Braverman's behaviour in parliament today proves nothing has changed.

Reported in The Times.

Braverman refused a request to move some asylum seekers out of a very overcrowded residence, after she was told that it was a serious health hazard.

Result

Scabies and Diphtheria spread amongst the people crammed in there.

varian

Suella is an influential member of the ERG - the real government of this country.

This- and as said again, I would urge anyone who is concerned about this to write to the other Party Leaders and ask them to seriously question the rôle of the ERG- request for a full official list with compulsory disclosure, and a proper investigation of their aims and activities.

Ask on social media, the Press, Twitter- it is time we found out exactly who they are, where they get their funding on top of Government funding (and why they get any at all???), and more.

More than a little thinking she's got something on Rishi, but its all "behind closed doors"

OR

he can't get her out because of the right of the party see it as flagship appointment

unless we have more compelling evidence. Also too soon? Biding time?

Golly, Maybee - that article is more than a little alarming. Thank you for the enlightenment.

Why have a ministerial code if there are no consequences for breaking it? Braverman is becoming a heavy millstone around Sunak's political neck and by keeping her in post he is showing a complete disregard for the rules, just like Boris.

Suella is an influential member of the ERG - the real government of this country.

Rishi

Why is wishi still defending her? Has she got something on him?

Bit by bit the truth is coming out. People are breaking cover. She will be toast I suspect.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63433252

There was a lot more than that but I struggle to copy things on my iPad. I knew that Johnson had somehow fast tracked her into the position as Attorney General. She just seemed to be there imo to enable him to break the law rather than uphold it. It’s a pity that I don’t know more about the publication but the article does seem to be very factual.

That’s a very detailed, interesting post MayBee. I d missed her dreadful invasion of the Court of Appeal. It seems her arrogance knows no bounds

Maudi

Is Suella Braverman your new hate figure now Boris has gone par for the course I suppose with Labour they have no policies only hate.

Speaks someone who's under dillusional thought that Tories actually care a flying fig about anything but themselves! Oh dear someone's been playing " I'm better than you cos I vote for the greedy party," haven't we? Labour means Work. Done any? .....ever....proper work?.... Doesn't sound like it. Personally I don't believe that sink or swim politics is either kind , honourable or even human! It's positively elitist rubbish that the chattering classes are still falling for!!!

Braverman not sacked yet?

Still a security risk though.

This is part of an article written in Prospect. I must admit to not knowing much about the publication but it pretty much sums up my opinion of her as someone Johnson elevated to the position of Attorney General so he could ignore as many laws as possible.

One side-effect of Suella Braverman’s failed attempt to become leader of the Conservative Party is that her tenure as attorney general will almost certainly come to an end once the new prime minister takes office. That may well be good news for her, since her showing could be enough to get her a senior cabinet position. But it is also good news for anyone who cares about the rule of law, given the damage that her tenure has done to her office.

Braverman’s stint as attorney general will doubtless be best remembered for her attempts to give threadbare legal cover to successive attempts by the Johnson government to break the Withdrawal Agreement with the EU—the treaty that it had campaigned for as a “great” and “oven-ready” deal. On the first attempt—Part 5 of the Internal Market Bill, introduced in September 2020—Braverman’s position was to admit the breach of international law but to suggest that there was no issue for the rule of law as a matter of principle, because parliament had power to pass domestic law in breach of treaty commitments.

On the second—the current Northern Ireland Protocol Bill—Braverman has distanced herself from the idea that the government may be breaching international law, arguing instead that the UK is entitled to breach the Withdrawal Agreement, in ways that go well beyond the limited exemptions provided for in Article 16 of the Northern Ireland Protocol, because it is “necessary” to prevent an immediate and grave peril. It is reliably reported that she had to “shop around” to find any lawyer outside government who was prepared to give credence to that argument, which is universally regarded outside government as hopeless: and any impartial expert will be unpersuaded by her published “legal position,” which contains a series of implausible and unevidenced assertions dressed up as “assessments” and deals with the main reasons why the government’s position is hopeless by ignoring them.

In retrospect, Braverman’s willingness to advance implausible legal argument now looks like the reason why she was appointed in early 2020 in place of the equally pro-Brexit, but determinedly independent, Geoffrey Cox QC (whose speech in the debate on the Bill made it clear that he had the “gravest doubts” over the legality of the Bill and drew attention to the complete absence of evidence in Braverman’s published position).

But Braverman’s tenure will be remembered for other things too. In R v Long—where she personally appeared before the Court of Appeal to argue that the sentencing of teenagers convicted of the manslaughter of PC Andrew Harper was unduly lenient—the court broke with its usual politeness towards serving attorneys general by describing her submissions as “striking” and “unusual” (Court of Appeal code for “hopeless”). It was, the court said, “regrettable” that her submissions had not addressed the relevant guidelines. In that same case a “friend” of hers briefed the Sunday Express that if the Court of Appeal upheld the original sentence it would be an example of “wet, liberal judges being soft on criminals.”

Indeed, loose but politically motivated talk has been a general problem during her tenure. In the Barnard Castle affair, Braverman (ignoring her position as the minister with ultimate accountability for criminal prosecutions in England and Wales) leapt to Dominic Cummings’s defence before any police investigation had been completed. In breach of well-established convention that advice from the law officers (the collective term for the attorney general, the solicitor general and the advocate general for Scotland) is not made public, she conspicuously refused to deny that she had authorised the leak of her advice on the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill. In the run-up to the Conservative leadership, she made in the press and on television a number of politically convenient but legally dubious claims about EU law and the effect of the Northern Ireland Protocol. And during her campaign for the Conservative leadership, she managed to undermine the basis on which the government was defending the Rwanda deportation proposals in the courts—and the government’s own claim that those proposals were compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights—by claiming that “the Rwanda plan can work but we’ll have to leave the ECHR to do it.”

Against that background, it is hard not to regard with some suspicion Braverman’s emphasis on obtaining “innovative” legal advice from government lawyers (there has even been a new award established to recognise “creative thinking”). When read with her complaints about a “Remain bias” in the civil service, the message that government lawyers are likely to hear is that frank but inconvenient advice will be dismissed as biased.

It looks as if Braverman treated her time as attorney as little more than a step on the ladder to high office

NotSpaghetti

Urmstongran

Braverman seriously wants to tackle the Channel migrants. So many Albanian thugs coming over. The rise is exponential - 800 last year, 12,000 this year according to the Home Office. She gets my vote but will be up against The Blob. She says when she gets trolled on Twitter she knows she’s doing what the majority of taxpayers want! Mind you Pritti Patel couldn’t get things done and maybe Braverman will be up against it too. We will have to wait and see.

Braverman fell out with Truss over immigration. Truss was watering down proposals. Braverman’s mild infringement using her personal email to amend an urgent document was ideal for her to ‘resign’ over. She said she certainly couldn’t go along with what Truss was capitulating on.

This will be an interesting time to see how Braverman deals with issues.

The foreign-born share of the population is unrelated to violent crime according to the most recent research findings. (The Migration Observatory, at the University of Oxford).

I'm not sure where you got your figures from.
Please post a link.

Re the use of personal emails - you say Braverman’s mild infringement - I think that sharing classified documents with a colleague's wife via an insecure email system is actually a sacking matter!

The Telegraph, no doubt. Albanians have become the latest scapegoats.

Casdon

She is a barrister, and was chief legal officer to the Crown when she was attorney general. She would have been absolutely clear on what constituted a data breach. It doesn’t add up.

I agree!

She has access to some of the most sensitive information in the land. There is no way that she wasn't aware.

I agree with Iam64 that it could be a smokescreen to divert from some of the other stuff she's come out with.

Urmstongran

Braverman seriously wants to tackle the Channel migrants. So many Albanian thugs coming over. The rise is exponential - 800 last year, 12,000 this year according to the Home Office. She gets my vote but will be up against The Blob. She says when she gets trolled on Twitter she knows she’s doing what the majority of taxpayers want! Mind you Pritti Patel couldn’t get things done and maybe Braverman will be up against it too. We will have to wait and see.

Braverman fell out with Truss over immigration. Truss was watering down proposals. Braverman’s mild infringement using her personal email to amend an urgent document was ideal for her to ‘resign’ over. She said she certainly couldn’t go along with what Truss was capitulating on.

This will be an interesting time to see how Braverman deals with issues.

The foreign-born share of the population is unrelated to violent crime according to the most recent research findings. (The Migration Observatory, at the University of Oxford).

I'm not sure where you got your figures from.
Please post a link.

Re the use of personal emails - you say Braverman’s mild infringement - I think that sharing classified documents with a colleague's wife via an insecure email system is actually a sacking matter!

'Why' Truss got it....

Prentice

Fleurpepper

What will the 'average' Tory member think when they realise they have been 'played' by their own- to stop them voting?

I would imagine that the average Tory member is just glad to have the mess created by Liz Truss reversed, and the money markets picking up again.

A lot of 'average tory members' were very upset at not getting a vote on the leader this time because they didn't want a brown PM. That's a large part of what Truss got it last time.

She is a barrister, and was chief legal officer to the Crown when she was attorney general. She would have been absolutely clear on what constituted a data breach. It doesn’t add up.

Fleurpepper

What will the 'average' Tory member think when they realise they have been 'played' by their own- to stop them voting?

I would imagine that the average Tory member is just glad to have the mess created by Liz Truss reversed, and the money markets picking up again.

It seems she is now getting extra instruction on security protocols so at least she shouldn't accidently send highly confidential information to some random person's wife again.
What a relief for the nation, but I would have thought it would have been a better idea that she was briefed on security protocols before being given the job ....again.

growstuff

DaisyAnne Surely you don't think that MI5 makes its concerns public!

I'm afraid I don't know what you are talking about.

I agree with posters insisting Sunak must have known appointing Cruella would create dissent. It could be a smokescreen to cover even worse news.
The entire front bench privately educated. How does that reflect our country?