Education
Rwanda bill ‘pushing at edge of the envelope’ but ‘within framework of international law’ says home secretary – UK politics live | Politics
Cleverly says bill ‘pushing at edge of envelope’ but still ‘within framework of international law’
John Baron (Con) asks Cleverly to confirm that the government will remain within international law.
The British are world champions at queuing, we don’t like queue jumpers, which is why illegal immigration grates with us. Can he confirm that the government will take all steps to ensure that we remain within international law, just not now but going forward, in which case I will certainly be supporting the bill tonight.
But does he also agree with me that some colleagues in this place need to be careful what they wish for?
Cleverly says he is confident, on the basis of conversations with the government’s legal advisers, that what it is doing is “within the framework of international law”.
But the measures are “novel”, and “very much pushing at the edge of the envelope”, he says.
I am confident and indeed the conversations that I have had with the government’s legal advisors reinforces my belief that the actions that we are taking whilst novel, whilst very much pushing at the edge of the envelope, are within the framework of international law.
Key events
Matt Warman (Con), who is one of the Conservative One Nation Caucus, says he is voting for the bill, but without any enthusiasm. He says MPs have a duty to tackle the problem of immigration. They should support the bill, even if it isn’t perfect.
David Simmonds (Con) says he started off as a Rwanda sceptic. He thought it would be a very expensive policy. But, on the basis of what he observed in Calais, and what he heard from officials, he concluded it could act as a deterrent for some people. The policy, and the bill today, have “enormous utility”, he says.
Simon Hart, the government chief whip, has cancelled a meeting with potential Tory rebels, to make time for talks with No 10, Pippa Crerar reports.
Tory source says the chief whip has cancelled a talks with Rwanda rebel MPs at 5pm so he can hold what is described as an “emergency meeting” with No 10
— Pippa Crerar (@PippaCrerar) December 12, 2023
Sir Edward Leigh (Con) told MPs that he wanted parliament to pass the bill as quickly as possible. He said that, to stop the UK being affected by injunctions from the European court of human rights, it would probably be necessary to leave the European convention on human rights. The government did not have a mandate for that, he said. He said that might be a matter for the next manifesto. But MPs had to be realistic, he said, and he claimed the bill probably went as far as was possible now.
No 10 says government not ruling out changing elements of Rwanda bill relating to domestic, but not international, law
At the afternoon lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson sounded marginally more open to accepting amendments to the Rwanda bill from rightwing Tories than he did this morning. (See 12.27pm and 3.24pm.)
Asked if the current version of the bill was at the limits of what was acceptable to Rwanda (which has said, if the UK breaks international law, it will no longer support the deportation agreement), the spokesperson said:
The Rwandan government’s position is in relation to the international law elements.
There are other aspects of the bill that don’t relate purely to that, so I’m not going to rule out considering any further suggestions that MPs may make or have made.
Those conversations are ongoing.
Sammy Wilson from the DUP says all MPs should support what the bill is trying to do. But he questions whether it works, and he says the government has not learned from the mistakes with previous immigration bills.
But he says the bill creates specific problems for Northern Ireland. He says Belfast is the city in the UK with the second largest number of immigrants, which creates pressure on housing. And he says the EU’s charter of fundamental rights applies in Northern Ireland. He suggests that could lead to asylum seekers from the rest of the UK coming to Northern Ireland on the grounds that would give them a better chance of staying.
Jackie Doyle-Price (Con) says MPs should not let the best be the enemy of the good. By passing this bill, they will help deal with the problem.
She tells her colleagues that, although this bill may not match their ideology, it will help to make the situation better.
Natalie Elphicke, the Conservative MP for Dover, says it was diplomacy that allowed the UK and France, working together, to stop people getting into the UK illegally via lorries.
She says diplomacy is needed again, to get a returns agreement with France. She says the UK should be returning people to France, not Rwanda.
She also says the UK should start international discussions on a new global migration settlement.
She wants to stop the boats, she says. But she says she is gravely concerned that this bill won’t do what the government intends.
If a former home secretary (Suella Braverman), a former immigration minister (Robert Jenrick) and the MP for the constituency most affected (Elphicke herself) are all saying the bill may not work, the government should listen, she says.
Tommy Sheppard (SNP) says he is disappointed that the Tories are only talking about migrants in negative terms. He says they are weaponising this for political gain.
And, referring to the business model for people smugglers, he says the government created their business model – by closing down legal routes for asylum seekers.
Simon Fell (Con) says the government is not acting alone. Other governments around the world are working on schemes similar to this one, he says.
He says voting for this bill is the best means of stopping the boats.
Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP, describes the bill as a “cynical and sinister attack on the highest court in the UK”.
The bill won’t work, she says. And it won’t serve as a deterrent to people who are already risking their lives.
It’s “a performative piece of cruelty from a dying administraton”, she says.
