Rwanda bill passes after months of debate

Rishi Sunak’s flagship Rwanda bill is set to become law after five months of debate in Westminster.

This designates Rwanda as a safe country and is a key part of the government’s plan to send some asylum seekers there.

The bill has been heavily criticized by opposition parties, but after several rounds of debate, Lords dropped their opposition to the bill late Monday.

Sunak said flights to Rwanda would take off within 10 to 12 weeks, falling short of the original spring goal.

However, there is still the possibility that departure from the country may be held up in court or that there may be delays in securing a flight for asylum seekers.

Home Secretary James Cleverley said the passing of the bill was a “landmark moment in the plan to stop boats”.

“We promised to do what was necessary to clear the path for the first flight, and that’s what we did,” he said in a video posted on social media.

“Right now, we’re working day by day to get the plane off the ground.”

But Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, called the Rwanda plan a “prohibitively expensive gimmick”.

Earlier on Monday, the prime minister said planes were booked to take off as soon as the bill was passed and 500 staff were ready to escort migrants “all the way to Rwanda.”

“Plans are in place, and no matter what happens, these flights will happen,” he said, adding, “We hope to build a drumbeat of multiple flights per month… Because that’s how you build systemic deterrence, and that’s how you do it,” he added. Please stop the boat. ”

Mr Sunak had vowed to have MPs work through the night if necessary to pass the bill and get the planes off the ground.

A long struggle between the House of Commons and the House of Lords lasted for hours, with MPs sending the bill back to MPs five times.

But the fierce parliamentary battle ended after colleagues decided not to press their opposition any further, with the final debate ending just after midnight.

This meant that the government was able to proceed as it wished, despite fierce criticism from opposition parties and lords.

After many setbacks, the bill’s passage was a political victory for Rishi Sunak.

But his pledge to stop small boats crossing the Channel depends on whether this becomes the deterrent he promised. With a general election approaching, the Prime Minister does not have much time to prove that his plan will work.

Lord Carlyle, who supported Mr. is absolutely correct.” There are better ways to deal with this problem in this country anyway. ”

Another amendment from Lord Brown of Reddington concerned the exemption from deportation for Afghanistan veterans who supported British troops.

The Labor MP criticized the government’s approach, telling government spokesperson Lord Sharpe that Afghan veterans with “credible links” to Afghan special forces would have their claims reassessed by an independent body. Those who were verified were asked to repeat their previous commitments. You won’t be expelled.

Lord Browne said this was a “very important concession” but as the pledge was not included in the text of the bill he had to “take their word for it” and decided to withdraw the amendment.

Back in the House of Commons, Shadow Immigration Secretary Stephen Kinnock praised the “persistence” of his colleagues in the House of Lords in holding out what he called “significant concessions”.

However, the government remained firm in its stance of completely rejecting the final amendment.

Once again the bill was sent back along the corridors of the Palace of Westminster, Lord Anderson decided to make a concession.

Speaking at the “funeral” of the last amendment, he said, “The purpose of ping pong is to use force to persuade the government to come to the table and agree to a compromise.

“They flatly refused to do so… It is time to recognize the supremacy of elected parliaments and withdraw from the fray.”

Epsom’s Home Secretary Sharp defended the bill, saying it complied with international law and that “protecting the integrity of our borders is deeply moral and patriotic.”

The bill is expected to receive Royal Assent from King Charles in the coming days and become formal law.

Opposition parties are not alone in opposing the Rwandan government’s plan, with human rights groups saying it poses a “serious threat to the rule of law” by undermining protections for people from state abuses of power. There is.

In a joint statement with Amnesty International and Liberty, the charity Freedom from Torture said: “We all have the right to live safe lives and have the opportunity to seek protection when we need it most. .

“This shameful bill undermines the Constitution and international law and puts torture survivors and other refugees at risk for a dangerous future in Rwanda.”