In a press conference this morning, the
reform UK leader promising to deport
more than half a million migrants within
the first term in government if reform
wins in the next general election.
>> We will stop the votes
is by detaining and deporting absolutely
anyone that comes via that route. And if
we do that,
the boats will stop coming within days
because there will be no incentive to
pay a trafficker to get into this
country. If you come to the UK
illegally, you will be detained and
deported and never ever allowed to stay.
Period. That is our big message from
today. I talked to a former Conservative
Law Chancellor to get his thoughts on it
in just a moment. First though, Natasha
Clark is here. LBC's political editor
who was uh with Nigel Farage at that
speech earlier this morning. Um Natasha
>> Ben, I think I just want to just reflect
on what we've learned from that speech
today. And I think there are two main
reasons that Nigel Farage has spent his
entire summer basically going around the
country making these press conference
making these big announces announcements
rather. They're twofold. Firstly, this
is trying to him trying to set out what
a reform government would actually do.
now for a year maybe more they've just
been I guess a vibes party right so
they've not actually had a lot of
policies and I think that has been a
major area where Labour where the tries
feel that they can kick the reform party
basically saying they don't actually
have a plan they just talk tough they're
not actually going to do anything Nigel
Farage today setting out his plan this
is what you would get if you actually do
elect Nigel Farage as prime minister so
a bit of a step forward there and
arguably he has been doing that all
summer so he would deport 600,000 and
illegal migrants. However, my question
to him today, we've had big promises on
migration before, from all of the main
party leaders for years. Of course, it's
going to face huge opposition from
lawyers, from politicians, from the
public. Mr. Farage acknowledged today it
would be hard. He said he was the person
to take that action. I asked him what
his message would be to those critics
who don't trust him and how the public
would trust him. The social contract
that exists in this country between
those that work and pay their taxes and
those that govern them
is is at a very very fragile moment.
That trust in politics and trust in
politicians uh frankly it's certainly
never been lower in my lifetime and I
think you might have to go back a long
way in history to find a parallel
period. So the restoring of that trust
is absolutely vital
>> and that lack of trust in politics and
that sort of distrust of the
establishment that is exactly what Nigel
Far has always been very good at tapping
into. So a question from today will this
make basically setting out a plan will
it make it easier for Labor for the
Tories to comb through these plans with
a fine tooth comb to basically combat
the reform rise. One cabinet minister
told me that they would now constantly
be asking the question now between now
and the next election on Nigel Faraj's
plans. How are you going to do this? And
does this plan make that easier? Yes or
no? Or are the public very much in a
state where they just want to see
something done about migration. They
don't care what that happens. They're
happy to see Nigel Farage as a vibes
party. They're happy to vote for him
because they think that he is the
direction of travel. They want to see
the country and obviously you know these
politicians on the opposite side of the
spectrum will say will this work will
this work how are you going to do this
does it actually matter because Nigel
Franch isn't isn't actually in power he
is not a politician with many MPs at the
moment but this is all about the journey
to get to the next election and
obviously secondly to increase the
pressure on sir stama that's exactly
what this summer has been about Nigel
Farage firmly believes this is going to
be an election for 20 sorry an issue for
the 2029 election he thinks it's going
to be even sooner he thinks that He is
dragging Westminster to where the public
are on these issues. He wants to make
immigration one of those key offerings.
He's already setting out what the
dividing lines are going to be for 2029.
You've heard him making some
extraordinary attacks on the prime
minister today saying that international
lawyers, he's siding with them rather
than the British public. But he is on to
something with the rise in immigration
as an issue for the public. If you look
at the yuggov tracker which looks at
those issues, immigration whether it is
a result of Nigel Farage himself, you
know chicken or egg, what came first,
right? It has been going up and up that
tracker issue. We have had more small
votes come under Labour. So is he on to
something? Is this something that the
public just want to see action on? Are
they prepared to vote for Nigel Farage
for his vibes? I think today just proved
probably yes. And just on just briefly
on the on the the details of the plan, I
mean, deporting 600,000 migrants in the
first term, scrapping the Human Rights
Act, opting out of the European
Convention on Human Rights, it's fair to
say it's it's pretty hardline stuff.
>> Yeah, absolutely. Like you said, this is
the toughest immigration plan we have
seen from any political party. leaving
the ECHR, suspending international
treaties like the Human Rights Act for 5
years, leaving um suspending the refugee
convention, um paying people potentially
paying Afghanistan or other you know
similarly uh you know destructive
regimes thousands of pounds to take back
their own migrants um a self-reporting
app as well. Very interesting to um
basically work. I did ask they didn't
actually answer that question.
>> So if you think you've spotted an
illegal
>> No, no. If you are an illegal migrant,
you can report yourself, declare
yourself, and somebody will apparently
um come and take you back home.
Apparently, he says that's far cheaper
to pay someone 2 and a half grand than
to put them on a deportation flight
costing £17,000 a person. He also
admitted that women and children could
be deported under his plans. There are
going to be some exemptions, things like
Afghanistan interpreters as well. Um but
lots of questions still, Ben, he didn't
say whether there'd be a cut off point.
For example, say you have come here
illegally on a small boat now. Are you
going to face deportation under Nigel
Faraj's future? We still don't know
that. So, lots of big questions detail.
>> Sasha, thank you very much. Dina Sasha
Clark is LBC's political editor who was
at that press conference earlier today.
10 5 is the time. What do you make of
that hardline approach? Does that sound
to you like a finally a proper proper
plan to stop the boat or in your view is
that not a road that you want this
country to go down? suspending decades
old conventions on international law on
refugees, doing away with the human
rights act even temporarily. Is that the
is that the country we really want to
become? 034560973.
So Robert Buckland KC joins us, former
conservative law chancellor, secretary
of state for justice between 2019 2021.
So Robert, good to have you on the
program. Um, what did you make of what
Nigel Farage had to say? Because a lot
of people say, "Look, we tried the
softly softly approach. It hasn't
worked. So we are going to have to take
quite drastic action like this.
>> Well, I think there's a big difference
between performative politics and
reality. I mean, what Nigel has done
today is give a little bit of catnip uh
to people who quite understandably and
rightly are concerned about the rise in
illegal uh migration and the problem
that we have not just here in the UK but
across Western Europe of people coming
to our shores not for political reasons
very often but for economic ones. Now,
that is a real issue. Um, I hear it
every day talking to friends and family
and people I interact with. Uh, he's not
wrong to talk about it, but looking at
the detail, that's where things start to
unravel. And I'm afraid what he said
today just doesn't add up. But doing a
deal with the Taliban to send people
back to Afghanistan, doing a deal with
Iran, come on, get real. uh the the
where reality meets the rhetoric, I'm
afraid there is a real problem uh in the
detail of what he has said.
>> In terms of the human rights element of
this, suspending the human rights act,
opting out of the European Convention on
Human Rights, opting out even of the the
Refugee Convention temporarily,
um there is a sort of trade-off
emerging, isn't there, Sir Robert,
between maintaining the human rights
protections that we have currently and
solving the problem of small boats?
Well, look, I I I think that uh there is
an issue about the refugee convention
which was written in 1951 and the
question of safe countries. Uh what is
happening now is clearly that people are
coming through many many safe countries
before they get to Britain. And it does
seem to me that the convention needs
updating in order to reflect the reality
of migration in the 2020s as opposed to
the 1950s. But I don't think you do that
by uh saying that Britain now needs to
withdraw from all its international
obligations. You know, metaphorically
pulling up the drawbridge uh to deal
with a problem we know is international
in nature. And the only way that we're
going to deal with it is to work more
closely with international partners in
order to deal with the problem. And in
many ways, you know, Nigel does concede
that in what he said. It's there's a
contradiction at the heart of his
message which is at one level he wants
to withdraw from all these international
conventions but then he wants to work
with other countries to return people to
them. I I I don't think uh that
contradiction really stands up to
scrutiny.
>> But what about the human rights act and
the the ECR? Because it there is a sort
of again an emerging view sir Robert
that those two pieces of legislation one
European one UK of course are massively
hampering any government labor
conservative who knows maybe reform in
their ability to to sort out this
problem once and for all. Look, we've
spent years dealing with aspects of
human rights legislation, particularly
on article 8 and the right to privacy
and family life. That has caused
problems, I think.
>> So, he's right to say we can't solve
this without scrapping some human rights
laws.
>> There's nothing new about this, Ben. I
mean, the previous government in which I
was involved did take a lot of steps to
mitigate the effect of this and well, up
to a point. I think that it's wrong to
say that leaving the ECR is going to be
the silver bullet that will solve all
these problems because what he's
offering is something called a British
bill of rights. Frankly, that I think
would be a worse scenario whereby the
sort of rights that he wants to
repatriate will be used quite obviously
and easily by people who want to claim
asylum and claim a place in Britain. I
don't think removing one set of laws and
replacing them with another is the
solution here. I think the reality is
that our system uh and the immigration
rules themselves have become very
complicated is gummed up. I agree with
that. uh but that it is practical
measures that we needed to unum and
unglue this system that will work rather
than lofty calls to pull Britain out of
all of its international obligations
which I think will make the position
much much worse if we're going to seek
cooperation from other countries.
>> And just finally, is there a risk here?
You talked about deals with the Taliban.
We're having a conversation this hour
about doing away with all sorts of human
rights protections. Is there a risk
here? Over the weekend, we also heard
Labour talking about taking judges
powers away in this domain that we are
at risk of undermining our own democracy
in order to stop the boat, Sir Robert,
at almost any cost, even one that is is
a potentially uh worse than the problem
we're dealing with.
>> Well, underlining the this issue is
whether or not it is it's a serious
issue. It's a challenge. It's a huge
concern to many communities. Of course,
is this the sort of national emergency?
for example, the troubles in Northern
Ireland that allowed us to deriggate
from the European Convention back in the
70s. Is it the sort of national
challenge, national emergency that would
justify the suspension of some civil
>> What's your answer to that? Is is
>> I I think that that's a big step to
take. I I think that whilst this is a
serious challenge to us, I don't think
that upending all our liberties is
indeed the way forward. I think it's far
better for us to recognize the gravity
of the situation. Uh we could even look
at things like ID cards for example.
I've been historically skeptical of them
but it does seem to me now that there is
a case for that bearing in mind the fact
>> but your view Robert would be that that
just tearing up sways of our human
rights laws um would be disproportionate
to the problem that they're facing.
>> I think that would be a mistake. It
would be ineffectual authoritarianism
that would not achieve the desired
outcome of reducing and removing uh uh
people who come here for no good reason
at all. We all want to see this problem
solved. It is a serious challenge.