Archived version: https://archive.ph/opd7m
A senior UK cabinet 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 migrants arriving on small boats crossing the Channel.
Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, said the government would do “whatever is required”, even if that meant pulling out of the ECHR, the 70-year-old pan-European treaty that protects human rights and political freedoms in the continent.
His comments are an escalation of the government’s previous statements that leaving the ECHR was not an immediate step it was going to take. It has insisted it can deliver on Rishi Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” within the convention.
However, ahead of an election, the Conservatives could dial up their rhetoric against the ECHR in order to create a dividing line with Labour.
The government’s plan to send some migrants to Rwanda for processing of their asylum claims is still facing a supreme court battle. The first flight was stopped at the 11th hour in June last year after an appeal to the European court of human rights, which ensures the rights enshrined in the convention are upheld by its 47 signatory countries. It is separate to the EU, which the UK voted to leave in 2016.
Ahead of that, there are already calls from some within the Conservatives to withdraw from the ECHR. Suella Braverman, the home secretary, who is also a lawyer, has previously expressed a view that the UK should leave.
On Times Radio, Jenrick would not rule out withdrawal from the convention, saying the government would do “whatever is necessary”.
“You can see from the prime minister, the home secretary and myself, our total commitment to this challenge,” he said.
“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.”
Pressed directly on whether that could include leaving the ECHR, he said: “We will do whatever is required, take whatever necessary action is needed.”
Jenrick gave his assessment as he announced the government had struck a deal with Turkey to focus on coordinated actions to “disrupt and dismantle” people-smuggling gangs.
On Tuesday night, the government announced the establishment of an operational “centre of excellence” by the Turkish national police and supported by the UK. The centre would aim to strengthen collaboration between the National Crime Agency and Home Office intelligence staff based in Turkey and their Turkish counterparts, the British government said.
Why is it so popular to ban immigrants? They're just people, trying to escape an unfortunate situation that is not their choice, but how they were born. And even if they were taking people's jobs (which they're not), why is it just to discriminate against people on this characteristic they can't control, the country they were born, when it is clearly perceived as unjust to discriminate on other charectiristics people can't control, such as race, sex, or sexual orientation?
Because the conservative party in the UK, much like the republican party in the US, knows that because of shifting demographics and because it has no real plan to address real problems they know they wont be able deny the existance of any longer, is about to start losing election after election. Instead of coming with actual plans and attempting to do anything with their power other than looting your pockets, they've decided to resort to the most basic and fascistic scapegoating by pandering to our tribalistic instincts. They just point to another group and blame them for all the problems they had a hand in creating.
"It's not our fault, it's those dirty _____!"
-liberals
-blacks
-immigrants
-gays
-jews
-trans people
-atheists
-muslims
-indians
-women
(Pick one, or create your own scapegoat)