Yorkshire MP David Davis says coronavirus law safeguards are not enough

This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission on items purchased through this article, but that does not affect our editorial judgement.

A six-month time limit will be put on emergency powers to tackle coronavirus, but a Yorkshire MP says the safeguards do not go far enough.

MPs are due to debate and sign off on strict measures that would grant ministers, councils, police, health professionals and coroners increased controls today.

Changes include reducing the number of doctors required to sign off on sectioning those with mental health issues from two to one, while police would be given authority to force those infected with Covid-19 to self-isolate.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But former Cabinet minister and Haltemprice and Howden MP David Davis is calling for Boris Johnson to go further by introducing a rewritten Bill in 12 months' time if the powers are still deemed necessary.

David Davis. Photo: PADavid Davis. Photo: PA
David Davis. Photo: PA | pa

Mr Davis, the ex-Brexit secretary, said six-monthly reviews were not sufficient to keep such wide-reaching legislation in check and predicted there were likely to be "mistakes" in the 300-plus pages of emergency legislation.

Senior ministers are currently attempting to limit the peak number of infections to reduce pressure on the NHS.

As of Sunday morning, there were 5,683 cases in the UK and 281 patients who had tested positive for coronavirus had died.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Downing Street sources confirmed that the Government would introduce an amendment to the Coronavirus Bill today to ensure the fresh powers within it had to be renewed every six months.

The announcement followed concern from some MPs that the extensive powers contained in the legislation could be in place for two years.

But Mr Davis said he feared the current set of powers contained in the fast-tracked Bill would give the Government undue strengths which could infringe on civil liberties.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

His comments come after Labour's Shadow Equalities Minister and Bradford West MP Naz Shah submitted an amendment, backed by 100 MPs, to exempt those from faith backgrounds from automatically being cremated if they die after contracting coronavirus.

There are anxieties, especially among Jews and Muslims whose faiths forbid cremation, that local authorities, in the event the number of deaths increase dramatically, will be able to use the emergency powers to disregard legal safeguards that currently prevent the cremation of human remains against the wishes of the deceased.

Mr Davis said he was personally concerned that powers allowing the Government to postpone elections could be misused.

The civil liberties campaigner said: "This Bill was put together in five days, it is 300-odd pages long.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

"It is guaranteed, bluntly, that it will have mistakes and unnecessary elements to it.

"Those mistakes will all be in one direction and that's giving more power to the Government than is necessary."

The senior Conservative MP said a six-month sunset clause would not go far enough in terms of checks.

"What's going to happen is we're going to have another one-day debate and we're going to talk about the same 320 pages in six months' time," he added.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

"How is that going to work out? Are we going to amend the Bill? We can't, there's no scope to amend it.

"My view is very different - we accept it is going to be there for a year for safety's sake and that gives you six to nine months to learn what has happened scientifically, what has happened economically and what has happened on the social front.

"We may have no high street by then, no pubs left by then or very few. You just don't know.

"The trick is to write it properly and present it nine months in so we can spend three months looking at it."

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

As Health Secretary Matt Hancock introduced the new legislation to the House of Commons on Monday afternoon, Mr Davis said: "Obviously I commend him for accepting the six-month review I think it is that he has just announced, but will he tell the House, in the event that the House decides that one element of this Act is working badly, would we be able to amend or strike out that element, or do we have to take the whole thing or reject it at the six-month point?"

Mr Hancock replied: "We're proposing, as discussed with the Opposition, a six-month debate and vote on the continuation of the Bill and before that debate we will provide evidence and advice from the chief medical officer to inform the debate.

"And there is also a reporting mechanism for a report every eight weeks on the use of the powers in the Bill."

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.