image source, Getty Images
Rishi Sunak insists his policy to process asylum seekers in Rwanda will become law, even if MPs sit into the night to pass it.
Over the past four months, this bill has been the subject of a protracted standoff between the House and Senate.
Lords have consistently blocked and amended the bill, and the House of Commons is expected to vote on a revised version later.
Chancellor Rishi Sunak is due to hold a press conference later to discuss his plans.
On Friday, the Prime Minister said there would be no further delay, adding: “We're going to sit there and vote until it's done.”
The government's proposed legislation would significantly limit the grounds for legal challenge to plans to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda and make it easier to remove refugees who arrive in the UK by illegal means. It has already been approved by the House of Representatives. Many times.
The latest was last Wednesday, when the House of Lords blocked the bill from passing by requesting amendments to the bill, including an amendment to exempt asylum seekers from Afghanistan who supported British troops while in Afghanistan. . They are among those forced to flee to Rwanda.
It also said the planes should not take off until an expert committee set up to monitor the program determines that Rwanda has implemented certain safety measures.
Peers want the government to add two amendments to the bill before ratifying it before passing it. MPs are expected to vote on the bill and its amendments from Lords on Monday afternoon.
This ping-pong between the two chambers could continue until the government makes concessions or abandons amendments proposed by other MPs.
Sunak calls the Rwanda Safety Bill “emergency legislation” that, if enacted, will make it easier to keep the promise to “stop the boats”. Because the government says this prospect will be an effective deterrent for the Rwandan people. Cross the strait in a small boat.
The scheme was first introduced by then Prime Minister Boris Johnson on April 14, 2022, but no asylum seekers have yet been sent to Rwanda, a landlocked Central African country 4,000 miles (6,500 km) from the UK. .
Mr Sunak then inherited the scheme when he became Prime Minister in October 2022, following Liz Truss' brief tenure.
Following the Supreme Court's ruling, the government introduced the Rwanda Safety Bill, which aims to make it clear in UK law that Rwanda is a safe country.
Critics say the plan would put people at risk and that the bill would undermine the independence of courts.
Following the ups and downs between the House of Lords and the House of Commons over the past four months, Mr Sunak has announced that he will ask both houses to repeat the process until a breakthrough is found.
Lord Carlyle, a member of the House of Lords who opposes the Rwanda plan, told BBC Radio 4's Today program that he and others would “keep moving forward as long as necessary” and would not withdraw the amendments.
He referred to the UK-Rwanda treaty signed in December and said Rwanda was “not yet in compliance with the treaty” it signed with the UK. The treaty is at the heart of the government's plans, but is separate from the Rwanda Security Bill. It was drafted in response to a Supreme Court ruling and aims to ensure greater protection for asylum seekers.
Lord Carlyle added: [the treaty] If the is followed, we would say, “Okay, we accept that people should go to Rwanda, but it won't be our first choice.”
“The government does not insist that Rwanda comply with the treaty.”
Former Home Secretary Suela Braverman told the Today program that the bill had “too many loopholes” to provide “the deterrent effect needed to defeat smuggling organizations”.
He said he was vulnerable to a “last-minute injunction” from the European Court of Human Rights, adding: “The simple fact is that this is the third parliamentary law the government has introduced in four years to stop boats.” Ta.
Home Secretary James Cleverley previously said the treaty would ensure people who have migrated to Rwanda would no longer be at risk of being returned to a country where their lives or freedoms would be threatened.
