Connect with us

Published

on

Isaac Levido, the man in charge of the Conservative general election campaign, did not hold back.

“Let me be clear,” he briefed Tory MPs at a closed-door meeting last Monday, “divided parties fail”. A fat lot of good that did the prime minister.

The next day 60 Conservative MPs voted, fruitlessly, for an amendment in defiance of the government’s bill to keep the proposed Rwanda removal scheme broadly compliant with the law.

Politics latest: Tax cuts hint dropped by Rishi Sunak

The rebels included former home secretary Suella Braverman, her deputy Robert Jenrick and three resigners from payroll jobs, including Lee Anderson, the loud-mouthed party deputy chairman.

The revolt shrunk at the substantive “third reading” on Wednesday.

More than 40 of them caucused before the vote and pulled back from bringing down the bill, and probably themselves and the government with it. Only 11 rebelled.

More on Conservatives

Still, it was a stretch for the prime minister to boast “the Conservative Party has come together” at a specially convened news conference the following day.

Sources informed Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby that several “letters had gone in” from Tory MPs demanding a vote of no confidence in Sunak.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What next for Rwanda bill?

Such behaviour prompts the question: “Do the Conservatives have a death wish as a party of government?” To put it another way: “Do they sincerely want to win the next election?”

The public notices when a party is divided. The latest figures for December are Conservatives divided 70%, united 8%.

The polling company YouGov runs a survey tracking that issue for the Conservatives. The jaws of disillusionment sprung wide in January 2022, the height of the “partygate” revelations, and have stayed gaping wide ever since.

Labour’s large lead in the opinion polls has also been in place for the past two years.

Show promo

Two YouGov polls in the past week suggest that, if anything, it is getting bigger.

A large survey in key constituencies, commissioned by a newly formed right-wing faction calling itself the Conservative Britain Alliance, plotted the party on course to lose 196 seats, down to just 169 MPs to Labour’s 385.

Next the regular monthly poll for The Times, conducted this week, gave Labour an increased lead of 27 points in voting intention, 47% to 20%, with Nigel Farage’s Reform in third place on 12%.

In such dire circumstances, the prime minister at least is now sticking to Isaac Levido’s advice and claiming that the Conservatives are united.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sunak warns Lords over Rwanda Bill

He is only managing to keep them together by constantly shifting closer to the position of the rebels on the right. He has declined to punish, or remove the party whip, from those who voted against the government on the Rwanda bill.

Instead, Sunak confirmed this week that he will order civil servants to ignore last-minute, so-called “pyjama orders” from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) under Rule 39, to halt deportations.

He and his ministers have adopted the nativist rhetoric of describing the ECHR as a “foreign court”. The UK has been a founder member of the international court since 1959 and a Briton sits as one of its judges. It is not an EU institution.

Some of the rebels are veterans of the post-referendum Brexit deliberations which brought down Theresa May. Whatever moves she made in their direction were never enough.

Others, like Lee Anderson, were elected in 2019 on Boris Johnson’s coattails. Bathetically Anderson abstained in the final vote because he couldn’t stand the mockery from Labour when he entered the “nay” voting lobby.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Boat carrying migrants seen crossing the Channel

That was a momentary weakness. The rebels have no interest in compromise and are already pressing for the UK to withdraw from the ECHR come what may, placing this nation alongside Russia and Belarus in Europe.

The prime minister claims that his Rwanda plan is the “will of the people”. It was not in the Conservative Party’s manifesto in 2019, although Boris Johnson subsequently floated the idea.

A majority of the general public, 53%, say it wouldn’t “be effective”. 40% want it abandoned, compared to 37% who say press ahead.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Tory MP on why he voted for Rwanda

The cross-Channel migrants are a dramatic manifestation of people coming into the UK but are only a fraction of the record net total, over 600,000 a year, currently coming into the UK.

By common admission the number who would be sent to Rwanda, if the scheme were established, is smaller still. Sunak’s “Stop the Boats” policy is almost a diversion from the complex issues raised by mass migration.

Sunak is drawing attention to Labour saying it would scrap the Rwanda scheme “even if it was working”. He is continuing to tell voters that Labour has no plan, whatever policy they develop. As yet this does not seem to be damaging either Starmer or his party.

But 46% of Conservatives voters in 2019 said the Rwanda scheme would be effective, even more of them, 63%, want the government to continue with the policy.

In truth, Sunak appears more concerned with keeping the majority of his electoral base together than delivering “the will of the people”.

Click to subscribe to Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts

Immigration is a major concern for some voters, but all categories and classes say the economy and cost of living matter more to them.

Here again, Conservative MPs are divided and feuding among themselves, with constant demands that the prime minister and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt go further with tax cuts than they feel the country can afford.

The Budget on 6 March will be a test of whether they resist or succumb to this pressure.

Read more:
PM ‘clear’ he’ll ignore international law to deport asylum seekers
Sunak challenges Lords to pass bill – what happens next?

Many Tory MPs think their “narrow path” to election victory is all but disappearing. As such winning has ceased to be a priority. They are more interested in what happens to their party and their own careers after a defeat.

At least 54 of them have given up and are retiring. Those shouting loudest about the threat from Reform want to drive party policy in Farage’s direction.

Farage appears to be more popular than Sunak with the ageing party membership who will choose the next Conservative leader but he is not eligible to stand.

Braverman, Jenrick, Badenoch and others are already positioning themselves for the vacancy which they think defeat will create.

Those on the other, One Nation, side of the party, and who managed to survive the Johnson era purges, are loyal but out of sympathy with the direction in which it is moving. They do not expect to win the next election.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

MP makes Rwanda gaffe during Commons debate

Some feel that the Conservatives will need to elect another extremist as leader, and lose again, before they can “get their party back ” – as Labour’s Neil Kinnock once put it.

Interestingly, the new roster of Conservative MPs is likely to be more moderate, given the preponderance of centrist new candidates now being selected, coupled with the likely defeat of many “red wall” Tories.

Sunak is hoping to stay in power at least until the autumn. Before then the Conservatives face parliamentary by-elections in Wellingborough and Kingswood and probably Blackpool North.

All will be tough to hold on to the party’s recent electoral form. Then there are the local elections in London and elsewhere. Such tests are as likely to divide as unite his party behind him.

Something may turn up. Labour needs a record swing to form a majority government and nobody, least of all Keir Starmer and his team, expect they will do as well on election day as in current opinion polls.

Still, as things stand, Issac Levido’s warning and the Conservatives’ dismissive reaction to it, may well be written into a chronicle of a political death foretold.

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto trader ups MEXC ‘bounty’ to $2.5M after in-person KYC request

Published

on

By

Crypto trader ups MEXC ‘bounty’ to .5M after in-person KYC request

Crypto trader ups MEXC ‘bounty’ to .5M after in-person KYC request

The “White Whale” increased his social media pressure campaign to $2.5 million after claiming that MEXC requested an in-person KYC verification in Malaysia.

Continue Reading

Politics

US appeals time served sentences for HashFlare Ponzi schemers

Published

on

By

US appeals time served sentences for HashFlare Ponzi schemers

US appeals time served sentences for HashFlare Ponzi schemers

Prosecutors appealed the sentences given to HashFlare founders Sergei Potapenko and Ivan Turõgin, after arguing the pair should get 10 years in prison.

Continue Reading

Politics

Nigel Farage has a new ‘leave’ campaign – here’s how it could work and how it might impact you

Published

on

By

Nigel Farage has a new 'leave' campaign - here's how it could work and how it might impact you

Nigel Farage has said he would take the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) if Reform win the next election.

The party’s leader also reaffirmed his pledge to repeal the Human Rights Act and disapply three other international treaties acting as “roadblocks” to deporting anyone entering the UK illegally.

In a speech about tackling illegal migration, he said a Reform government would detain and deport any migrants arriving illegally, including women and children, and they would “never, ever be allowed to stay”.

Sky News looks at what the ECHR is, how the UK could leave, and what could happen to human rights protections if it does.

What is the ECHR?

On 4 November 1950, the 12 member states of the newly formed Council of Europe (different to the EU) signed the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – otherwise known as the ECHR.

It came into force on 3 September 1953 and has since been signed by an additional 34 Council of Europe members who have joined, bringing the total to 46 signatories.

The treaty was drafted in the aftermath of the Second World War and the Holocaust to protect people from the most serious human rights violations. It was also in response to the growth of Stalinism in central and Eastern Europe to protect members from communist subversion.

The treaty was the first time fundamental human rights were guaranteed in law.

Sir Winston Churchill helped establish the Council of Europe and was a driving force behind the ECHR, which came from the Charter of Human Rights that he championed and was drafted by British lawyers.

Sir Winston Churchill was a driving force behind the ECHR
Image:
Sir Winston Churchill was a driving force behind the ECHR

To be a signatory of the ECHR, a state has to be a member of the Council of Europe – and they must “respect pluralist democracy, the rule of law and human rights”.

There are 18 sections, including the most well-known: Article 1 (the right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of torture), Article 6 (right to a fair trial), Article 8 (right to private and family life) and Article 10 (right to freedom of expression).

The ECHR has been used to halt the deportation of migrants in 13 out of 29 UK cases since 1980.

ECHR protections are enforced in the UK through the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates most ECHR rights into domestic law. This means individuals can bring cases to UK courts to argue their ECHR rights have been violated, instead of having to take their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Article 8 is the main section that has been used to stop illegal migrant deportations, but Article 3 has also been successfully used.

Read more:
Why Farage’s small boats plan is not actually about policy
Legal expert explains if Farage deportation plan would work

The ECHR is interpreted by judges at this court in Strasbourg, France. File pic: AP
Image:
The ECHR is interpreted by judges at this court in Strasbourg, France. File pic: AP

How is it actually used?

The ECHR is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) – you’ll have to bear with us on the confusingly similar acronyms.

The convention is interpreted under the “living instrument doctrine”, meaning it must be considered in the light of present-day conditions.

The number of full-time judges corresponds to the number of ECHR signatories, so there are currently 46 – each nominated by their state for a non-renewable nine-year term. But they are prohibited from having any institutional ties with the state they come from.

An individual, group of individuals, or one or more of the signatory states can lodge an application alleging one of the signatory states has breached their human rights. Anyone who have exhausted their human rights case in UK courts can apply to the ECtHR to have their case heard in Strasbourg.

All ECtHR hearings must be heard in public, unless there are exceptional circumstances to be heard in private, which happens most of the time following written pleadings.

The court may award damages, typically no more than £1,000 plus legal costs, but it lacks enforcement powers, so some states have ignored verdicts and continued practices judged to be human rights violations.

Read more: Asylum seekers in charts and numbers

Inside the European Court of Human Rights. File pic: AP
Image:
Inside the European Court of Human Rights. File pic: AP

How could the UK leave?

A country can leave the convention by formally denouncing it, but it would likely have to also leave the Council of Europe as the two are dependent on each other.

At the international level, a state must formally notify the Council of Europe of its intention to withdraw with six months’ notice, when the UK would still have to implement any ECtHR rulings and abide by ECHR laws.

The UK government would have to seek parliament’s approval before notifying the ECtHR, and would have to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 – which would also require parliamentary approval.

Would the UK leaving breach any other agreements?

Leaving the ECHR would breach the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, a deal between the British and Irish governments on how Northern Ireland should be governed, which could threaten the peace settlement.

It would also put the UK’s relationship with the EU under pressure as the Brexit deal commits both to the ECHR.

The EU has said if the UK leaves the ECHR it would terminate part of the agreement, halting the extradition of criminal suspects from the EU to face trial in the UK.

Keir Starmer has previously ruled out taking Britain out of the ECHR
Image:
Keir Starmer has previously ruled out taking Britain out of the ECHR

How would the UK’s human rights protections change?

Certain rights under the ECHR are also recognised in British common law, but the ECHR has a more extensive protection of human rights.

For example, it was the ECHR that offered redress to victims of the Hillsborough disaster and the victims of “black cab rapist” John Worboys after state investigations failed.

Before cases were taken to the ECtHR and the Human Rights Act came into force, the common law did not prevent teachers from hitting children or protect gay people from being banned from serving in the armed forces.

Repealing the ECHR would also mean people in the UK would no longer be able to take their case to the ECtHR if the UK courts do not remedy a violation of their rights.

The UK’s human rights record would then not be subject to the same scrutiny as it is under the ECHR, where states review each other’s actions.

Two victims of John Worboys sued the Met Police for failing to effectively investigate his crimes using Article 3 of the ECHR. Pic: PA
Image:
Two victims of John Worboys sued the Met Police for failing to effectively investigate his crimes using Article 3 of the ECHR. Pic: PA

How human rights in the UK would be impacted depends partly on what would replace the Human Rights Act.

Mr Farage has said he would introduce a British Bill of Rights, which would apply only to UK citizens and lawful British citizens.

He has said it would not mention “human rights” but would include “the freedom to do everything, unless there’s a law that says you can’t” – which is how common law works.

Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said this would simply confirm the rights to which people are already entitled, but would also remove rights enjoyed by people visiting the UK.

Continue Reading

Trending