Dominic grieve

It doesn’t say much for this government that Dominic Grieve can run rings around them. An amendment drafted by the ardent Remainiac was just one of 14 defeats inflicted by the Lords last night as peers opted to torpedo Priti Patel’s flagship Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. Cue a crowing press release from Grieve’s group Best for Britain, declaring victory.  The rare triumph for the Beaconsfield barrister is all the more sweet in light of another result which, er, doesn’t make for such good reading. For earlier this month, Lowick landlord Geoff Monks was quietly awarded a seven-figure settlement — thought to be about £4 million — by North

Dominic Grieve, David Gauke and Anne Milton face a big challenge to keep their seats come 12 December. The trio were among 21 Tory MPs who lost the whip when they backed the Cooper-Letwin bill back in September. Last night, Grieve, Gauke and Milton teamed up with the former deputy prime minister Lord Heseltine to hold an event in Grieve’s Buckinghamshire constituency of Beaconsfield to rally against the party they once called home. While the odds might be against them in their bids to retain their seats as independents, the three candidates are optimistic. They embraced their newfound independence, telling voters they could ‘make the difference’ and generally talking up their

This election is going to be particularly discombobulating for the ex-Tory MPs who are now independents. Even though all three of them – David Gauke, Anne Milton and Dominic Grieve – have been through at least four elections each (Grieve has been an MP since 1997, while Gauke and Milton were elected in 2005), this is the first time they are standing without the help of a party apparatus. For Grieve and Gauke, this is the first time they will be fighting the sort of election campaign that their colleagues in marginal seats are perfectly used to: one full of uncertainty, very long hours, and never quite enough money, local

The former Tory MP Dominic Grieve may have voted against the parliamentary recess for Conservative party conference, but that certainly hasn’t kept him away from the action this week. The now independent MP showed up in Manchester yesterday, and this afternoon attended a ‘Conservatives for a People’s Vote’ event at the aptly named (for a man with few allies inside the hall) ‘Friends House’ outside the conference area. As expected, the MP first used his platform to launch attacks on Boris Johnson’s government. Grieve said reports that he and his Remain allies had sought help from the French to draft the Benn bill were a serious piece of ‘defamation’ and that Number

Boris Johnson’s plan to suspend Parliament is not going down well with MPs, not least among some of those on the Tory backbenchers. Dominic Grieve reacted furiously to the news. The Tory MP said the Prime Minister’s decision is ‘outrageous’ – and he threatened to help bring down the Tory Government, even if it means ushering in a Corbyn government. Here is what he had to say on Radio 5 Live: ‘I don’t see how a Prime Minister who persists with this is going to find he is going to get to the 31 October still in office. There will be a vote of no confidence and his government will

Another day, another defeat for the government—this time on Dominic Grieve’s amendment, which requires Theresa May to set out within three sitting days what she’ll do next if the meaningful vote doesn’t pass. The significance of this is that Grieve thinks that the motion the government would put down would be amendable, so MPs would be able to tell the government what they want to happen. But what does this mean in practise? Well, the first thing to note is that there isn’t currently a majority for anything in the Commons. This suggest that no amendment—whether it be for a second referendum or Norway Plus—would be able to pass the

One of the laws of Brexit is that every Commons division and Cabinet meeting billed as being a ‘crunch vote’ or ‘crunch talks’ ends up postponing the crunching again, and again and again. This afternoon, Dominic Grieve announced that he would ‘accept the government’s difficulty’ on the matter of a meaningful vote and ‘support it’. He was speaking in the Commons shortly before a division was supposed to be called on this matter, and not long after the government had offered a compromise. That compromise involved David Davis issuing a Written Ministerial Statement which clarifies that the Speaker can decide whether or not a motion issued by the government using

At 3pm yesterday afternoon, the Remainer rebels led by Dominic Grieve thought the government was honouring the PM’s putative commitment to draft an amendment to the EU Withdrawal Bill in the spirit of Grieve’s amendment. At 4.45, Grieve was told by an embarrassed solicitor general Robert Buckland that the deal was off. The Remainer rebels are not happy. And the scene is set for a final parliamentary showdown on the “meaningful vote” issue, in the Lords on Monday and the Commons on Tuesday or Wednesday. Here is what happened and what was at stake. It is complicated so please bear with me. The contentious amendment clause was all about the

Dominic Grieve was a worthy attorney-general whose career was helped by this magazine: nine years ago, he was named Spectator Parliamentarian of the Year, beneath the nose of David Cameron, then nearing the end of his successful campaign for the Conservative leadership. But Grieve’s remarks this week, in which he suggested that the Prime Minister would be seen to be as bad as Putin if he pursues proposals to give Parliament ultimate authority over laws in this country, underline why his position as a member of the government had become untenable. One of the few redeeming features of David Cameron’s reshuffle is that it added a certain clarity to our

On matters domestic (England and Wales division) I was sad to see Dominic Grieve turfed-out of the cabinet in last week’s reshuffle. Today he pops up in the Times to remind us (well, me) why his departure has lowered the average level of decency in the cabinet. According to the former Attorney-General, the Prime Minister’s plans to rework Britain’s relationship with the European Court of Human Rights are the kind of cockamamie scheme that would, quite correctly, be considered laughable if it were copied by, say, Vladimir Putin. You see: “What actually is being suggested is not that we will leave the ECHR, but that we will announce for our manifesto that

‘There’s no shame in a cabinet to win the next election,’ declared an exasperated senior No. 10 figure on Tuesday night. This week’s reshuffle was not one for the purists: it was designed with campaigning, not governing, in mind. With less than ten months to go to polling day, politics trumps policy. This is why Michael Gove is moving from the Department for Education to become Chief Whip. The test of this shake-up will be whether the Tories win the next election or not. This reshuffle demonstrated that Tory modernisation is not about measures anymore but men — and women. The party has spent most of David Cameron’s leadership trying

Mr Justice Saunders, who presided over the phone hacking trial, is not impressed with David Cameron and Ed Miliband. He has branded the various political interventions of yesterday afternoon as ‘unsatisfactory so far as justice and the rule of law are concerned.’ Stern words from the bench. One wonders what the government’s lawyers make of them. Indeed, Mr S understands that Dominic Grieve QC, the Attorney General (the government’s chief legal officer), was actually inside No. 10 when Cameron was recording his ‘full and frank apology’ yesterday. Did Grieve advise the Prime Minister? Mr S contacted Grieve’s office. A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office reiterated the long standing convention that they neither confirm

After the week he’s had in the Commons, no-one would blame David Cameron for heading for the pub today. Unfortunately, he’s got François Hollande in tow as he pitches up at a pub in his constituency, and the pair are supposed to be discussing European reform over the pork scratchings. This isn’t great timing, frankly. The rebellious mood of the Tory party is in part down to a desire from backbenchers for more details of Cameron’s European renegotiation plan – and signs that he’s going to get what he wants too. A summit with another norther European country might yield more positive noises on this, as Cameron does have allies

Tonight brings two major developments in terms of Tory policy on the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Courts of Human Rights. The Mail on Sunday reports that Theresa May is close to announcing that under a post 2015, majority Tory government Britain would leave the Convention. All the articles of the Convention would be incorporated into a British Bill of Rights. But no one would be able to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. This would end stand-offs such as the one over prisoner voting where the Strasbourg Court is telling parliament it has to enfranchise convicted inmates. Under this system, the Supreme Court in

The prisoner voting issue is threatening to bring the whole issue of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights to a head. It is almost impossible to see how the Strasbourg court can be satisfied without the ending of the ban on all prisoners voting, while it is hard to see parliament ever agreeing to that. Cabinet Ministers concede that the government’s current efforts are about buying time more than anything else. (For more on the legal questions that arise from this matter, see David’s post on the subject.) Leaving the jurisdiction of the Court is fast becoming the mainstream position in the Tory party. In an interview