MINISTERS are to hold crisis talks with the ringleader of a Tory revolt as Boris Johnson seeks to head off a damaging row over parliamentary scrutiny of the Government’s coronavirus regulations.
The Prime Minister is under mounting pressure to give Parliament greater power to debate and vote on coronavirus restrictions, with more than 50 Tory MPs signalling they could rebel on the matter.
MPs will vote on Wednesday on whether to renew the powers in the Coronavirus Act.
MP Graham Brady, chairman of the influential Tory backbench 1922 Committee, is leading calls for ministers to consult Parliament before introducing new curbs on people’s freedoms.
Some 52 Tories publicly back the amendment, enough to wipe out Johnson’s Commons majority if it is put to a vote and the opposition parties support it.
Health Secretary Matt Hancock agreed to meet Brady “to see what further progress can be made” on the issue, saying the Government was “looking at further ways to ensure the House can be properly involved in the process in advance where possible”.
“I strongly agree with the need for us in this House to have the appropriate level of scrutiny,”.
But he said the Government had to have the ability to act quickly where necessary.
Former Cabinet minister Chris Grayling told Hancock: “Before we embark upon measures that affect everyone, as opposed to firefighting in individual areas, it is really important that this House has the chance to really scrutinise and hold to account and challenge.”
Hancock replied: “The question is how we can have the appropriate level of scrutiny whilst also making sure that we can move fast where that is necessary.”
Conservative rebels seized upon an assessment by academics at University College London (UCL) which concluded that “Parliament has been consistently sidelined during the pandemic”.
Tory former minister Steve Baker, one of the Conservatives signed up to the amendment, said he believed the Government will be forced to back down.
“I have always hoped we would find a way through to prior parliamentary approval,” Baker said.
“I’m more optimistic now the UCL Constitution Unit has said we are right.”
Baker also likened some of the Government’s coronavirus restrictions to George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984, specifically referencing a ban on singing and dancing in bars, cafes and restaurants.
A blog post by the UCL’s Professor Meg Russell and Lisa James said: “MPs have genuine cause for complaint.”
They pointed to the new rules which came into force last Monday, but which only appeared in regulation form on Sunday.
“Only yesterday regulations on self-isolation were published, coming into effect just seven hours later, and imposing potential £10,000 fines.
“Yet, despite media briefings eight days previously, these were not debated in Parliament,” Russell and James said in their post.
“Such cases raise clear political questions, but also legal ones as the underlying legislation allows ministers to bypass Parliament only if a measure is so urgent that there is no time for debate.”
They added that decisions to sideline Parliament were part of a “longer-running trend” under Johnson.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel