SUELLA Braverman should be removed as Home Secretary, a former Scottish cabinet secretary has said, after one of the Tories’ most controversial and reactionary MPs spoke out against her rhetoric.
The top Conservative minister was heavily criticised after she said that people who cross the Channel looking to claim asylum in the UK have values “which are at odds with our country”.
Braverman further said – without data to back it up – that there were “heightened levels of criminality” linked to people who had come across from France in small boats.
READ MORE: Michael Russell: Tory asylum bill showed no respect for equality or rule of law
The Home Secretary’s comments have proven too much for politicians even within her own party.
Even Jonathan Gullis – the Conservative former minister who in December attempted to force the UK Government to ignore rulings from the European Court of Human Rights over the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda – distanced himself from Braverman’s rhetoric.
“I don’t feel comfortable with the mentioning of the values,” he told LBC. “I don’t think that was appropriate, nor was it right.
“I think the Home Secretary does have a point around the criminality … I think it’s perfectly right to say that there is of course criminality within this.
“But I don’t think that the values and the broad stroke that was brushed to everyone was right or reasonable.”
READ MORE: Experts slam BBC after top editor says children are 'willingly' trafficked
Gullis, a fervent anti-immigration voice in the Tory party ranks at Westminster, has previously called for asylum seekers to be housed in “portacabins or tents”, and heckled a Labour MP who raised the case of the hundreds of migrant children missing from Home Office care by saying they “shouldn’t have come here illegally”.
Michael Russell, the SNP president and former Scottish constitution secretary, said that Gullis’s reaction to Braverman’s comments proved she had gone too far.
He told The National: “If Jonathan Gullis thinks your rhetoric is unacceptable, then you have crossed every boundary there is, and a few more besides.
“It is clear now that Braverman’s cruel and offensive view of those who are in desperate need is upsetting even the hardest of hearts in the Tory Party.
“But given that we know the Tory grassroots like this approach, it is doubtful if the Prime Minister has either the courage or the political capital available to remove her, as removed she should be.”
Sayeeda Warsi, a Tory peer and former co-chair of the party, also said that Braverman should be removed.
She told Channel 4: “Part of what, unfortunately, the Home Secretary has a tendency to do is to make sweeping statements based upon nothing.
“I think she has to go back to having a sense of proportionality, a commitment to facts, making policy based upon evidence.”
On Wednesday, MPs at Westminster voted by 289 to 230, a majority of 59, to give their assent to Braverman’s Illegal Migration Bill.
The bill – which is expected to face stiff challenges in the Lords – will change the law so people who arrive in the UK illegally will be detained and then promptly removed, either to their home country or a safe third country such as Rwanda.
However, campaigners say there is no legal route to claiming asylum in the UK, meaning the bill will effectively ban it outright.
Speaking on Wednesday, the Home Secretary appeared to rule out introducing safe and legal routes to the UK for refugees trying to escape the conflict in Sudan.
Braverman (above) said the Tories had “no plans” to consider making provisions for civilians from the war-torn country to access Britain.
At PMQs, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was asked by SNP Westminster group leader Stephen Flynn whether he would deport child refugees who arrive in the UK without authorisation under plans to “stop the boats”.
The PM told the Commons the country has a “proud record” of supporting asylum seekers, but did not commit to a new safe and legal route for those fleeing Sudan.
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