‘Brexit: how do you unscramble an egg?’

Next month the British electorate will return to the polling booths to vote whether to remain in the EU. Known sometimes as the Brexit referendum, the outcome is not just about our relationship in Europe, but could have huge constitutional implications for the UK, particularly if the outcome of the vote is dramatically different in England, Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, say if the majority of England or Wales votes to leave, yet more Scots vote to stay in the EU.

Many questions remain unanswered. In a time of growing movement of people, how will the land border with the UK and Europe, between the Republic of Ireland and the UK’s Northern Ireland be policed, regarding immigration applicants and asylum seekers, for example, if we separate from the EU? What about the City of London, the economic engine of the UK, remaining a global leader and European financial centre?

Yet while the banking sector shirks at the idea of Brexit, becoming an isolated island is alarming for many other reasons too, not least because a no vote would leave us at the mercy of Tory governments; historically hell bent on eroding legal and social policy protections, fought for by successive Labour administrations.

In an era of creeping insecurity at work, such as zero hours contracts, poverty pay, and other corrosive systemic issues like the ever-burgeoning housing crisis and dismantling of the NHS, I don’t want to see any further erosion of security in the workplace, let alone more attacks on the rule of law and our human rights.

Last year, presumably to appeal to the extreme right wing of his party, Cameron and the Tories announced they wanted to repeal the Human Rights Act (HRA). This is the piece of legislation that incorporates into UK law the rights contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Considered very much part of Churchill’s legacy, hardly a man of the economic left, these rights are derived from all the great religions and community groups and enshrine into law basic principles, seen as essential to civilised living, for our species to live peacefully and thrive, after witnessing the horrors of the Nazis and World War II.

As someone who was forced to take legal action over the News Corporation hacking scandal, the HRA is an issue very much close to my heart. Article 8 of the convention surrounds the right to respect for your family and private life, your home and your correspondence and interventions from Strasbourg have made phone hacking illegal.

I want the HRA to stay in place for many reasons, including the protections it has given women. Before the HRA, alleged rapists would often sack their legal representatives at the door of the court – then be able to question the rape complainant, exposing them to gruelling and humiliating cross examination, often for days.

The HRA protects women from this. Shockingly, until the Convention was used back in 1991, a woman could be raped by her husband, considered to be a possession, part of his chattels.

None of this is scaremongering. The same Tories wanting to repeal the HRA are the very same politicians who in 2013 destroyed legal aid, a cornerstone of equality for us the people under the law and also recently attacked Judicial Review.

We know from the Hillsborough disaster verdict only last week, serious miscarriages of justice still happen in the UK, do you want to lose any of our rights protected in the HRA?

The HRA has helped rape victims, defended domestic violence sufferers and guarded against slavery; protected those in care, shielded press freedom and provided answers for grieving families, and the HRA has held the State to account for illegally spying on us, as well as safeguarding our soldiers, and supported peaceful protest.

Though the issues need to be separated out, the Brexit referendum clearly has an influence on the debate around the HRA and the relationship within the UK, because of the treaties that bind the UK.

In Scotland, the HRA has now been interwoven into our devolution arrangements and the Scottish Parliament cannot now breach the HRA. In addition, the Northern Ireland Anglo-Irish Treaty requires that the ECHR is incorporated into Northern Irish law.

The Good Friday Agreement is an international agreement, very much built with an underpinning of the HRA. This all begs the question: how do you go about unscrambling an egg?

As well as the notion of no longer being at the head table of European decision-making, breaking up the EU could threaten post-war peace and security and while the Brexit debate might well be about relations over the channel, leaving the EU could also threaten our ‘special relationship’ across the Atlantic.

In the face of globalisation, with the likes of the USA and China’s huge landmass, stronger performing economies and vastly bigger armies than the UK’s, don’t we want to be part of a larger Europe? I also worry about certain investment drying up, money coming into the UK because we are part of the EU, which brings jobs and boosts the economy.

When you decide how to vote on Thursday June 23, perhaps ponder these elements and consider the words of Mary Queen of Scots: “Look to your consciences and remember that the theatre of the whole world is wider than the Kingdom of England.”

Amanda Ramsay is a PhD researcher at the University of Bristol’s Faculty of Social Sciences and Law. She is on Twitter @AmandaRamsay

Do you disagree with our columnist? Or perhaps you want to get something else off your chest? To contribute to our opinion pages, email martin@bristol247.com.