This is a subject close to my heart given that I recently debated the topic for a new program for Channel 4 done by Jamie Oliver. I argued that no, prisoners shouldn't have the vote to an audience of youngsters (the majority who agreed) against John Hirst, convicted of killing an old woman with an axe who served 25 years in prison and who overturned the British government's ban on prisoners getting the vote in the European Court of Human Rights.
Fact is, the British public of course would not support those who have broken the law getting a say in who makes the laws and what they are. The spectre of politicians going from cell to cell lobbying for support is ridiculous yet scary as their are several constituencies including Fleetwood where the prison population outweighs the majority by which the winning candidate won by. In other words, those in prison in some constituencies could wield tremendous power by being the difference between who gets elected as MP.
Prison is a punishment and a deterrent. If you want the civil right to vote, don't break the law. Once you are let out of prison and have served your time, you can vote again.
The fact that a foreign Court with judges from around the world are going to decide who can and cannot vote in our country is scandalous. The British Prime Minister David Cameron is going to prove what a melt he is once again by doing whatever those in Europe say, whether the British people like it or not. Cameron is proving just how watered down his role now is as Prime Minister, which is very sad.
What do those people in this country disgusted at this ruling do? They can't vote out the judges of the European Court of Human Rights, but I hope they vote in some politicians who will act in the British public's interest and not despite it just to appease unelected foreign figures.
EDIT: John Hirst celebrates