DOMINIC Grieve has accused Boris Johnson of a further radicalisation on Brexit, leaving the UK with "starker" prospects by strengthening his stance on the Irish backstop.
The former Attorney General also accused the Tory leadership front-runner of making a "disgraceful" suggestion which would spell the end of democracy as we know it.
On Tuesday, Mr Grieve warned whoever becomes the next prime minister that their government will collapse if they pursued a no-deal departure from the EU.
In last night’s head-to-head debate with leadership rival Jeremy Hunt, Mr Johnson made clear the backstop to prevent a hard border in Ireland could not have time limits or "unilateral escape hatches".
Mr Grieve suggested the frontrunner to succeed Theresa May had confirmed that hardliners would "put up another obstacle" if anyone was able to solve the issue because it was being "used as an excuse because of this radicalisation".
Mr Grieve explained: "When challenged and confronted, he radicalised even further and excluded any possibility of trying to negotiate some way out of the backstop at all. It had to go in its totality. The consequence of that is make it the choices starker and starker.
"I've always been willing as a politician to listen to people willing to come up with credible compromises but what I've found so staggering about the Conservative leadership [contest] is it has been played to a tune of growing extremism."
READ MORE: Michael Gove in dramatic U-turn, declaring Boris Johnson would now make 'great' prime minister
Speaking alongside Mr Grieve at a second referendum campaign event, Labour veteran Margaret Beckett called the candidates' backstop pledges "terrifying" and accused them of throwing "the Irish situation under a bus".
She said: "Nobody can say that that situation is now so peaceful it's inconceivable that there will be further problems in the future. I think that's an extraordinary demonstration of lack of responsibility to the country."
Pressed at The Sun and talkRadio debate on Monday, Mr Johnson had said the problem with the backstop was "fundamental".
He added that the answer was "no to time limits or unilateral escape hatches or these kind of elaborate devices, glosses, codicils and so on which you could apply to the backstop".
Unlike contest underdog Mr Hunt, Mr Johnson has refused to rule out suspending Parliament in order to force Brexit through against the will of MPs.
Mr Grieve said it was an "astonishing" and "disgraceful" suggestion from the man most likely to be the next PM.
"It is unconstitutional, it is anti-democratic, it would in fact be the end of our Parliamentary democracy and it's something which hasn't been done in this fashion for such a purpose since the 17th century," declared the Buckinghamshire MP.
READ MORE: Neil Mackay: Why the Plan B path to independence reveals a world of pain for the SNP
He added that Mr Johnson failing to rule out the measure would be one of the defining issues of whether he could offer him any support.
While there would be "no reason" to resign the Tory whip if Mr Hunt won, Mr Grieve expressed his "concerns about the suitability of Boris Johnson as prime minister" that go "way beyond" Brexit.
"But what I have said repeatedly is that I will consult with my colleagues about the best course of action if he wins the leadership," he added.
Mr Grieve and Mrs Beckett were speaking at the launch of a report for the People's Vote campaign.
Entitled Six Dead-Ends, One Cliff-Edge, Only One Way Out, it argues that a second referendum is the only way to end "this never-ending crisis", whatever the outcome.
And it stated that a series of possible Brexit outcomes were likely to lead to further political deadlock, including renegotiating the backstop.
The study also dismissed the idea of having a general election and claimed there was unlikely to be a majority in Parliament for revoking Article 50.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel