A vote to remain will protect our human rights from being destroyed by the Tory government

There are many critically important issues in this referendum campaign that have barely got a mention. The most important of them is human rights. On this, perhaps, the media has more excuse, for in discussing Europe and human rights there are a number of overlapping instruments and bodies, producing a veritable alphabet soup of acronyms that can easily descend into confusion.

Here are the facts. There are two key legal declarations, and two key bodies. One set is relevant to the EU referendum. One is not.

First, the “not”. That’s the European Convention of Human Rights, which comes from our membership of the Council of Europe, the 48-member body. The convention rights are enforced by the European Court of Human Rights and covers such issues as freedom of speech and freedom from torture.

That’s likely to become a political issue soon, since the Tory Government has vowed to abolish the Human Rights Act, which is the UK enactment of the convention.

That has no link, no connection, to our membership of the European Union, the critical issue about which the nation will be deciding tomorrow.

So for the moment, we can park that debate.

Where the EU and human rights come together – raising critically important issues for your vote – is in the Fundamental Charter of Human Rights.

That covers wider social and economic rights, including those at work – anti-discrimination provisions (including on gender and age), safety and fairness issues like rights for agency workers, to the privacy of your data, and to healthcare. And it also, to some degree, replicates the “basic” rights also in the ECHR.

Brexiters will tell you that a number of British legal provisions currently offer a high level of protection than the charter. They are right.

Even when our current standards are higher, why should having a guaranteed “floor” of provision for, say, maternity leave, be a problem?

But some of its provisions were higher than those provided by British law at the time they applied, so they have forced improvements in the provisions for workers in British law – equal pay for work of equal value and the rights of agency workers are two of these areas.

And when you have such unlikely champions of workers’ rights as Boris Johnson claiming they’re concerned about your rights at work, you might want to ask why they find the EU standards a problem. Surely it is only a problem if they’re imagining as a future Prime Minister they’d want to reduce those rights?

There’s one further important point to make. Brexiters find this a problem; the Green Party considers it a strength.

Under British common law, judges can’t overturn a decision of Parliament (that’s why a judge could say our family visa law rules are unfair and unreasonable but declined to overturn them).

Under the ECHR, judges can make a “declaration of incompatibility” with primary legislation. Only under the Fundamental Charter can judges strike down legislation.

Some may find that a problem, but I consider having a mechanism to uphold fundamental rights as a strength and another powerful argument for remaining part of the EU.

That’s particularly the case when we have a failed, undemocratic electoral system that has seen a Government elected with just the support of 24 per cent of eligible voters, a Government that’s rushing at great speed to privatise our NHS despite that being clearly against the will of the people, and that’s engaged in a clear “softening-up” campaign to introduce charging for core NHS services. And an unelected House of Lords that, while it has recently become an occasional, surprising champion of humanity and the poor, has no legitimacy and that can be further stacked with any Prime Minister’s cronies.

A solid legal bulwark defending the right to healthcare – and to privacy of data and workers’ rights, as well as protection against torture and other basic freedoms – is a reason to remain as part of the EU. A vote to remain tomorrow is a vote to remain as part of a network that not only protects us, but other people in countries across Europe.

Natalie Bennett is leader of the Green Party

open image in gallery

The EU referendum debate has so far been characterised by bias, distortion and exaggeration. So until 23 June we we’re running a series of question and answer features that explain the most important issues in a detailed, dispassionate way to help inform your decision.

What is Brexit and why are we having an EU referendum?

Does the UK need to take more control of its sovereignty?

Could the UK media swing the EU referendum one way or another?

Will the UK benefit from being released from EU laws?

Will we gain or lose rights by leaving the European Union?

Will Brexit mean that Europeans have to leave the UK?

Will leaving the EU lead to the break-up of the UK?

What will happen to immigration if there's Brexit?

Will Brexit make the UK more or less safe?

Will the UK benefit from being released from EU laws?

Will leaving the EU save taxpayers money and mean more money for the NHS?

What will Brexit mean for British tourists booking holidays in the EU?

Will Brexit help or damage the environment?

Will Brexit mean that Europeans have to leave the UK?

What will Brexit mean for British expats in Europe?