Tory revolt over Johnson’s lockdown plans and English liberties

Conservative backbenchers are in open revolt over the Prime Minister’s decision to introduce national lockdown restrictions for at least a month. Dozens of Conservatives, including Sir Graham Brady, the chair of the powerful backbench 1922 Committee, have publicly stated their intention to vote against the government’s plans when they come to parliament, further heightening tensions between Boris Johnson and his parliamentary party.

Backbenchers are dismayed by the government’s apparent willingness to erode people’s freedoms and liberties – which they consider to be foundational, small-c conservative principles, which are not to be betrayed under any circumstance. “It is axiomatic that the government has no right to instruct law-abiding adult citizens as to how to conduct their intimate or family relationships,” Sir Graham Brady said this morning.

He continued: “Freedom, liberty, human rights. The words are cheap, but if we surrender them cheaply, the cost will be immense. We must take Covid seriously, but it is time to shift that burden from the government and to take responsibility on our own shoulders. Our parliament came into existence to protect the liberty of the citizen from arbitrary government. When MPs vote on Wednesday, they should remember that.”

It appears that Brady has won over a significant proportion of the Parliamentary Conservative Party. Those who’ve already indicated support for his rebellion include three former cabinet ministers – Iain Duncan Smith, Esther McVey and John Redwood – as well as former Chairman of the 1922 Committee Charles Walker and former Minister of State Desmond Swayne. The government’s measures are still expected to easily make their way through parliament, but only with Labour support.

Johnson had attempted to ease backbench nerves before Saturday’s announcement, inviting Steve Baker – a lockdown-sceptic backbencher known for running effective, independent whipping operations during the Commons Brexit battles – to review the scientific evidence. Baker emerged sounding supportive, telling the cameras that Johnson had “very very difficult choices to make” and that his parliamentary colleagues should “listen extremely carefully to what the PM says.”

Baker has since grown more sceptical, however, in a sign of shifting sands within the parliamentary party. Today, he tweeted: “If the modelling NHS capacity is as flawed (as the modelled death predictions), we are suddenly in a very different conversation today from the one I had in Number 10 on Saturday.”

There has been another attempt by the government to ease backbench nerves this afternoon, with Johnson holding personal meetings with lead rebels in Downing Street before delivering a marathon statement to the Commons – staying potentially for hours to answer the myriad of difficult questions he will face from both sides of the chamber. The Prime Minister is expected to say: “Models of our scientists suggest that unless we act now, we could see deaths over the winter that are twice as bad or more compared with the first wave.”

Without some key concessions, however, it is unlikely he will be able to shift the mood in his parliamentary party. Lockdown-sceptic backbenchers are demanding three things: a Commons vote on any decision to extend lockdown in December, impact statements from both the Treasury and the Department for Health on the impacts of lockdown on the economy and non-Covid health, and a comprehensive lockdown strategy to be presented for scrutiny.

Johnson has listened to the advice of Professors Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance over the concerns of his MPs. The consequences for his ability to manage his parliamentary party will be severe, whatever he says over the coming days.