Tuesday, January 23, 2024
Hysteria and Commonsense
There is something comical about Nigel Farage calling for the sacking of members of the House of Lords because they voted through an unprecedented move seeking to delay the PM’s treaty with Rwanda.
Following the vote, the man who has reportedly hankered after a peerage himself tweeted: “We must sack all current members of the House of Lords. It is beyond parody.”
Farage himself, has been beyond parody for some time which makes it all the more disturbing that some UK ministers take him so seriously.
In fact, the House of Lords has done us all a service by voting by 214 votes to 171 – a majority of 43 – to delay the controversial deportation agreement until the government can prove the country is safe.
Farage himself, has been beyond parody for some time which makes it all the more disturbing that some UK ministers take him so seriously.
In fact, the House of Lords has done us all a service by voting by 214 votes to 171 – a majority of 43 – to delay the controversial deportation agreement until the government can prove the country is safe.
As the Independent reports the upper chamber supported a call by Tony Blair’s former attorney general Lord Goldsmith that parliament should not ratify the pact until Sunak’s ministers can demonstrate Rwanda is safe:
The government agreed the legally-binding treaty with Kigali in December – arguing that it addressed concerns raised by the Supreme Court about the possibility of asylum seekers deported to Rwanda then being transferred to a country where they could be at risk.
But Lord Goldsmith cross-party agreements committee said promised safeguards in the agreement are “incomplete” and must be implemented before it can be endorsed.
The initial blow delivered by peers signals a potential rough ride for the legislation, despite Mr Sunak urging the house not to block the “will of the people”. While the government insist the defeat will not delay the PM’s bill, there is now a risk that ignoring the demand by peers could later be used in a legal challenge aiming to stop flights.
The treaty underpins Mr Sunak’s Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill which compels British judges to regard the country as safe.
The whole plan to send refugees to Rwanda becomes more and more unhinged as further details emerge. Thank goodness for the House of Lords injecting some commonsense and realism into the debate.
The government agreed the legally-binding treaty with Kigali in December – arguing that it addressed concerns raised by the Supreme Court about the possibility of asylum seekers deported to Rwanda then being transferred to a country where they could be at risk.
But Lord Goldsmith cross-party agreements committee said promised safeguards in the agreement are “incomplete” and must be implemented before it can be endorsed.
The initial blow delivered by peers signals a potential rough ride for the legislation, despite Mr Sunak urging the house not to block the “will of the people”. While the government insist the defeat will not delay the PM’s bill, there is now a risk that ignoring the demand by peers could later be used in a legal challenge aiming to stop flights.
The treaty underpins Mr Sunak’s Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill which compels British judges to regard the country as safe.
The whole plan to send refugees to Rwanda becomes more and more unhinged as further details emerge. Thank goodness for the House of Lords injecting some commonsense and realism into the debate.
