This is a preview of Migration Watch’s free weekly newsletter. Please consider signing up to the newsletter directly, you can do so here and will receive an email copy of the newsletter every Friday as soon as it is released.
Rishi Sunak’s Safety of Rwanda Bill is caught in the midst of a fierce battle in Parliament. Despite facing rejection from the House of Lords for the third time, Mr Sunak remains resolute, refusing to budge on concessions (maybe). But what exactly does this mean for the future of his plan?
The stage is set for a showdown as MPs gear up to overturn the Lords’ amendments, sending the bill back to the Upper House. However, Labour and and a majority of crossbench peers remain determined to hold firm on amendments relating to Afghans who worked for Britain. They are also pressing for a monitoring body for deported migrants.
The government may be tempted to make concessions if only to secure the passage of the Bill. For our part, we don’t think they should go further than committing to dealing sympathetically with genuine cases (of which there shouldn’t be many). If their lives had been at risk they wouldn’t have survived for as long as they have post the Taliban’s return. A blanket exclusion from removal to Rwanda would simply provide further grounds for asylum claims and more scope for abuse. Traffickers will just add it to their package of grounds on which to claim asylum.
Despite the ongoing tug-of-war between the Commons and the Lords, it is highly likely that the Bill will eventually get onto the statute book.
As we have discussed before, at its core, the Bill, alongside a new treaty with Rwanda, seeks to greenlight deportation flights to Kigali by asserting Rwanda’s status as a safe country for deported migrants, aiming to address concerns stemming from a Supreme Court ruling that cast doubt on Rwanda’s safety.
The road ahead is fraught with bumps and obstacles. Immigration lawyers are busy looking for avenues to challenge the legislation, while organisations like Care4Calais stand ready to offer support to migrants facing deportation. Moreover, logistical difficulties, including securing airlines and accommodation in Rwanda, pose additional challenges.
The success or failure of the Rwanda scheme carries significant political implications for the Prime Minister, who vowed to “stop the boats.” While public sentiment leans towards supporting the deportation policy, its actual impact on migrant crossings remains uncertain. Indeed, we have serious doubts that the passing of the legislation and possible implementation will have much, if any, impact before the general election, whenever that may be.
The saga of Mr Sunak’s revised Rwanda Plan embodies the intricate dance of politics and policymaking. While the path ahead may be fraught with uncertainties, one thing remains clear: the fate of the Rwanda Bill will be a defining moment in shaping the future landscape of asylum policy in the UK.
Our firm belief is that the Rwanda Bill has now become a distraction. Its sole purpose is to show Messrs Sunak and Cleverly doing their best, in the face of strong opposition from their opponents. Better they, and all aspiring MPs and political parties, now devote serious thought to how they will tackle out-of-control legal migration and tell us in their manifestoes how they will reduce net migration to the levels the public want.
This is a preview of Migration Watch’s free weekly newsletter. Please consider signing up to the newsletter directly, you can do so here and will receive an email copy of the newsletter every Friday as soon as it is released.