Afternoon summary
Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, has signalled the government may be prepared to leave the European convention on human rights (ECHR) if it will help the UK tackle the problem of people arriving on small boats crossing the Channel.
Lee Anderson, the Conservative deputy chair, has admitted that the government has “failed” on immigration. (See 11.22am.)
Leo Varadkar, the taoiseach (Irish PM), has said that if power sharing is not restored at Stormont in the autumn, the UK and Irish governments need to work on a “plan B”. Speaking after talks with all the main Northern Ireland party leaders in Belfast, he said he hoped the DUP would lift its boycott of the power-sharing executive so it can reconvene in the autumn. But he went on:
I do think, though, that if that opportunity is missed, if it’s the case that the institutions can’t be re-established in the autumn, well, then I do think at that point we have to start having conversations about alternatives, about plan B.
That’s very much a conversation that I’m keen to have with the UK government. I don’t want to speculate too much at the moment, because I still believe it is possible to get the institutions up and running in the autumn.
I do think the suspension has gone on for a long time. There is drift. And that’s not good for Northern Ireland.
Asked what the “plan B” might be, Varadkar said he did not want to say. He went on:
That’s kind of a conversation that we’re having some of the party leaders today, a conversation that I think we need to have between the British and Irish governments, because we’re not the sovereign government in Northern Ireland – we accept that.
But we are co-guarantors of the Good Friday agreement and if the Good Friday agreement isn’t working, if institutions aren’t functioning, well, then it makes sense that the British and Irish governments work together to talk about what arrangements could be put in place.
Asked if this meant joint authority, he added:
I don’t mean anything specifically. I understand again why you’re asking that question but, as you know, there’s no provision for joint authority in the Good Friday agreement, there’s also no provision for direct rule in the Good Friday agreement.
Updated
Mark Drakeford says he will leave Senedd at next election
Mark Drakeford, the Welsh first minister, has said he will leave the Senedd (Welsh parliament) at the next election.
He has already said that he intends to stand down as first minister – a post he has held since 2018 – before the next Welsh parliamentary election in 2026.
Speaking at the Eisteddfod today, Drakeford said that he would not stay on in the next parliament because he did not want to complicate life for his successor. As the BBC reports, he explained:
It’s important to have a refresh. I think it is difficult for those who will be doing the work in the future to have people like me sitting behind them.
I don’t want to do that. I think of it like Tony Benn – when he decided to leave the House of Commons, he said: ‘I’m going to stop being an MP in order to spend more time in politics.’
I’m not going to be a member of the Senedd after 2026 but I am not going to step back from the debate or stop thinking about Wales’ future.
Drakeford posted this video on Twitter about his visit to the Eisteddfod, a Welsh language and cultural festival.
What a pleasure to be back at yr @eisteddfod eleni.
— Mark Drakeford (@PrifWeinidog) August 9, 2023
A huge diolch to everyone who works so hard to ensure this gŵyl - the largest cultural Festival of its kind in Europe – is one to enjoy.
You don’t have to speak Cymraeg to join the fun. Please come and visit if you can! pic.twitter.com/Ex3R3sUtC8
Updated
Does Good Friday agreement make it impossible for Tories to propose ECHR withdrawal?
Several readers have been asking how the UK could leave the European convention on human rights given that complaince with the ECHR is one of the safeguards cemented into the text of the Good Friday agreement, which is the foundation of the peace settlement in Northern Ireland. Alexander Horne, a lawyer and former legal adviser in parliament, is one of many people to have made this point on Twitter.
Every time I see this story (which seems to appear cyclically on at least a yearly basis) I wish that the journalist would pose the politician concerned 2 questions:
— Alexander Horne (@AlexanderHorne1) August 9, 2023
1) What about our international law obligations under the Good Friday Agreement?
(1/2)https://t.co/XhW6NfkoGt
And
— Alexander Horne (@AlexanderHorne1) August 9, 2023
2) Are you prepared to end criminal justice co-operation (extradition, criminal records checks, etc.) with the European Union in order to implement this policy?
(2/2)
All of this explains why proposing withdrawal from the ECHR would be hugely provocative and controversial. But does this mean that there is no chance at all of the Tories proposing movement on this issue in their next manifesto? Not quite. There are at least three reasons why.
1) Conservative party members care a lot more about small boats, and about leaving institutions with “European” in their title, than they do about Northern Ireland. Rishi Sunak may be opposed to leaving the ECHR (his precise views on this are not clear – see 10.02am) but, if he is, he is in a minority comprising fewer than a quarter of the Conservative party membership, according to a recent survey. Most Tory members want to withdraw. What about Northern Ireland? “Who cares?” seems to be the response of many. Arguably, if safeguarding the Good Friday agreement was a priority, the party would never have pursued Brexit in the first place. (Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU, and the current deadlock at Stormont is a direct result of the trade conditions it created.) Polling in 2019 showed that a majority of Tory members said they wanted Brexit to happen even if that were to lead to Northern Ireland leaving the UK.
2) Renegotiating the Good Friday agreement is not entirely unthinkable. The deal has been one of the great British diplomatic successes of the postwar period, and it has improved life in Northern Ireland immeasurably. But, as Arlene Foster said when she was DUP leader, it is not “sacrosanct”, and periodically there are calls for it to be reformed. For some, the crisis with power sharing is making the case for revision of the agreement even more compelling.
3) For some Tories, ECHR withdrawal may be more of a threat than a goal, anyway. Some believe that a hardball strategy by the UK government could lead either to the European court of human rights applying the convention less strictly, or the Council of Europe granting concessions that might make the Rwanda policy easier to implement. (Some in the Conservative party felt threatening to leave the EU might have the same effect on the European Commission; it didn’t.)
Updated
DUP leader says he does not know if Northern Ireland's executive will be restored in weeks or months
Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP leader, has said that he does not know when power sharing will be restored at Stormont.
The power-sharing executive has not been functioning for 18 months because the DUP is refusing to participate until its concerns about the Northern Ireland protocol are addressed. Speaking after talks in Belfast with Leo Varadkar, the taoiseach (Irish PM), Donaldson said:
The matters that we’re dealing with are essentially about the internal market of the United Kingdom, and that’s why the focus is on the UK government and ourselves in trying to find solutions.
In terms of timescale, I don’t know at the moment how quickly things will move, but I am hopeful that we will see progress. I want to see that progress, but we need to get a solution.
I don’t know if Stormont will be restored in weeks or months, that depends very much on the government’s response to our paper on the concerns that we have raised on the Windsor framework.
Varadkar has been meeting all the main party leaders in Belfast. After her meeting with him, Michelle O’Neill, the Sinn Féin leader in Northern Ireland and first minister designate, said patience was “wearing thin” with the DUP. She said:
I’ve heard more urgency from the taoiseach today than I’ve heard from the British government in terms of the need to restore the executive …
We need an executive today. It’s long overdue, the public need it to be there fighting their corner, dealing with the budgetary situation that we have, fighting their corner in terms of good public services. There shouldn’t be any more delay as to that.
Updated
Lord Falconer, who was justice secretary and lord chancellor in Tony Blair’s government, says Robert Jenrick’s suggestion today that the UK could leave the European convention on human rights is just one of several developments showing the Tories are undermining the rule of law.
R Jenrick suggesting UK might leave ECHR, L Chancellor attacking lawyers acting lawfully in challenging govt action they disagree with, Home Sec blaming lefty lawyers for immigration failures. Deliberate undermining of law and lawyers by government. There will be consequences.
R Jenrick suggesting UK might leave ECHR, L Chancellor attacking lawyers acting lawfully in challenging govt action they disagree with, Home Sec blaming lefty lawyers for immigration failures. Deliberate undermining of law and lawyers by government. There will be consequences.
— Charlie Falconer (@LordCFalconer) August 9, 2023
Updated
Here is the video of Lee Anderson, the Conservative party’s deputy chair, telling Nigel Farage last night that the government has failed on immigration. (See 11.22am.)
Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘deeply personal and revealing’ autobiography to be published in 2025
Nicola Sturgeon’s “deeply personal and revealing” memoir will be published in 2025 by Pan Macmillan, after nine publishers bid for it at auction. Lucy Knight has the story here.
Zac Goldsmith claims he could support Labour at next election over climate issues - if it focused more on nature, not just carbon
Zac Goldsmith, who resigned as a Foreign Office minister in June saying he could no longer support Rishi Sunak because of his “apathy” on climate issues, has told the BBC that he might even back Labour as a result.
Goldsmith raised the prospect of supporting Labour in an interview with Hardtalk. But he said that would only happen if the Labour party adapted its green policies to put more focus on the natural environment and biodiversity – issues about which he feels particularly strongly.
He told the programme:
My concern about the Labour party at the moment - I don’t say this is a tribal politician, I’m not a tribal politician – is I think there is a blind spot on the natural environment. When the Labour party thinks environment, when it talks about the environment, it is thinking carbon – and taxation, regulation and all the things that go with that.
The simple truth is there is no pathway to net zero and there’s no solution to climate change that does not involve nature, massive efforts to protect and restore the natural world.
And at the moment, I’m not hearing any of that from the Labour party. If I do, if there’s a real commitment now the kind of commitment, frankly, that we saw when Boris Johnson was the leader, then I’d be very tempted to throw my weight behind that party and support them in any way I could.
Goldsmith is close friends with Johnson and his wife Carrie – he lent them his holiday villa in Spain two years ago – and his resignation was seen in part as a member of the Johnson faction retaliating against Sunak for the role he played in Johnson’s demise. Goldsmith’s threat to endorse Labour at the next election may be seen in the same way.
As a peer, Goldsmith will not have a vote at the election.
Updated
A reader asks:
Is the EU/UK FTA under pinned by the ECHR and, if so, what are the ramifications of the UK leaving the ECHR? What are the likelihood of the repercussions?
If the UK were to leave the European convention on human rights (ECHR), that would have an impact on the post-Brexit trade deal with the EU (the trade and cooperation agreement, or TCA). When the deal was being negotiated, the UK tried to avoid making it conditional on the UK remaining party to the ECHR. But it was not entirely successful. As Lisa O’Carroll points out in this story, written earlier this year, leaving the ECHR would lead to the law enforcement and judicial cooperation parts of the TCA being immediately suspended.
On the subject of the ECHR, I have updated the post at 10.02am to say that in February Rishi Sunak said the UK “will remain a member of the ECHR”. (You may need to refresh the page to get the update to appear.) Other comments from Sunak have been more evasive, and what the Conservative party will say about this subject in its next manifesto is still unclear.
Jenrick says it's 'naive' to think reducing asylum application claims backlog will solve small boats problem
During his morning interview round Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, covered quite a range of small boat-related issues. Here are more lines from what he said that haven’t been covered already.
Jenrick said it was “naive” to think that reducing the backlog of asylum applications would by itself sort out the small boat problems. Reducing the time spent waiting for applications to be processed might just encourage more people to come, he said. When it was put to him that the backlog was “the nub of the problem”, he told Sky News:
It isn’t the nub of the problem. But it is an important thing that we have to get right.
I say that because there are those, such as the Labour party, saying that just if you process claims quickly, that will fix it. I think that’s a naive view. That’s what they did when they were last in office. And that just encourages more people to come.
But it is right that we make the Home Office as efficient as possible and the good news is that we’re succeeding.
This is not the first time Jenrick has made this argument; in May he told MPs that cutting the asylum application backlog could increase the number of asylum seekers coming to the UK. But it is a perilous line to take, because it implies the Home Office is not fully committed to reducing the backlog, and because Rishi Sunak has made cutting the backlog a priority. In December Sunak told MPs that claims should be processed “in days or weeks, not months or years”.
Jenrick claimed that a “significant number” of migrants who originally turned down places on the Bibby Stockholm barge were now agreeing to move there. He said:
We have written to those individuals who have so far declined to travel and, as I understand it, a significant proportion of them have already changed their minds and agreed to move. A significant number moved yesterday, I suspect more will move in the coming days.
He confirmed that asylum seekers who refused to move to a barge might not be offered alternative accommodation by the government.
He rejected claims that the UK was losing out because, as a result of Brexit, it was no longer party to the Dublin agreement that allowed people claiming asylum in the UK to be returned to safe countries in the EU they had travelled through previously. When this was put to him on the Today programme, Jenrick replied:
No, I dispute that.
The Dublin arrangement which you are referring to didn’t work well. In fact, in their last years of operation, more individuals were brought from the continent to the UK than were sent in the other direction, so the arrangement wasn’t working well.
He confirmed that the UK was paying some money to Turkey as part of the deal to tackle people smuggling gangs announced today, but he refused to say how much. When asked what the sum was, he told GB News:
I’m not able to say how much this morning, but what we are funding with Turkey is real investment in core law enforcement capability with a centre of excellence whereby Turkish national police will be training up to tackle this issue in Turkey.
Updated
Labour welcomes Lee Anderson's admission government failing on immigration, but says his 'back to France' jibe wrong
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, has welcomed Lee Anderson’s admission that the government is failing on immigraiton. She told the Today programme:
[Anderson] did admit that the government is failing to tackle the boats crisis. What we need is grip rather than gimmicks, we need solutions rather than just this ramping up the rhetoric all of the time.
And that is the problem – because they are failing, because they have been flailing around for years while they have just made things worse with the policies they have pursued, they have ended up now lashing out trying to promote division and trying to find someone else to blame.
That is not what responsible governments do. They should be getting on with trying to solve the practical problems around the gangs and around the backlog.
But, in her interview, Cooper criticised Anderson for saying yesterday that asylum seekers unhappy with barge accommodation should “fuck off back to France”. She said:
It is clearly the wrong language to use and it is ramping up the rhetoric as a distraction from the fact the government is failing.
One person likely to welcome Cooper’s condemnation is Anderson himself. In an interview with the Daily Express, which could be seen as confirmation that his reactionary soundbites are primarily crafted with the intention of provoking a reaction, he in effect complained that Labour MPs weren’t criticising him publicly over his France comment. Anderson told the paper:
The leftwing mainstream media has gone into meltdown over my comments but, interestingly, I am yet to see one Labour frontbench MP disagree with my comments.
Is this another U-turn from Labour because their silence is deafening.
Updated
Tory deputy chair Lee Anderson admits government has 'failed' on immigration in interview with Farage
Lee Anderson, the Conservative deputy chair, has admitted that the government has “failed” on immigration.
Anderson made the comment last night, in an interview with the former Ukip and Brexit party leader Nigel Farage on GB News.
As the Telegraph reports, Farage put it to Anderson that the government had “completely and utterly failed everyone” on immigration. Anderson replied:
Listen Nigel, I am not going to sit here and make excuses to anyone. This is out of control, we are in power at the moment, I am the deputy chair of the Conservative party, we are in government and we have failed on this. There is no doubt about it.
We have said we are going to fix it, it is a failure.
Anderson said the government had policies in place to address the small boats problem, such as the Rwanda deportations plan and the Illegal Migration Act, but he said progress “seems very slow”.
He also said the government faced opposition from “lefty lawyers”, human rights groups and charities. He went on:
Everything is against us but I am not making excuses. It is slowing us down. If the whole of parliament was behind us on this I am sure this would have got through by now.
Updated
Liberty, the human rights group, has expressed alarm at the suggestion that the Conservative party could support leaving the European convention on human rights. (See 10.02am.) In a tweet it said:
The European Convention on Human Rights protects everyone in the UK
The rights and freedoms we’re all familiar with come from it
Dragging the UK out of the ECHR will allow the Government to knowingly commit human rights abuses against anyone
The European Convention on Human Rights protects everyone in the UK
— Liberty (@libertyhq) August 9, 2023
The rights and freedoms we're all familiar with come from it
Dragging the UK out of the ECHR will allow the Government to knowingly commit human rights abuses against anyonehttps://t.co/lsyLX9ISzo
Jenrick suggests he's open to backing parliamentary move to force byelection in Nadine Dorries' constituency
Robert Jenrick has suggested he would not rule out backing a parliamentary move to punish Nadine Dorries for not attending parliament as a means of forcing a byelection.
Dorries, the former culture secretary, had infuriated many MPs, including her colleagues, by her failure to formally resign her seat despite her announcing in early June that she was going to do so “with immediate effect”.
All three main English parties are gearing up for a byelection in her Mid Bedfordshire constituency, and her non-resignation has focused attention on how little work she appears to be doing as an MP. She has voted in the Commons six times this year, and has not spoken in the chamber since last summer.
Last week Sunak criticised Dorries, saying she was not properly representing her constituents.
Today, in an interview with Sky News, Jenrick, the immigration minister, used similar language to Sunak. But he went further in hinting that he might back a parliamentary move to oust Dorries.
Asked if it was time for Dorries to go, Jenrick replied:
Yes. I think being a member of parliament is a special privilege. You sign up for a term in office. If you decide you want to leave parliament for whatever reason, you need to get on and do that.
I don’t think that Nadine Dorries’ constituents are being properly represented.
I hope she’ll reach that conclusion soon.
Jenrick was then asked if he supported a proposal from Sir Chris Bryant, the chair of the Commons standards committee, to force Dorries out. In an interview with the Financial Times, Bryant, who is promoting his new book on conduct in parliament, said he favoured resurrecting a parliamentary rule from 1801 stating that “no member do presume to go out of town without leave of this house”. Bryant suggested that a process like this could end up with Dorries being suspended for more than 10 days, which would trigger a recall petition and then a byelection (if the 10% threshold were met).
On Monday, asked about the Bryant proposal, Downing Street declined to endorse it, and said ultimately it was for constituents to decide who should serve as an MP.
But when Jenrick was asked about the plan, he sounded more enthusiastic. Asked if he would support Bryant’s proposal, he replied:
I’m not familiar with the details of his proposal, I know he’s relying on quite an arcane piece of legislation.
Obviously the government will consider that, but it’s probably a matter for the House of Commons rather than for the government.
And so if he brings forward serious proposals, then as individual members of parliament we’ll have to consider.
Dorries, who is a loyal Boris Johnson supporter, has said that before she resigns as an MP she wants to get a proper explanation as to why she was blocked from getting a peerage in his resignation honours. She has not responded to the recent criticism of her attendance record in parliament, or her failure to quit, but yesterday she did post a message on Twitter accusing Bryant of being a publicity seeker.
Ahh, Chris Bryant has a book out – well, I never. This latest bout of publicity seeking was so unlike him… All is now clear…
Ahh, Chris Bryant has a book out - well, I never. This latest bout of publicity seeking was so unlike him…
— Rt Hon Nadine Dorries (@NadineDorries) August 8, 2023
All is now clear…
Sir Chris Bryant says he has been assaulted by five MPshttps://t.co/XczUYXGgEC
Dorries, of course, is no slouch when it comes to publicity-seeking.
Updated
Jenrick suggests Tories would take UK out of ECHR if that offered only means of stopping small boats
Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, has suggested that the government might withdraw from the European convention on human rights if that offers the only means of stopping asylum seekers coming to the UK on small boats.
Asked if leaving the ECHR was an option for the government, Jenrick said the government would “take whatever necessary action is needed”.
Jenrick was responding to a question prompted by a BBC report saying senior Conservatives believe the party will campaign on a manifesto proposing ECHR withdrawal. The report, by Nick Eardley, also quotes an unnamed minister claiming the UK is being “punished” by the European court of human rights, which enforces the convention, because of Brexit.
Rishi Sunak has played down the prospect of leaving the ECHR, arguing that the UK is instead in a good position to secure reforms to how the European court operates that might help it implement its Rwanda policy.
But Sunak has never ruled out leaving the convention, or the court, and one recent survey showed that 70% of Conservative party members wanted the UK to leave the convention. Suella Braverman, the home secretary, has in the past said she agrees with this view, although she now tends not to say that publicly because it is not government policy.
In an interview with Times Radio, asked if the government was ruling out withdrawal from the convention, Jenrick replied:
You can see from the prime minister, the home secretary and myself, our total commitment to this challenge.
That’s why we’re working on every possible front. That’s why we have produced the most comprehensive plan, I believe, of any European country to tackle this issue.
And we’ll do whatever is necessary ultimately to defend our borders and to bring order to our asylum system.
Asked if “whatever is necessary” might include leaving the ECHR, Jenrick replied:
We will do whatever is required, take whatever necessary action is needed.
UPDATE: A reader points out that in February, in a Commons statement on the Windsor framework, Rishi Sunak told the Labour MP Alison McGovern that the UK “will remain a member of the ECHR”. See the clip below. McGovern raised the question because the Good Friday agreement is based on the UK remaining party to the ECHR, and so withdrawal could upset the peace settlement in Northern Ireland. But, on other occasions when asked about this, Sunak has been more evasive, and No 10 has never said Sunak is committed to staying in under all circumstances. No one expects the government to leave before the general election, but whether or not to include the option of leaving in the next Conservative manifesto is something that is being discussed within the party.
“The UK will remain a member of the ECHR”
— Peter Kyle MP (@peterkyle) February 28, 2023
Great question from @Alison_McGovern and good to finally have a definitive answer from @RishiSunak that @DominicRaab and @SuellaBraverman will not be allowed to break the Good Friday Agreement by withdrawing us from the ECHR. pic.twitter.com/K71XKcVnVw
Updated
Labour says it would set up commission to tackle 60% fall in proportion of crimes solved since 2015
Good morning. In August, as “normal” political news dries up, journalists are more dependent than usual on what the political parties are offering and the government is still banging away with announcements designed to show that it is dealing with the small boats problem. Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, has been promoting a deal with Turkey intended to tackle illegal migration. The Home Office statement is here, and our story about the initiative is here.
But today Labour has got its own, rival announcement. It is about crime, and how to ensure more crimes lead to suspects being charged, and it is inspired in particular by this chart in the document Keir Starmer published earlier this year explaining his “making Britain’s streets safe” mission. It shows the detection rate for offences in England and Wales has fallen by 60% since 2015.
Labour says that, in addition to proposals it has already announced to deal with this (more neighbourhood police officers, more people working as crown prosecutors), it will set up a charging commission to ensure more cases go to trial. It says a body is needed to speed up the process because the time taken to charge suspects is getting longer (up from 14 days, on average, in 2016, to 44 days now), and because 2.4m cases were dropped due to evidential difficulties in the past year.
Another problem is the huge increase in the proportion of victims who just give up on wanting to see a case through.
In an article for the Daily Mirror, Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, says a charging commission is needed because, for every 500 people who get burgled, only 20 cases go to court. She says:
Across England and Wales today, over 500 people will have their home broken into. Only 20 of those burglars will face court. Shockingly, less than 5% of burglaries are solved.
For violent crime the figures are worse. More than 5,000 people will face a violent attack or abuse today alone. But less than 300 of the criminals responsible will face court.
Under the Tories the proportion of crimes that are solved has dropped by two thirds. Bluntly, more criminals are getting off, more victims are being badly let down.
The Labour commission will be chaired by Dame Vera Baird, a former Labour MP and former victims’ commissioner. Explaining what it would do, she said:
Investigations and prosecutions for serious crimes like rape are in a dismal state, the criminal justice system is in chaos, and things simply cannot stay as they are.
This commission will bring together voices from across policing and prosecutions to forensically investigate the causes of this charging crisis, and set out robust recommendations for recovery.
Jenrick and Cooper have both been doing media rounds this morning. I will post the highlights shortly.
If you want to contact me, do try the “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a PC or a laptop. This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting, too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line, privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate), or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.
Updated
