Edited by Deepali Verma
Rishi Sunak’s plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda received its first parliamentary defeat once the peers backed calls for protections to be introduced before any other flights take off. The House of Lords voted for a motion that sought to delay ratification of the new Rwanda treaty until the government can show if the country is safe.
The vote by 214 votes to 171, was an unprecedented move that seeked to hold the implementation of the deal that paved the way for the asylum scheme. The safety of Rwanda bill reads that the law will not come into force till the time the treaty is ratified.
The Commons passed the bill last week but it was followed by a Tory row that diminished the prime minister’s authority.
Downing Street has urged the flights to Rwanda to be on time and not be affected by the Lords vote and had issued a warning to the peers prior to the vote that a failure to pass the legislation would prove as an attack on the “will of the people”.
James Cleverly, the home secretary, had inked the legally binding pact with Kigali in December, saying it was in direct address of the concerns raised by the supreme court regarding the possibility of asylum seekers deported to Rwanda then being transferred to a country where they could be at risk. On the other hand, the cross-party Lords committee had promised that the safeguards mentioned in the treaty are “incomplete” and must be implemented prior to its endorsement.
Labour peer, Lord Goldsmith, chairman of the committee, informed the upper house that the report had identified at least 10 issues where “important additional legal and practical steps” must be implemented to guarantee the safety of asylum seekers.
He remarked: “We are not of the view that the treaty should never be ratified but instead the parliament should have the opportunity to scrutinise the treaty and its implementation measures in full before it arrives on a judgement that Rwanda is safe.”
Lord Howell, who happens to be former conservative cabinet minister, criticised the “rather patronising tone that one hears in certain comments about Rwanda along with its judiciary and legal system as though it could not possibly have high enough standards”.
There was support for the motion from Labour and the Lib Dems, along with crossbench peers and some on the “one nation” wing of the Conservative party.
This marks the maiden time that the Lords has given the motion to delay ratification of an international treaty eversince the legislation was introduced in 2010. Lord Sharpe of Epsom, the Home Office minister, responded to the debate, accusing Labour peers of “using the House of Lords to frustrate our plans to stop the boats”.
Downing Street currently finds itself in down playing the significance of the vote. Addressing the Lords motion, the prime minister’s spokesperson said there would be no delay in any flights for Rwanda.
“Our understanding is that had the motion been successful it would simply require the government to layer the said legislation with an oral statement that would have no impact on the timelines for getting flights off the ground,” they said.
