Tory rightwingers rally in support of Suella Braverman as Rishi Sunak mulls over whether to sack her – UK politics live

What Tory papers are saying about Braverman

Suella Braverman may have been happy with the Daily Mail splash this morning (see 9.08am), but she won’t be so happy with the Daily Telegraph’s editorial. It says many people will agree with her claim that the police have been soft on pro-Palestinian demonstrations. But it goes on:

But Mrs Braverman holds one of the great offices of state and occupies a complex position in the constitutional settlement. Hers is obviously a political role, given that she is an MP and a member of the Cabinet, but it includes certain statutory responsibilities and functions.

Her newspaper article effectively criticising Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, for not requesting a ban on Saturday’s pro-Palestine march, cut across operational decisions which have always been off-limits to politicians for good reason.

We do not want to live in a country in which ministers can direct officers to arrest particular individuals, or involve themselves directly in police decisions. If Mrs Braverman had wanted Saturday’s march proscribed, she could have brought forward an emergency Bill to do so.

According to Sky’s Beth Rigby, some ministers think No 10 would be wrong to wait until the middle of next week before deciding Suella Braverman’s fate.

Senior minister: “We can’t continue like this” “No 10 may want to wait & see what happens at w/end & & poss wait for Supreme Court on Weds [Rwanda decision] But relationship with police is v damaged. Credibility generally is low. Delay makes the govt look weak unfortunately”

According to a report in the Times, Suella Braverman did agree to change some aspects of the article she wrote criticising the Metropolitan police at the request of Downing Street – but she also left in other aspects it wanted removed. The Times says:

The home secretary’s aides submitted a draft of the article to No 10 on Wednesday. Officials came back that evening with a series of amendments, toning down some of the most incendiary claims.

Braverman accepted some of the amendments, including removing a warning to the police not to take a “soft touch” approach at the Armistice Day protest, along with claims that there was “ample evidence” that senior police officers were biased. She also removed a direct reference to Sunak at No 10’s request. But she rejected further changes, including suggestions that she remove the comparison to rallies in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.

The paper also says Rishi Sunak will delay any decision about her fate until after Wednesday, when the supreme court will say whether or not the Rwanda deportation policy is legal. It reports:

One minister familiar with No 10’s thinking said that Sunak’s team would wait until after the Supreme Court publishes its judgment. They said: “The bigger problem is the fact that we’ve got the Rwanda ruling next Wednesday. Surely people will want that to be finished before moving forward. You’d want to know the outcome of that before deciding what kind of home secretary you want going forward.”

Suella Braverman was seen leaving her home at around 10.15am, PA Media reports. She did not stop to speak to reporters at the scene.

Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, has described Suella Braverman as an “incredibly nasty and vindictive politician”. Speaking on BBC’s Good Morning Scotland this morning, he said Braverman had been trying to direct the police. He went on:

There’s a big difference between scrutiny and seeking to give direction to the police.

Direction which, as I understand it … would break the law. This is a very dangerous moment and the home secretary really needs to go.

He also said his view of Braverman was well known.

My own view on Suella Braverman is well known.

I think she’s an incredibly nasty and vindictive politician, someone who attacks the most marginalised in society on a daily basis.

UK economy flatlines in third quarter amid high interest rates

Nigel Farage, the former leader of Ukip and the Brexit party, also defended Suella Braverman on GB News last night. He said:

I am absolutely certain that the centre of gravity on this in this country is actually right behind the home secretary.

Now there are rumours swirling tonight around the bars and pubs in Westminster that a rapid reshuffle is on the way and that maybe Suella Braverman is on the way out.

I like very much what Suella Braverman has to say, my disappointment is she never actually delivers any of it.

Farage said he agreed with Braverman about the police being biased against rightwing protesters and in favour of groups like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, and as evidence of that he cited the fact that some English Defence League marches proposed in east London were banned more than a decade ago.

Suella Braverman seems to have GB News onside. Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, one of several Tory MPs paid to work as a presenter on the channel (Lee Anderson is another – see 9.08am), backed her when he was on the channel last night, saying:

The home secretary has said what many people are thinking and the calls to sack her seem to be disproportionate because whether she’s broken the ministerial code or not is something of a moot point … she was talking about her own departmental area where she has direct responsibility.

But Rees-Mogg’s endorsement was not unconditional. He said Braverman should be acting, not commentating.

People expect the government to act not just commentate. At the moment the government seems to be unsure where it’s going and this is leaving a vacuum that the police are unable to fill.

This echoes something that George Osborne, the former Tory chancellor, said on his Political Currency podcast yesterday. Osborne is at the opposite end of the Tory spectrum from Braverman and Rees-Mogg, and he suggested Rishi Sunak should sack the home secretary. But, quoting the election strategist Lynton Crosby, he said it was wrong for Braverman to act like a commenatory. Osborne explained:

The home secretary is actually becoming a commentator when she should be acting as the home secretary.

There’s a thing Lynton Crosby the Tory strategist used to say to David Cameron and me, ‘don’t be Connie the commentator!’ That was the Australian phrase they used.

He says you’re not the commentator on the situation, you’re the prime minister, you’re the chancellor, in this case, Suella Braverman is the home secretary.

She’s got real decisions to make about how to support the police in their policing of demonstrations. She’s got powers to override the police and ban demonstrations. She should be exuding all the authority of her office, rather than being yet another newspaper commentator, who is in some senses, demonstrating her powerlessness.

The Conservative MP Miriam Cates defended Suella Braverman on the Today programme this morning. She rejected claims that the home secretary was inflaming tensions and she said Braverman’s claims about the police being biased in favour of leftwing protest groups like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign were perfectly reasonable. She said:

I think the home secretary has a view that is very mainstream in the rest of the UK.

Cates is co-chair of a Tory group launched this year called the New Conservatives. Her co-chair is Danny Kruger, who was also on the Today programme, yesterday, defending Braverman. The group wants lower taxes, less immigration, and socially conservative, “pro-family” policies. It is not clear how powerful it is – only 14 supporters are listed on its website – but it has been getting a lot of positive coverage in Tory papers like the Daily Telegraph who love this stuff. Given the interventions of Cates and Kruger, it also looks as though it might function as Braverman’s campaign base in a Tory leadership contest.

Braverman might also get the backing of the European Research Group, the once-mighty pro-Brexit faction that she chaired at one point. But the ERG is much more marginal than it used to be. On the issues that matter now in Tory politics, the group is not united, and Brexiters are less keen to talk about the subject than they once were.

It has become normal for ministers giving interviews in recent weeks to start by failing to endorse something said by Suella Braverman, and Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, and Rob Halfon, the skills minister, were both at it this morning.

Asked about Braverman’s most recent comments in the Times, Hunt said:

As many other cabinet ministers have said, the words that she used are not words that I myself would have used.

But I have a productive relationship with her as a colleague and I have always given her the money that she needs to fund police, bring down crime and to fund the immigration and asylum system.

Asked if he would have been allowed to defy No 10 in the way Braverman did, Hunt went on:

The prime minister has said that he has full confidence in her. And I have nothing further to add.

And Halfon, asked if he agreed with Braverman’s anti-Met comments, told LBC:

I think the home secretary has a unique way of expressing herself.

Asked if he would have published an article without No 10 approval, he replied:

No I wouldn’t. Everything I do in terms of articles and speeches must be signed off by No 10.

Suella Braverman’s allies mount fightback on home secretary’s behalf