The so-called “Rwanda bis plan” sought by Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government has received the first green light from Parliament. Late on Wednesday evening, January 17, the Westminster House of Commons passed the “Security of Rwanda Act”, controversial legislation that would see asylum seekers who land illegally on UK shores be transferred to Rwanda.
Changing irregular immigration quotas in this African country is one of the highlights of Sunak’s tough stance on illegal immigration. Some members of the party, as well as many members of the opposition and civil society, opposed it. Conservatives.
After hours of debate, the vote in the House of Commons resulted in 320 votes in favor and 276 against. The “Rwanda plan” now heads to the House of Lords, where a bitter confrontation is expected.
What the “Rwanda plan” includes: safe third country node
The provision is part of the wider framework of new immigration legislation approved last July 18, which is considered one of the most restrictive laws ever in the UK. A key plank in the government strategy to deter channel departures and risky crossings stipulates that anyone entering the UK illegally will not be able to apply for asylum. The Home Secretary is responsible for detaining irregular migrants and arranging their transfer to their country of origin or a safe third country.
In this definition, the British government includes countries such as Rwanda, with which the UK signed a repatriation agreement last year, which was later declared illegal by the Court of Appeal in London. The latter found that, in fact, there were reasonable grounds to believe that, due to the shortcomings of the Rwandan asylum system, asylum seekers would be returned to their country of origin where they would face “persecution or other inhumane treatment.” “Deportation” to Rwanda therefore appeared to be averted, but the British government appealed the court’s decision. Last summer, the British NGO Refugee Council commented that it was “a dark day for the UK’s reputation”, announcing new struggles to defend the right to asylum.
The ruling party is together
Thirty ‘no’ votes from the majority party, added to those from the opposition, would have been enough to fail the Rwanda plan, the BBC estimated. But a sense of unity prevailed within the Conservative Party ranks, and in the end only 11 members of the majority party voted against it. Of these, former immigration undersecretary Robert Jenrick and former Home Secretary Suella Braverman underline in “X”: “The Rwanda Bill will not stop the boats, while exposing us to legal disputes with the Strasbourg Court. I We have met with the government to correct critical problems in the plan, but no changes have been made.” “I couldn’t vote for another bill that was doomed to fail. The British people deserve honesty and that’s why I voted against it.”
The Rwanda Bill will not stop the boats. This exposes us to litigation and the Strasbourg Court.
I contacted the government to fix this but no changes were made.
I cannot vote for another bill that is doomed to fail. The British people deserve honesty and I voted against it.
— Suella Braverman MP (@SuellaBraverman) January 17, 2024
Rejecting the measure would undermine the stability of Sunak’s government, whose party has appeared riven by internal divisions on several occasions, this time clearly evident.
While the party’s more moderate wing has opposed further restrictive interventions into the already highly criticized law for months, the far right has continued to push to further discourage the submission of asylum claims instead.
Source: Today IT
Karen Clayton is a seasoned journalist and author at The Nation Update, with a focus on world news and current events. She has a background in international relations, which gives her a deep understanding of the political, economic and social factors that shape the global landscape. She writes about a wide range of topics, including conflicts, political upheavals, and economic trends, as well as humanitarian crisis and human rights issues.
