All political parties, if they are to be successful, have to be broad churches.
— Dominic Grieve
If you are making policies through speeches that are contradicting some of the policy development your colleagues are embarked on, you are destroying collective responsibility.
I would like to think that I have followed in the proper tradition of attorneys-general, providing good quality advice to my colleagues in government and have taken on their needs and concerns.
It's difficult to see how the U.K. can be a member of the E.U. if it's not adherent to the principles set out in the convention.
I think politicians should express their faith. I have never adhered to the Blair view that we don't do God, indeed I'm not sure that Blair does.
I worry that there are attempts to push faith out of the public space. Clearly it happens at a level of local power.
The state is there to serve the citizen, not the reverse.
There is a certain belief that so long as something is published in cyberspace there is no need to respect the laws of contempt or libel. This is mistaken.
Believing in and practising the principles of the rule of law is, with our liberty and democracy, among the most powerful weapons we have. It is less effective if we blur its clarity and we should do this as sparingly as possible.
As one of the principal responsibilities of the government is to safeguard its citizens, it is entirely reasonable that it should look at what more might be done to improve security.
We do ourselves as politicians no favours if we are seen to peddle unachievable moonshine.
As a politician, I should expect sharp challenge from those who disagree with my decisions.
A decision as a backbencher to vote against one's party ought not to be taken lightly.
We will not be thanked by anyone for dragging the country out of the E.U. on a deal for which the public have shown no enthusiasm. For MPs that would be an abdication of responsibility.
A no deal Brexit is a proposal so damaging to our future that it cannot be accepted.
It has long been noted that two of the Conservative Party's great strengths have been the loyalty of its members and its pragmatic approach to policy challenges.
Since 1955, the U.K. has been part of an intelligence-sharing arrangement with the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Intelligence-sharing is, in itself, commonplace.
The principles of conservatism include upholding the rule of law and the United Kingdom's international legal obligations.
I am a Conservative, so I don't wish to be seen as a rebel, particularly, at all.
We have to look at levels of migration. We are in a world that is quite chaotic. Some people are really frightened about it. Some people are quite despairing. They don't believe our country is capable of providing a good quality of life. That feeds into why people voted Ukip and induces a culture of despair.
Ultimately, any government is one which enjoys the majority of support of members of Parliament to carry out a policy.
It is in nobody's interest that groups should find themselves excluded from society.
Surveillance legislation passed in good faith has been stretched well beyond its original purpose.
Our personal data belongs to us. Government holds it on trust.
As attorney general I see my role as defender both of press freedom and of the fair administration of justice.
As has been the case throughout the history of terrorism, government anxiety centres on what to do about those against whom there may be intelligence but no usable evidence.
We need to understand why there is a void of participation in public life from the Muslim community and why it is a growing issue, and we need to understand the impact of this on wider civil society.
From the immediate abandonment of the promise of an extra £350m for the NHS, the history of Brexit is already littered with discarded and unfulfillable promises.
If parliament and government work together in their respective constitutional roles, and respect due processes, we will maximise our chances of making the right decisions as we encounter the many challenges, risks and opportunities Brexit poses for our country.
We have collectively to face up to the fact that in the two main political parties there are substantial disagreements on the best form Brexit should take.
A careful examination of the information available, from previous counter-terrorism investigations, demonstrates that police have never come close to having to release any dangerous terrorist suspects as a result of time constraints.
A Brexit with a poor outcome will damage our country and lead to years of further division.
Intelligence is fragmentary and hard to discover, so it is by joining forces and sharing information with our allies that we maximise our ability to protect ourselves.
Investment by any foreign company in any element of the U.K.'s Critical National Infrastructure should receive careful scrutiny.
Nobody in this country goes around saying: 'I'm feeling very oppressed by the E.U.' Well, one or two people do, but they're a bit odd. Ultimately, if they're getting oppressed by the E.U., they're going to start to feel oppressed by something else and just switch to a new subject of oppression.
I came into parliament to do things, so I don't particularly relish being a rebel.
I do worry about population growth and the preservation of the green belt space but I don't think these are insurmountable problems.
It's very nice to be a rebel saying, 'I stand on my principles,' but if in fact that's not going to have any impact on the policy, it may be principled, but it doesn't deliver the better outcome that the country needs.
Some of the cases which have come to light of employers being disciplined or sacked for simply trying to talk about their faith in the workplace I find quite extraordinary. The sanitisation will lead to people of faith excluding themselves from the public space and being excluded.
Of course we should harness IT to strengthen public protection and public service delivery.
The inexorable rise of the Internet and the citizen journalist presents us all with challenges for the future.
It is not always easy to balance freedom of expression with the needs of the justice system.
Whether it be the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 or the Terrorism Act 2000, there is no shortage of offences with which to prosecute those who go abroad to fight or train and who may threaten us on their return.
It is this desire to see civil society remain a strong and united force within the U.K. that has encouraged me to chair Citizens U.K. Commission on Islam, Participation and Public Life.
All the main parties accept that the stated wish of the United Kingdom electorate to leave the E.U. must be respected. That must place on us collectively a responsibility to work together to find a solution.
Political parties depend for existence and success, not so much on the holding of identical views, as on a shared philosophy and ties of loyalty and respect between members. So there are good reasons to try to find compromises when differences emerge on a specific matter.
Thankfully, roads have opened that could lead us out of this Brexit crisis. One obvious solution, which is fast gaining support, is to hand the issue back to the country. I would add that we also need formally to take no deal Brexit off the table, because that way lies chaos and disaster.
The country needs leadership driven by the dictates of national security, not the ebb and flow of political fortunes.
Including myself, it is now clear that there is a significant group of Conservative MPs who think that a People's Vote - a vote on the final form Brexit will take, is absolutely indispensable for the future wellbeing of our country.
In seeking to counter challenges such as terrorist threats, hostile state activity, or nuclear proliferation, we cannot work in isolation.
