should we actually leave the echr ? okay, let me know your the echr?r thoughts that email again gbviews@gbnews.com at gb news on twitter. while you're there , twitter. while you're there, take part in our poll results shortly. but going head to head on this joined by human on this now. i'm joined by human rights lawyer dr. shoaib khan and reform party spokesperson for business and agriculture for rupert low. rupert, i will start with out of echr . now with you out of the echr. now >> well, i've been consistent in saying that the only solution , saying that the only solution, patrick, and if you read if you read suella bravermans resignation letter, she was quite clear that she thought she'd done a deal with rishi, that that would be what was happening . happening. >> but she's quite clear that the current legal situation is not going to deliver the result that the british people want and part of the brexit vote was all about protecting our borders. we are now a sovereign nation and sovereign nations do exactly that. sovereign nations do exactly that .

should we actually leave the echr ? okay, let me know your the echr?r thoughts that email again gbviews@gbnews.com at gb news on twitter. while you're there , twitter. while you're there, take part in our poll results shortly. but going head to head on this joined by human on this now. i'm joined by human rights lawyer dr. shoaib khan and reform party spokesperson for business and agriculture for rupert low. rupert, i will start with out of echr . now with you out of the echr. now >> well, i've been consistent in saying that the only solution , saying that the only solution, patrick, and if you read if you read suella bravermans resignation letter, she was quite clear that she thought she'd done a deal with rishi, that that would be what was happening . happening. >> but she's quite clear that the current legal situation is not going to deliver the result that the british people want and part of the brexit vote was all about protecting our borders. we are now a sovereign nation and sovereign nations do exactly that. sovereign nations do exactly that .

— coming down to a battle on whether the uk leaves the echr? no, that is the uk leaves the echr? that we _ the uk leaves the echr? no, that is the last thing that we need - the uk leaves the echr? no, that is the last thing that we need to i the uk leaves the echr? no, that is the last thing that we need to be i the last thing that we need to be considering doing. the situation is there are far too many people coming across the channel illegally using people smugglers. the number is down on last year by more than 30% at a time when illegal immigration has been going up into the rest of europe so some success but still too high and a long way to go to make sure we are in control of that. part of that is the rwanda deal and part of that is the rwanda deal and part of that is the rwanda deal and part of that is processing asylum claims much more quickly. also having more return solutions for people who have failed their applications and have no right to be in the uk. all those things need to come together before we start talking about changes to the international law. melt we start

why didn't rishi sunak say he would pull out of the echr?— pull out of the echr? i pull out of the echr? firstly, | neither the prime minister nor i pull out of the echr? firstly, - neither the prime minister nor i can go into the details of the bill because we are in the final stages of drafting it right now and that is for an understandable reason and not because we have been sitting on our hands, but we had to wait for the supreme courtjudgment and the exact issues that they raised with our policy so that we could craft the bill appropriately. policy so that we could craft the billappropriately. i policy so that we could craft the bill appropriately. i am policy so that we could craft the bill appropriately. iam not policy so that we could craft the bill appropriately. i am not going to speculate on exactly the contents of the bill, but let me say this. the prime minister and i have said for a long time that we will do whatever it takes to get the flights off to rwanda and we both meant it. i am determined to deliver on that. that is interesting. that doesn't n

weill. to the echr if it means less chance of deportation of migrants?- of deportation of migrants? of deportation of migrants? well, i think what we have _ of deportation of migrants? well, i think what we have got _ of deportation of migrants? well, i think what we have got to - of deportation of migrants? well, i think what we have got to bear - of deportation of migrants? well, i think what we have got to bear in l think what we have got to bear in mind is that the prime minister has already made very clear that nothing is off the table. and by that, i take it to mean that he is prepared as a last resort to remove the uk from the echr. i personally would support that in those circumstances. but if there are other options available, let's hearfrom them. i'm sure that the government does have a plan b, unlike what suella said in her letter, i'm sure there is a plan b. let's get the judgment tomorrow, let's hear the prime minister's response and if, as he has previously said, nothing is off the table and we have to take that route, i will be right behind him. thank you forjoining u

the idea - leading the echr meant we had no commitment — leading the echr meant we had no commitment no commitment to human rights is . leading the echr meant we had no| commitment to human rights is not true _ commitment to human rights is not true we _ commitment to human rights is not true we can — commitment to human rights is not true. we can talk _ commitment to human rights is not true. we can talk about _ commitment to human rights is not true. we can talk about the - true. we can talk about the technicalities, _ true. we can talk about the technicalities, but - true. we can talk about the technicalities, but we - true. we can talk about the technicalities, but we need| true. we can talk about the . technicalities, but we need to true. we can talk about the - technicalities, but we need to take stock— technicalities, but we need to take stock of— technicalities, but we need to take stock of the — technicalities, but we need to take stock of the big _ technicalities, but we need to take stock of the big picture. _ technicalities, but we need to take stock of the big picture. w

should leave the echr? >> absolutely. think should leave the echr? olutely. think should leave the echr? >> should leave the sly. think should leave the echr? >> should leave the scrapthink should leave the echr? >> should leave the scrap the( we should leave the scrap the refugee convention it's refugee convention an it's a 1951 convention that was built for the post—war age and now 700 million people are technically able and permissible to come to this country under that convention. it's insane. i don't think it's going to happen. >> as david cameron as foreign secretary, though, is it? >> let's face it, george osborne actually said that, which of course, he was chancellor under david cameron, and he has said under foreign under david cameron as foreign secretary, will not be doing secretary, we will not be doing any this. any of this. >> so that just is another reason david cameron is reason why david cameron is a wrong. actually, i think it wrong. and actually, i think it was david cameron that suggested a of rights a british bill of rights origi

should leave the echr? >> absolutely. think should leave the echr? olutely. think should leave the echr? >> should leave the sly. think should leave the echr? >> should leave the scrapthink should leave the echr? >> should leave the scrap the( we should leave the scrap the refugee convention it's refugee convention an it's a 1951 convention that was built for the post—war age and now 700 million people are technically able and permissible to come to this country under that convention. it's insane. i don't think it's going to happen. >> as david cameron as foreign secretary, though, is it? >> let's face it, george osborne actually said that, which of course, he was chancellor under david cameron, and he has said under foreign under david cameron as foreign secretary, will not be doing secretary, we will not be doing any this. any of this. >> so that just is another reason david cameron is reason why david cameron is a wrong. actually, i think it wrong. and actually, i think it was david cameron that suggested a of rights a british bill of rights origi

. to potentially leave the echr.ant to leave out of a rwanda leave the echr out of a rwanda ruling . ruling. >> so shouldn't it also be pointed cleverly pointed out that james cleverly as well, the only reason he's in that job is because he doesn't want rishi's job. useless want rishi's job. he's useless now very, very quickly. >> very quickly . i've also got a >> very quickly. i've also got a story for you that's inside one of books today, which is of the books today, which is greta joining greta thunberg joining anti—fossil fuel activist is outside the lord mayor's banquet in london. and i've not just gone and got the story for you. we've got a clip as well. >> we have not been listening . >> we have not been listening. >> we have not been listening. >> the people in power have not been listening. >> i've here for a climate >> i've come here for a climate demonstrate political demonstrate, not a political view . view. >> this is time for calm down. >> this is time for calm down. >> she enraged people. that was a li

the idea leaving the echr would mean we no longer— leaving the echr would mean we no longer had _ leavingtment to human rights _ longer had a commitment to human rights is _ longer had a commitment to human rights is not — longer had a commitment to human rights is not true. we can talk about— rights is not true. we can talk about the _ rights is not true. we can talk about the technicalities, this is hollamon's roll, but we need to take stock— hollamon's roll, but we need to take stock of— hollamon's roll, but we need to take stock of the — hollamon's roll, but we need to take stock of the big picture. who runs this country, who is responsible for the borders? the judgment today does cast out— the borders? the judgment today does cast out whether it is the uk parliament. following the vote in 2016 and — parliament. following the vote in 2016 and 2019 we need to make sure parliament— 2016 and 2019 we need to make sure parliament has sovereignty, and that is the _ parliament has sovereignty, and that is the government'sjob. we parliament has sovereignty, and that is the government's job.—

. to potentially leave the echr.t to leave out of a rwanda leave the echr out of a rwanda ruling . ruling. >> so shouldn't it also be pointed cleverly pointed out that james cleverly as well, the only reason he's in that job is because he doesn't want rishi's job. useless want rishi's job. he's useless now very, very quickly. >> very quickly . i've also got a >> very quickly. i've also got a story for you that's inside one of books today, which is of the books today, which is greta joining greta thunberg joining anti—fossil fuel activist is outside the lord mayor's banquet in london. and i've not just gone and got the story for you. we've got a clip as well. >> we have not been listening . >> we have not been listening. >> we have not been listening. >> the people in power have not been listening. >> i've here for a climate >> i've come here for a climate demonstrate political demonstrate, not a political view . view. >> this is time for calm down. >> this is time for calm down. >> she enraged people. that was a litt

the echr.u're that technical point, you're right. care right. but i think people care very deeply about migration and especially illegal migration. i think by the think people are appalled by the spectacle in spectacle of people drowning in the channel that the channel and the idea that our borders are completely porous. if the rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. if the rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. iof1e rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method da scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method of scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method of dealing or any kind of method of dealing with the crisis the channel with the crisis in the channel is to do need to is going to work, we do need to leave echr and i also think leave the echr and i also think that there is a logic to it in terms completing terms of just completing the brexit project don't how brexit project. i don't see how we've asserted sovereignty we've asserted our sove

the echr.u're that technical point, you're right. care right. but i think people care very deeply about migration and especially illegal migration. i think by the think people are appalled by the spectacle in spectacle of people drowning in the channel that the channel and the idea that our borders are completely porous. if the rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. if the rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. iof1e rwanda scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method da scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method of scheme our borders are completely po any. iof method of dealing or any kind of method of dealing with the crisis the channel with the crisis in the channel is to do need to is going to work, we do need to leave echr and i also think leave the echr and i also think that there is a logic to it in terms completing terms of just completing the brexit project don't how brexit project. i don't see how we've asserted sovereignty we've asserted our sove

the echr that is effectively prevented removal .united removal. it is the united kingdom's obligations under the refugee convention and no one is suggesting for a moment that they're repealed or overlooked. and as to this emergency legislation, again, that might sound tremendous , gung ho, and sound tremendous, gung ho, and we're going to get something done, but they're going to have to look at not only the echr, but also the refugee convention and about three, at the very least, domestic statutes which incorporate the refugee convention. >> but in theory , as richard was >> but in theory, as richard was saying, parliament is sovereign. >> it can pass a law, it could pass a law. what i think suella braverman was called notwithstanding clause is notwithstanding clause is notwithstanding all of those points you've just referred to, if parliament was to pass that law , do you think that it could law, do you think that it could be challenged by other groups in the court of appeal all the way back up to the supreme court? and so the merr

echr i didn't agree with that. echr i didn't agree with that.said there be votes echr said there should be votes for and i don't agree for prisoners, and i don't agree with the day with that either of the day which it which was labour ignored it because we knew it was a because we all knew it was a load nonsense. because we all knew it was a loa i nonsense. because we all knew it was a loai don't nonsense. because we all knew it was a loa i don't agreeense. because we all knew it was a loa i don't agree with >> i don't agree with that ehhen >> i don't agree with that either, but just to focus on derek, worth saying that derek, it's worth saying that the british government historically a ratio of historically loses by a ratio of 2 to 5 in the uk courts. >> the same number of times that it loses in the echr. >> okay, looks very quick . straw >> okay, looks very quick. straw poll. will we see more less of no confidence off the back of this, yes or no? no, no. >> no, no, no, because this is biased polling that doesn't necessarily reflect the actual

echr i didn't agree with that. echr i didn't agree with that.said there be votes echr said there should be votes for and i don't agree for prisoners, and i don't agree with the day with that either of the day which it which was labour ignored it because we knew it was a because we all knew it was a load nonsense. because we all knew it was a loa i nonsense. because we all knew it was a loai don't nonsense. because we all knew it was a loa i don't agreeense. because we all knew it was a loa i don't agree with >> i don't agree with that ehhen >> i don't agree with that either, but just to focus on derek, worth saying that derek, it's worth saying that the british government historically a ratio of historically loses by a ratio of 2 to 5 in the uk courts. >> the same number of times that it loses in the echr. >> okay, looks very quick . straw >> okay, looks very quick. straw poll. will we see more less of no confidence off the back of this, yes or no? no, no. >> no, no, no, because this is biased polling that doesn't necessarily reflect the actual

the echr that is effectively prevented removal .united removal. it is the united kingdom's obligations under the refugee convention and no one is suggesting for a moment that they're repealed or overlooked. and as to this emergency legislation, again, that might sound tremendous , gung ho, and sound tremendous, gung ho, and we're going to get something done, but they're going to have to look at not only the echr, but also the refugee convention and about three, at the very least, domestic statutes which incorporate the refugee convention. >> but in theory , as richard was >> but in theory, as richard was saying, parliament is sovereign. >> it can pass a law, it could pass a law. what i think suella braverman was called notwithstanding clause is notwithstanding clause is notwithstanding all of those points you've just referred to, if parliament was to pass that law , do you think that it could law, do you think that it could be challenged by other groups in the court of appeal all the way back up to the supreme court? and so the merr

so not just the echr . the like. so not just the echr.t take so it does to an extent, it take some of the wind out of the sails of those who say that we've got to pull out of the echr because as i say in handing down the ruling lord reed, they're making it clear that it wasn't just the echr they were relying on in lore here. >> well, mark white, thank you very much for that detailed analysis of what was quite a sparky exchange in the house of commons. first with prime minister's questions and then with the home secretary's statement . let's digest it all statement. let's digest it all further. delighted to be joined in the studio by political commentator peter and the commentator peter barnes and the former editor of labourlist, peter edwards . and peter, shall peter edwards. and peter, shall we start with you? because the home secretary, one of the things that he said was that labour didn't have a plan when or if they did have a plan. it was basically the same as what is happening now, more cooperation with france and the like. >> yeah,

italy's a member of the echr. italy's a member of the echr.ber of the italy is still a member of the european union, yet they've done a in half the a deal with albania in half the time that the rwanda deal has failed to a single person failed to get a single person off the ground. ed think off the ground. ed you think people just getting people are just getting a bit bored you're bored of the fact that you're kind of always blaming the bogeyman in strasbourg? an actual responsibility actual fact the responsibility lies on the lies squarely on the conservative desk. >> @ i think desk. >> i think there's @ i think there's a desk. >> i think there's a big >> well, i think there's a big difference the uk's difference between our the uk's approach international approach to international law and treaties. approach to international law ancand treaties. approach to international law ancand of treaties. approach to international law ancand of ouraties. approach to international law ancand of our european >> and many of our european counterparts who oft

and the idea that echr makes us a panah the idea that echr makes us a pariah state.tralia, canada , i mean, australia, canada, united states, they seem to get along quite happily their human rights without the need for some trans superior jurisprudence. we can disapply the echr decisions. we've done it before . at seven we've done it before. at seven times out of 80 decisions. we've done that. we did it with voters. prison voting system. more importantly , we more more importantly, we more importantly go to other countries. strasbourg is full of case law where inconvenient decisions have been set aside by member states who want to follow it, and that is a decision which we take here and now. and i suspect a little bit closer and the polls don't move and that dial doesn't shift that we're talking about someone in government is wake up to what the british people are asking for that is to those for and that is to stop those boats . boats. >> interesting stuff. well, let's bring my pundits in, if i can. frederick, do stay can. frederick, do you stay there, ben? if we do,

so how do we deal with illegal migration when we've got a 39 section instruction from the echr tellingwe can't get rid of people even if our own courts rule in favour of it, with a home secretary who's not in favour of resigning from the echr and he's got a foreign secretary in david cameron, who's european. who's also committed european. so we have a situation where the government no longer appears to be serious about tackling legal or illegal migration, and that is a major concern of voters conservative policies followed by suella are popular and decision making by prime minister to get rid of her seems to me not to be popular. in a shift to the left , the tory shift to the left, the tory party conference, the prime minister declared himself the candidate of change. but today's change, perhaps rather splendidly, perhaps in a rather tory way, has really been the deification of the status quo, or possibly a return to the status quo ante . well, i'm status quo ante. well, i'm joined now by the labour mp for brent north, barry gardiner. barry, thank you so much for joining me. we used to

. quite a big fan of the echr.borne. just i mean, they were so supportive to me in standing against ed balls now. so never that. but so i'll never forget that. but it's sort of went down like a bucket of sick, as i say in my red wall seat because cameron will be forever known in these red wall seats as somebody who resigned because he didn't like the referendum result. the democratic referendum result. >> architect of project fear >> the architect of project fear which lied public. >> remember that leaflet? do. >> i do. and he got treasury civil servant on our behalf. i talked to some people and i think he'll do a good job as foreign secretary >> however, i think it's a >> however, i just think it's a ridiculous appointment and i tell ridiculous as tell you what is ridiculous as well. a storm is brewing well. assume a storm is brewing in the party. clearly it is. yeah. what do they do in yeah. and what do they do in these recent appointments? they've the most inec's they've put the most inec's experienced people as

we could go on the echr , the go nuclear on the echr, the human rights act, un conventions exist.f this has been known for some time. but the big question chris, is the question is, chris, is the actual will to tackle this? there . there. >> people aren't sure on that. they don't know. they look at rishi sunak and they see someone they think is happy on the global stage. he likes the idea of treading treading the boards with other world leaders. his allies say correctly he was a brexit year back in 2016. he did fight. he did fight to leave the european union when, to use a quote from a friend of mr sunak, it was hardly a good career opfion it was hardly a good career option because back then, of course, a brexiteer, course, if you were a brexiteer, you seen as being beyond you were seen as being beyond the pale by leadership of the pale by the leadership of the pale by the leadership of the party. david cameron, now foreign secretary and george osborne. i think , you know, osborne. so i think, you know, he was he was brave. he showed his his his his views then, didn't he, on brexit

echr immigration minister robert jenrick is saying will leave . no ifs, no saying we will leave. says . i've been clear buts, he says. i've been clear that do whatever that we have to do whatever it takes. this idea has takes. there was this idea has suella gone now because they think they're going the think they're going to lose the case and then everything will blow up. it'll be massive drama. so . maybe they think so she's gone. maybe they think they're going to it and they're going to lose it and therefore they will have to leave echr it comes down leave the echr and it comes down to have the will to to does sunak have the will to do it? and now perhaps it also comes down the influence comes down to the influence of james and cameron and james cleverly and cameron and cameron's anti echr cameron's been a bit anti echr in cleverly has in the past, but cleverly has been opposed been has publicly opposed leaving now he's in the home leaving and now he's in the home office. so that looks very unlikely now doesn't it? but on the other hand it would be humiliation if they don't bec

echr immigration minister robert jenrick is saying will leave . no ifs, no saying we will leave. says . i've been clear buts, he says. i've been clear that do whatever that we have to do whatever it takes. this idea has takes. there was this idea has suella gone now because they think they're going the think they're going to lose the case and then everything will blow up. it'll be massive drama. so . maybe they think so she's gone. maybe they think they're going to it and they're going to lose it and therefore they will have to leave echr it comes down leave the echr and it comes down to have the will to to does sunak have the will to do it? and now perhaps it also comes down the influence comes down to the influence of james and cameron and james cleverly and cameron and cameron's anti echr cameron's been a bit anti echr in cleverly has in the past, but cleverly has been opposed been has publicly opposed leaving now he's in the home leaving and now he's in the home office. so that looks very unlikely now doesn't it? but on the other hand it would be humiliation if they don't bec

>> the echr is obviously one, b|number of others and eferenced >> the echr is obviously one, b|numberd then you need need to reform or need to you need to reform or repeal that legislation because otherwise this otherwise you end up with this crazy position where got crazy position where you've got this law this mass of unwieldy law and then got individual then you've just got individual policy which ignore then you've just got individual pccompletely. which ignore it completely. >> recipe for bad >> and that's a recipe for bad policy both directions. you policy in both directions. you need politicians need do policy in both directions. you nee hard politicians need do policy in both directions. you nee hard work icians need do policy in both directions. you nee hard work ofans need do policy in both directions. you nee hard work of lookingi do policy in both directions. you nee hard work of looking at do the hard work of looking at everything they've or everything they've passed or signed years. and signed on the last 20 years. and deciding or not it deciding whether or not it actual

that will mean leaving the echr . and if you do leaving the echr.an't support this government . that's support this government. that's the threat here in plain terms to the prime minister and chris, there will be many, many people looking at this, looking for the next move. >> what this indicates, what the direction of travel will be. a lot of people were saying we'll suella braverman position herself as the champion of the right in a fragmenting party. chris this says that in spades. well the context, of course, is let us know of no confidence. >> now after the first year of the of the sunak's premiership was up last month, you can now submit if you're a tory mp and you want to a letter of no confidence in the leadership of the prime minister. rishi sunak. that's to graham brady. if more than of say they support than 15% of mps say they support that, there will be a vote of no confidence, it's the first letter went in last night from dame andrea jenkyns. letter went in last night from dame andrea jenkyns . she was dame andrea jenkyns. she was seen

well he's warning that leaving echr. cooperation countries cooperation with countries across across europe in across the across europe in terms of tackling the european migration problem . migration problem. >> and of course, this is quite interesting because previously rishi sunak had said that he wasn't going rule off the wasn't going to rule it off the table. cleverly's language around very more around this is very much more hostile idea. yeah. hostile to that idea. yeah. and i a lot the right of i think a lot of the right of the party were very the tory party were very much hoping that there'd be some commitments that year's commitments in that next year's election leave the echr this commitments in that next year's elect clearly,eave the echr this commitments in that next year's elect clearly, ive the echr this commitments in that next year's elect clearly, i thinke echr this commitments in that next year's elect clearly, i think ,echr this commitments in that next year's elect clearly, i think , rulesthis commitmen

they come from the echr, from the european court of human rights.o essentially that we're still going to be thwarted by strasbourg. that strasbourg. is that your understanding of the rules, even if the government wins and obviously , there is a chance. obviously, there is a chance. >> i mean, you know, the further legal course of action if the appellants, i.e, the asylum seekers lose tomorrow and the policy is found to be lawful , policy is found to be lawful, then of course there is further recourse to the european court of human rights. and in fact, i would disagree with her assessment. in fact, her legal analysis , i most analysis, as i think most lawyers do in terms of rule 39, the court itself , the practice the court itself, the practice direction is on the court's website very clearly says that rule 39 interim measures are binding on member states. so i'm not sure , you know, she seems to not sure, you know, she seems to be suggesting we advise the prime minister that they're not binding. followed to he binding. and he followed to he refused

he could say, well, i simply don't accept the analysis that this would be illegal anyway, under echr,al route against it, getting to run out of courts. i do grant you. i mean, there are two ways you can do it. one is to tangle with the law and the other is to say, well, i can make amendments and then keep it moving forward. the problem, in a way, with both of those positions is that the first one, any discussion around cabinet table and beyond in the party about derogating from leaving the convention in some form, i think he might offer a temporary some kind of temporary bridge has been talked about. but you say, well, i'm just going to do it before this instance. but i think the court has been fairly clear that it doesn't think that that would wash, although it says it was not the reason for its decision. its decision doesn't rest on that. so you could go into another legal entanglement or you could simply say, well, there there's a workaround here. either way, it does mean it seems to me it'sjust myjudgment. i think it's very unlikely that we get flights off the ground to rwanda bef

they come from the echr, from the european court of human rights.o essentially that we're still going to be thwarted by strasbourg. that strasbourg. is that your understanding of the rules, even if the government wins and obviously , there is a chance. obviously, there is a chance. >> i mean, you know, the further legal course of action if the appellants, i.e, the asylum seekers lose tomorrow and the policy is found to be lawful , policy is found to be lawful, then of course there is further recourse to the european court of human rights. and in fact, i would disagree with her assessment. in fact, her legal analysis , i most analysis, as i think most lawyers do in terms of rule 39, the court itself , the practice the court itself, the practice direction is on the court's website very clearly says that rule 39 interim measures are binding on member states. so i'm not sure , you know, she seems to not sure, you know, she seems to be suggesting we advise the prime minister that they're not binding. followed to he binding. and he followed to he refused

, all injunctions from the echr, all of which mean the next flight might actually leave the runway.nd that is when the true test would begin . but if the would begin. but if the government loses the last three years will have been for nothing. the small boats will keep coming, and the rwanda policy effectively dead policy will effectively be dead in olivia oatley . in the water. olivia oatley. gb news so i suppose the big question is what is plan b? >> i mean suella braverman saying there is no plan b, is that true? well it seems pretty true, to be honest . true, to be honest. >> the rwanda plan is the central pillar of the government's stop the boats policy. there are rumours that the government is in conversation with with other countries, other third countries where these asylum claims could be processed. but of course , be processed. but of course, those claims could run into exactly the same problems as we have seen with rwanda, and we could expect another year. i think it's been almost now of legal processes, complaints, etcetera . so there is no etcetera. so there is no strai

historically, we've ignored the echr as we did on prisoner voting rights, when for ten years or moreo what they wanted us to do. we could do the same for the question rwanda, but there is question of rwanda, but there is something quite telling about this ruling . suella braverman this ruling. suella braverman scathing to the prime scathing letter to the prime minister alleged that in exchange for her support during the leadership contest, prime minister promised to include notwith standing clauses to small boats , legislation that small boats, legislation that would block the operation of the aforementioned domestic laws that inhibit the rwanda policy. in fact , looking into some old in fact, looking into some old amendments, we found two of them that earlier the year would have done exactly this. as you can see, this amendment stipulates the section in question will have effect notwithstanding rulings from the echr or other international law obligations . international law obligations. and this other amendment would have blocked the operation of the human rights act 1998. these ame

should we be whole echr echr? should we be leaving that or not?ow , matthew, a couple of lines from you think to from you. what did you think to the today? well it's not the ruling today? well it's not for me to quibble with the ruling. >> i suspect that they got it spot and key thing is spot on. and the key thing is that the government pretty much knew this how the court knew that this was how the court would it. i mean, pick your would find it. i mean, pick your own adjective, pick own own adjective, pick your own noun fiasco , shambles, chaos. own adjective, pick your own noun fiasco , shambles, chaos . we noun fiasco, shambles, chaos. we are just months out from a general election. and let's remember that this is the government's flagship policy and it has failed enormous amounts of our money. taxpayers money has been wasted so far. huge amounts more look set to be wasted as well and effectively the plan b on rishi sunak part. and we know that suella braverman , who he sacked this braverman, who he sacked this week, said that he didn't have a

she had made her view on that very clear and said that, said that she was certainly critical of the echrow. as somebody who isn't a government any more, she is able to be much more vocally critical of the without facing potentially any repercussions. {iii facing potentially any repercussions. facing potentially any re-ercussions. , ., repercussions. of course, there have been other reshuffles _ repercussions. of course, there have been other reshuffles going - repercussions. of course, there have been other reshuffles going on i repercussions. of course, there have been other reshuffles going on away| been other reshuffles going on away from the great offices of state and we have just heard that in the last few minutes, ministerjessye norman has quit his role in the department for transport. has quit his role in the department fortransport. he has quit his role in the department for transport. he says he gave his notice to the government whip several months ago was that it has been a great honour to serve in successive governments since 2016, thank you, he says, to rishi sunak for the ca

. >> i think it doesn't even >> but i think it doesn't even matter echr because matter about the echrget the supreme on side? they have supreme court on side? they have made their mind up that rwanda cannot trusted to send cannot be trusted to send people back country from where back to the country from where they how ever they came. so how is he ever going to round that? well, going to get round that? well, that's it. going to get round that? well, tha and. court relied heavily >> and the court relied heavily on evidence the un high on evidence from the un high commission on refugees who have, by way, sent refugees to by the way, sent refugees to rwanda and have completely and said has an exemplary said clearly it has an exemplary record with refugees. >> yes. >> yes. >> but also it it has been against this policy in the uk from the start. so it's hard tonight to not look at this and think that there is something more political. i don't think the court is political, but i think the un's input there is political and to rely on that is something that upsets a lot of conservative mps an

has been appointed with| the confidence of the prime minister and policy on the echr hasn't yet movedwhich was passed earlier this year provides for the home secretary to override article 39. if you are in favour of being in the echr, i would have thought you were unlikely to challenge the court when suella would have been willing to do so. let's look at andrewjenkins's letter of no confidence. enough is enough, time for rishi sunak to go and replace him with a real conservative party leader. do you understand how she could have come to that conclusion? i understand how she could have come to that conclusion?— to that conclusion? i don't agree with her. to that conclusion? i don't agree with her- i _ to that conclusion? i don't agree with her. ithink— to that conclusion? i don't agree with her. i think that _ to that conclusion? i don't agree with her. i think that enough - to that conclusion? i don't agree with her. i think that enough is l with her. i think that enough is enoughin with her. i think that enough is enough in terms of the number of tory leaders in one parliament. i thi

is it time for us to pull out of the echr ? well, to pull out of the echr? most senior ministers has had his say on that very topic today. i'm martin daubney on gb news and this is britain's news channel mornings from 930 on gb news is . mornings from 930 on gb news is. welcome back . welcome back. >> it's 327. you're watching or listening to me, martin daubney on gb news. now after sir keir starmer was hit by ten resignations over his israel—hamas stance , in a few israel—hamas stance, in a few minutes, i'll ask just how damaging that is to the labour leader. but first, a day after the government's rwanda plan was ruled unlawful , home secretary ruled unlawful, home secretary james cleverly has doubled down on the policy . james cleverly has doubled down on the policy. he james cleverly has doubled down on the policy . he says james cleverly has doubled down on the policy. he says ministers are absolutely determined to begin deporting migrants to rwanda before the next election . rwanda before the next election. rishi sunak still promising to stop the boats

of the echr. >> i mean, the only thing that it seems to have affected has this ability to do rwandan terms of doing the advantages that we were talked about during brexit. that to be down to brexit. that seems to be down to government incompetence and lack of action. >> but there were quite a few things and also it would involve rolling back lot of blairite rolling back a lot of blairite legislation. the equalities act and on. there would be an and so on. there would be an awful lot of things that well, i mean are things, you know, mean these are things, you know, protect and workers protect workers and workers rights, workers, we rights, protect workers, as we slide recession and slide into recession and economic, you know, lack of competitiveness, which is not a great protection in the long run . well, in my view. well but when it comes to rwanda, there was never any evidence that this was never any evidence that this was the silver bullet. >> no . that was going to you >> no. that was going to you know, the idea that it would be this great deterrent or whatnot. that's never your

that deal, she said, covered reducing legal migration, excluding the echr from disrupting their plansintroducing "unequivocal statutory guidance" to schools to protect biological sex. suella braverman says none of that happened, and just look at what she says. "you have manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver on every single one of these key policies. either your distinctive style of government means you are incapable of doing so or, as i must surely conclude now, you never had any intention of keeping your promises." it must be one of the strongest ever attacks in a letter like that, so thatis attacks in a letter like that, so that is the personal side, but drill down into policy. yes, an attack on two core areas — a failure to deal properly with small boats and a failure to crack down on antisemitism and extremism. so, on small boats, suella braverman says the prime minister is guilty of a double failure — failure to prepare for a loss in the supreme court tomorrow and failure to prepare for a win. the court will be ruling in the morning on the government's plan to send illegal

echr. >> t seems it seems echr. >> seems it seems unfair >> and it seems it seems unfair that fired forhat she's been fired for telling truth . i mean, you telling the truth. i mean, you know, i understand politicians have she's have to play politics, but she's you know, she's convictions you know, she's got convictions and she not not police convictions , but she she convictions, but she she criticised the police , criticised the police, ironically, you know, saying that they've got a two tier policing system, which is, of obvious to anybody watching the police of marches. police policing of the marches. you've freely you've got people freely chanting anti—semitic , genocidal chanting anti—semitic, genocidal chants . and some of them are chants. and some of them are being started by police employees , police advisers. employees, police advisers. >> we felt it for well, as long as this program has been running, certainly over two years now, it's been a regular complaint that the met police are not fit for purpose , that are not fit for purpose, that the police seem to be. one moment. i

of the echr. >> i mean, the only thing that it seems to have affected has this ability to do rwandan terms of doing the advantages that we were talked about during brexit. that seems to be down to government incompetence and lack of action. >> but there were quite a few things and also it would involve rolling back lot of blairite rolling back a lot of blairite legislation. the equalities act and on. there would be an and so on. there would be an awful lot of things that well, i mean are things, you mean these are things, you know, protect workers and workers rights, workers, we rights, protect workers, as we slide recession and slide into recession and economic, you know, lack of competitiveness, which is not a great protection in the long run . well, in my view. well but when it comes to rwanda, there was never any evidence that this was never any evidence that this was the silver bullet. >> no . that was going to you >> no. that was going to you know, the idea that it would be this deterrent or whatnot. this great deterrent or whatnot. that's never your starmers man. >> what does

— principles so the idea that leaving the echr means we no longer have a commitment to human rights_ talk about those technicalities but we need to take stock of the big picture — we need to take stock of the big picture here. he runs this country? who is— picture here. he runs this country? who is responsible for our borders and has _ who is responsible for our borders and has the — who is responsible for our borders and has the ultimate 5ay who is responsible for our borders and has the ultimate say over our laws? _ and has the ultimate say over our laws? the — and has the ultimate say over our laws? the judgment ca5t and has the ultimate say over our laws? the judgment cast doubt on whether— laws? the judgment cast doubt on whether that is the uk parliament. following — whether that is the uk parliament. following the vote in 2016 and 2019, we have _ following the vote in 2016 and 2019, we have to _ following the vote in 2016 and 2019, we have to make sure that parliament doe5 we have to make sure that parliament does have _ we have to make sure that parliament does have sovereig

echr. >> t seems it seems echr. >> seems it seems unfair >> and it seems it seems unfair that fired forhat she's been fired for telling truth . i mean, you telling the truth. i mean, you know, i understand politicians have she's have to play politics, but she's you know, she's convictions you know, she's got convictions and she not not police convictions , but she she convictions, but she she criticised the police , criticised the police, ironically, you know, saying that they've got a two tier policing system, which is, of obvious to anybody watching the police of marches. police policing of the marches. you've freely you've got people freely chanting anti—semitic , genocidal chanting anti—semitic, genocidal chants . and some of them are chants. and some of them are being started by police employees , police advisers. employees, police advisers. >> we felt it for well, as long as this program has been running, certainly over two years now, it's been a regular complaint that the met police are not fit for purpose , that are not fit for purpose, that the police seem to be. one moment. i