in any legal debate.
All this is quite different.
And so is the statutory duty on you and me to act in accordance with the Convention rights in every single one of our public actions.
Getting it right on human rights cannot be seen as just another policy aspiration, a box to be ticked in a list on a council policy appraisal form.
It is not an option.
It is a legal requirement.
We must do it.
We should want to do it, to play our full part in building the new
human rights culture.
Some of you who are new to the Human Rights Act may be asking yourselves where this new Act has come from and what it is supposed to be for.
The answer is simple.
The Government came to power with a clear promise to modernise Government
and strike a new and better balance between the citizen and the state.
Incorporating the ECHR is a key part of delivering that promise.
Britain had a big hand in writing the Convention rights after the Second
World War. We were the first country to sign up.
But we kept human rights off the legal centre stage in the United Kingdom.
That meant two things.
The Human Rights Act is about building that rights and responsibilities culture.
It is about weaving the Convention rights and responsibilities deep into the fabric of our legal tradition.
And it is about weaving the Convention rights and responsibilities deep
into the public service ethos.
I say "rights and responsibilities".
The Home Secretary puts it this way: the Human Rights Act, he says, like
the Convention, is a two-way street. One person's freedom is another person's
responsibility.
And rights flow from duties - not the other way.
Look at the Act and the Convention.Article 17 - and I quote - "Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any state, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention."
Look at Article 10, Freedom of Expression, then back at Article 8, right to respect for private and family life. Rights for the balancing.
Look at the concepts of limitation - and I quote - "necessary in a democratic
society, in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public
order, health or morals. They run like a silken thread through the Convention.
Rights and responsibilities balanced against rights and responsibilities,
That is what it is all about.
II. How local government should prepare
So that's what the Human Rights Act means.
What about preparing for it in local government?
Let's start with elected members. Members should not make the mistake of thinking that the Human Rights Act is something for the lawyers to sort out.
It is not.
If you have that attitude, when things go wrong, what your lawyers will
be left to sort out is the damages.
They will be left to pick up the pieces too late in the process.
And your local authority will not be a part of any positive human rights
culture.
The Act is addressed to all of us.
It places you and me under a duty not to breach the Convention rights.
You don't have to become a human rights lawyer to understand that.
But you do need some basic understanding of what the Convention rights
are about.
You need to know that the Convention rights are not just about the tyrannical
acts of killing, torture, arbitrary punishment and detention that are referred
to in the bare titles of the Articles.
Those rights have been refined and elaborated.
They now set standards about what may reasonably be expected by a citizen in his every day dealings with the authorities in a modern liberal pluralistic democracy.
And so you need to address the question of human rights standards whenever you are considering adopting new policies or actions. The question is a simple one. "Are we on the right side of human rights?"
Initially the question is about compliance. At the minimum, a wise local authority is probably going to want that question addressed explicitly by officers before deciding on any significant proposal coming before them.
But you as members should also try to develop an instinct of your own on human rights.
You need to get beyond compliance-based, litigation-based thinking. Bells should ring if you are talking about applying council power in a way that intrudes upon people's private lives, homes and health. Or represses expression of their beliefs or strongly-held views.
You also need to be sensitive to any quasi-judicial proceeding you may be involved in.
A refusal to grant a licence for a taxi or market for example may raise issues relating to proper procedures, as recognised in the Convention judgements.
It won't do anymore - I hope that it never did - just to ask if you have
specific legal power.
It is not a question of just your rights and responsibilities as
a public authority. It is also a question of their rights and responsibilities
as citizens.
So we all need also to consider what human rights may be involved. And if we are acting compatibly with them.
Of course, under Convention law, public authorities are allowed to intrude
on many of the rights.
And, yes, government activity often involves conflicting rights.
We have to balance rights and responsibilities.
That is what our role is all about.
But, acting compatibly with the Convention means that we must, if you intrude
upon a right, be ready to show why we did so - and to show why in Convention
terms.
We have to be ready to show, for example, that what we did was set forth
in law, necessary in a democratic society: proportional, fair, and did not
have discriminatory effects.
And we should not proceed unless we are satisfied that that can be done.
I don't think you need to panic about any of this.
Let me stick my neck out even further: I very much doubt that, in practice,
many of you should get into serious trouble on human rights.
Let's not forget that you are operating under legislation which, for nearly half a century, successive governments have "Strasbourg proofed", to use the jargon.
The second reason is that there is a big gap between what the barrack-room human rights lawyers say is a killer Convention point and what has actually gone down at Strasbourg.
You will certainly face some challenges on human rights grounds
when the new Act comes fully into force next October. It makes sense to
put your authority in a position where it is not caught on the back foot,
or able only to respond defensively.
Be in the vanguard of building the new human rights culture!
Local Government Officers need to go into all of this in some detail. It
is a question of reviewing each area of responsibility and working out implications
and a strategy.
That isn't going to be done in a day.
Some examples.
Take planning. The planning system may interfere with the peaceful enjoyment
of property; that is a Convention right.
Therefore any interference with that right needs to be justifiable in the
general interest, as well as necessary and proportionate.
Also, in granting or refusing planning applications, Article 6 issues might
arise concerning the Convention right to a fair and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal.
Planning applications should, of course, be dealt with in a reasonable time.
On Social Services, Article 6 issues may arise.
So might Article 12, the right to found a family, Article 2, the protection
of life and Article 5, the right to liberty and security.
As for housing the ECHR does not confer social or economic rights on individuals.
There is therefore no right as such to be housed.
But, where you do provide housing ECHR issues are relevant: respect for
individuals' privacy, family life (for example in respect of housing allocations
and placements) and the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
I do not have time today to go into all the possibilities. I know that
you are going to hear quite a bit more on the topic later today - with a
special session later this morning from Mirza Ahmad and Belinda Schwehr.
The important point to remember is that most, if not all, activities of
local government impinge on people.
Those people will have statutory rights. And the local authority, as a
public authority,
must respect them.
To succeed you need to work out carefully and systematically the implications
for all the various areas of your work.
That work really does need to be well underway before the Act is brought
fully in to effect on human rights day, 2 October 2000.
How central government can help
How is central government helping with all this?
First and foremost we are working with your representatives and NGOs on the Task Force to produce guidance and publicity for all public authorities. This will, I believe, complement the excellent guide your Association has published for you today.
Some of it will be produced in a form which will enable public authorities to supplement the material with specific guidance relating to their particular work.
The Task Force is also helping with the design and production of training and publicity campaigns and materials. And there will be a regular Newsletter with news, views and good practice on developing the new culture.
III. Educating the public
Which brings me on to my final point.
Increasing public awareness.
It is here - perhaps in more than any other area - that we believe that the expertise of the NGOs on the Task Force can really make a difference.
The reason?
Because what we are after here is nothing less than a shift in public thinking.
A culture change.
The publicity campaign, which will start next Autumn needs to present the
Human Rights Act as the Human Rights and Responsibilities Act.
People have to see themselves not as the bearer of negative rights against
the state but as active members of a democratic community in which rights
are properly balanced against each other and have their full meaning and
effect within a framework of public responsibility and duty.
We do not want to build a US litigation-style culture.
Human Rights Day 2000 should not be seen as a field day for the lawyers.
It should be seen as the day on which we breathed life and substance into
a big new idea about rights and responsibilities.
The public campaign will need to be taken forward in various ways over
a sustained period.
It will need to develop and foster general awareness of these deeper meanings.
It will need to be complemented by long-term work in schools and colleges.
And it will need to be reinforced at the local level by the way people in
this room today approach Human Rights.
You are in the vanguard of change.
You are the ones who need to say, "No, the Human Rights Act is not to be
seen as a threat. As some legal obstacle to doing what we want. The Human
Rights Act is about an opportunity to add a new and profound dimension to
our relationship with the public. A dimension in which my interest and what
is necessary and legitimate in a democratic society can be much better comprehended,
measured and weighed."
Above all - if I can leave you with just one message to take back to your
offices from today - remember that human rights do not "belong" to the lawyers.
They are not playthings for the courts.
Yes, of course lawyers and courts are needed to make the Act work.
But this is not law for the lawyers.
It is an instrument of social utility.
That is the difference.
You and only you can make that difference work in practice.
And you will make that difference if you embrace human rights. Embrace them
as an essential part of your public service ethos.
IV. Concluding peroration
So that's the challenge and opportunity facing everyone at this Conference.
You are in the vanguard of change.
I know you will rise to the challenges and opportunities before you.
And all this is part of a programme to decentralise power and enhance the
rights of individuals within a more open society.
Devolution to Scotland and Wales;
Freedom of Information;
the Human Rights Act;
modernising local Government;
reform of the House of Lords -
all of these are about making Government and politics in Britain
more accessible,
more modern
and more responsive
to the aspirations of the people.
We want to improve the future of Britain by restoring confidence in our
constitution and by modernising our justice system.
In the early days of incorporation, when we are all getting to grips with
a lot that is new or unfamiliar, there may be a risk of forgetting the value
of what we are doing or that the whole thing is just another unwelcome burden.
My hope for this Conference is that it will have left an enduring sense
of the underlying value in what we are doing.
A sense of value and, I hope, a real sense of pride.
Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for your attention. I wish you all every success.