He could look again at short sentences. I wanted to scrap them – they are counter-productive in reducing reoffending and cause a great deal of disruption to prisons.
The Conservative Party seems to be allergic to *doing things*, whether that be building houses, securing a cheap and plentiful supply of energy, prosecuting and locking up criminals, or securing our borders.
No, his does not mean that the UK has become “ungovernable” or that it will be “impossible for Ministers to do their job” or that his departure is a victory for “the Remainer blob” or evidence that the public sector is full of “snowflakes”.
A bolder government would not win every battle it fought, but it would win more than one that never gave battle at all.
It will be difficult and controversial but do nothing substantial about our relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights.
The new leader should review the Government’s current plans and focus limited time and political capital where it counts.
It seems to fall between two stools: neither a tight technical update of the existing system, nor a fundamental overhaul.
Our commitment to the rule of law is undiminished, but the Human Rights Act is a flawed vehicle which needs reform.
The Court has simply made up its jurisdiction to provide interim relief. More specific to this case, it had no proper application before it.
After a stumbling start, the Government is heading in the right direction on human rights reform. But there remains much to do.
There is political and constitutional danger to creating the impression of major reform whilst delivering minimal change.
This is the first of a three-part ConHome mini-series from Policy Exchange on the judges, public policy and the election.
We should join organisations like Amnesty International, which has made a terrible mistake on anti-semitism, to ensure that our voices are heard.
The protection of the rights of the individual against an over-mighty state has always been one of the main principles of conservatism.