DOWNING Street has insisted there are “no plans” for the UK to withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) after reports to the contrary sparked a civil war among Tory MPs.
It comes with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak set to publish legislation designed to stop asylum seekers trying to cross the Channel in small boats.
A score of Conservative MPs hit out after The Sunday Times quoted an anonymous source who said Sunak would be “willing to reconsider whether being part of the ECHR is in the UK’s long-term interest” should his plans be deemed unlawful by European courts.
The source claimed that Sunak, alongside his Home Secretary Suella Braverman, would be “pushing the boundaries of what is legally possible, while staying within the ECHR”.
READ MORE: 'We will oppose any attempt to take Scotland out of ECHR', SNP say
The reports led Bob Neill, the chair of Westminster Justice Select Committee, to tell the Financial Times: “If Conservatives don’t believe in the rule of law, what do we believe in? Are we going to put ourselves in the same company as Russia and Belarus?
“It’s not a virtue to push the law to the limits. Adherence to and membership of the ECHR is a red line for many Conservatives. It would be unbelievable for a Conservative government to leave it.”
Robert Buckland, a Tory former justice secretary, also told that paper: “It would be an undesirable state of affairs if the UK was to follow Russia out of the Council of Europe … I don’t think there would be a majority for it.”
Elsewhere, Jackie Doyle-Price, a Tory MP and briefly a minister in Liz Truss’s government, said that “willy waving about leaving the ECHR will do zilch”.
“Upholding the law should never be a matter for debate for a Conservative. Our Home Office is crap. If the government wants to have a phone[y] war over the ECHR instead of sorting itself out it can do it without me,” she said in the “Home Group” of Tory MPs on Whatsapp.
Anna Firth, a former barrister elected to Southend West after the murder of David Amess, said Doyle-Price had been “bang on the money”.
Politico reported that other messages exchanged in the Conservative group were equally damning.
Tory MP David Simmonds said: “The ECHR is not the issue here. By pretending it is, we are setting ourselves up for a fall as a UK court will take the same line.”
Alicia Kearns, the chair of Westminster’s Foreign Affairs Select Committee, said Simmonds was “exactly” right.
After the Conservative backlash, Downing Street insisted it had no plans to withdraw from the ECHR.
In a briefing on Monday, No 10 said the UK Government is “confident” proposals being drawn up will be “compliant with our international obligations”.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesperson told reporters: “We will of course comply with all our international obligations, and we are confident the measures being worked through will tackle the problem while being compliant with the ECHR.”
Asked if there are any circumstances in which the UK would consider leaving the ECHR, he replied: “There are no plans for Government to take that approach.”
READ MORE: George Kerevan: Fight for independence will charge on post-Nicola Sturgeon
Tackling the flow of small boats across the Channel has been set as one of Sunak’s top five priorities in the run up to the next General Election.
According to Downing Street, the proposals for cracking down on the crossings are due to be published “fairly soon”.
So far this year, some 1442 migrants have crossed the Channel to the UK, according to Home Office figures.
Those numbers include 262 people who made the journey this weekend.
Last year, a record 45,755 succeeded in making the trip, UK Government figures show.
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