Rishi’s plea for party to “come together” on Rwanda bill

The Prime Minister issued a direct appeal to his party to unite behind the deportation plan in a crunch Commons vote on Wednesday night.

He issued a rallying cry to them, telling the Daily Express: “As a party we have to come together to get this legislation through and put the pressure on Labour who are nowhere near on the issue.”

Tory rebels were told deportation flights to Rwanda are likely to take off in spring if they back the reforms in tonight’s vote.
Mr Sunak believes the “vitally important” bill is the “fastest way” to get planes in the air, Downing Street said.

“This was a vitally important piece of legislation that provides the necessary deterrence,” his spokesman said.

“It remains the fastest way to get flights off the ground. The public wants the government to do more to tackle the migration. This bill will deliver on that.”

Mr Sunak’s call came after his flagship Rwanda bill was thrown into chaos by a 58-strong rebellion from his MPs voting in amendments to the proposed legislation.

If the size of the rebellion is repeated in Wednesday evening’s third reading of the bill the Government is likely to be defeated, throwing Mr Sunak’s premiership into jeopardy.

The Prime Minister suffered a further blow when one of the most high profile red wall MPs in his team, Lee Anderson, quit as deputy Tory chairman and voted with the rebels.

Tory whips are now desperately scrambling to persuade the rebels to vote with the Government and save the flagship piece of legislation.

Conservative MP James Daly, a member of the New Conservatives group of Tories behind the amendments, called on his colleagues to halt the rebellion and back the bill.

He said the legislation is “robust” and will prevent the courts from trying to “meddle” with the will of Parliament.

Mr Daly added: “I will back this bill. I hope everyone on the government benches will do the same.

“The alternative is division within our Conservative family that would help only the Labour Party and let our nation down.”

Former party leaders Iain Duncan Smith and Liz Truss were among Tory MPs who backed attempts to change the bill yesterday. Mr Anderson and fellow deputy chairman Brendan Clarke-Smith quit their roles to vote for the amendments.

In a letter to the Prime Minister, the pair said they have consistently argued for the Government’s Rwanda legislation to be watertight.
“It is therefore important in terms of credibility that we are consistent with this,” they added.

“We have already had two pieces of legislation thwarted by a system that does not work in favour of the British people.

“It is for this reason that we have supported the amendments to the Rwanda Bill.

“This is not because we are against the legislation, but because like everybody else we want it to work.

“This task is not an easy one and we appreciate the fine balance that must be struck.”

Tory rebel Sir John Hayes said he would listen to the full debate and the Government before deciding how to vote on the Rwanda Bill.

The Conservative former minister said of the rebellion: “The numbers speak for themselves. It was a really impressive number.”

He added: “I think we got a very significant proportion of the backbenchers.”

Asked if he would vote against the Government, he said: “We’ve got another day’s debate tomorrow, haven’t we – so let’s listen to that debate and deal with things as they occur rather than before they occur.

“So we will see what the Government says tomorrow and, as I say, the numbers speak for themselves.”

He said there is a “line of communication” with the Government and the whips and there has been “no acrimony and so our door is always open”.

Under the Government’s plan, migrants who cross the English Channel on small boats could be sent on a one-way trip to Rwanda rather than being allowed to try to seek asylum in the UK.

The legislation along with a treaty signed with Kigali are intended to make the measures legally watertight following a court ruling blocking deporations.

Some 58 Conservative MPs backed a series of amendments last night, though their attempts were easily seen off as Labour did not join them.

Ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick said his attempts to change the legislation represented the “last opportunity” to make sure it is a strong deterrent to small boat crossings.

He said the Bill left loopholes open which would allow individuals to claim Rwanda would not be safe for them specifically, even if it was deemed a safe country overall.

“Of course as we have seen in the past, one person will mount a successful challenge, that will create a precedent,” Mr Jenrick told the Commons.

“Time and again we will lose these cases in the courts. So the Bill in that respect is legally flawed.”

But it is understood that No 10 has not been shown Mr Jenrick’s legal advice to back up his case the amendments are in line with international law.

Tory former cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke said the test facing MPs is whether the Rwanda legislation will work, telling the Commons: “There is a crisis of faith in our politics and that really boils down to – as it has done for a number of years, spanning the Brexit debate and indeed the causes of it – do we as Members of Parliament mean what we say?

“Is our word worth anything? Are we capable as a country of asserting our national sovereignty? Are we as a country capable of policing our borders?”

Justice Secretary Alex Chalk has asked for more judges to be appointed to deal with migrant appeals.

He told the Commons that recruitment would “conclude in the next few months and new judges will be appointed, trained and start sitting from this summer”.

In the meantime, the judiciary had identified judges which could provide 5,000 additional sitting days while extra space had been prepared, making a total of 25 courtrooms available for hearings.

But the most senior judge in England and Wales stressed decisions on deploying judges were “exclusively a matter for the judiciary”.

The Lady Chief Justice, Lady Carr said: “Parliament has legislated, we – the judiciary – have acted in preparation for that legislation.

“But to be absolutely clear, matters of deployment of judges, the allocation of work for judges and the use of courtrooms is exclusively a matter for the judiciary, and more specifically, a matter for myself and the senior president of the tribunals. And it’s really important that people understand that clear division.”