Fresh Round of Government Defeats in House of Lords Over Rwanda Bill

House of Lords faces fresh defeats over Rwanda Bill from Government

March 7, 2024 TruthUSA

The vote on Wednesday has resulted in ten total amendments backed by peers.

The government’s Rwanda asylum bill faced a setback in the House of Lords, experiencing defeat in a series of five votes.

Former Tory Cabinet members and the Archbishop of Canterbury were among the peers who opposed the bill, introducing an amendment to consider the safety of Rwanda in court. Peers supported the amendment in a 278 to 189 vote.

The government’s defeat in all five amendment votes on Wednesday brings the total number of defeats to ten at this stage. Earlier, peers voted in favor of amendments to the bill, including the government’s claim that Rwanda is safe.

Illegal immigration has been a contentious issue for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who has pledged to prevent illegal crossings in small boats across the English Channel. The government’s proposal to send illegal immigrants to Rwanda, especially those crossing the Channel in small boats, has faced legal obstacles regarding the scheme’s safety.

The defeats in the upper chamber have increased pressure on the government to make changes to the bill as part of their crackdown on illegal immigration.

Changes proposed by peers to the bill, supported by peers, would enable individuals to challenge their removal if they believe they have been wrongly identified as adults. Another amendment would prevent the relocation of individuals who had previously supported the British military overseas or had been victims of modern slavery or human trafficking.

Debate

According to an amendment vote passed on Monday, Rwanda cannot be considered a safe country until treaty safeguards are fully implemented. The Archbishop of Canterbury stated that if this is the case, there should be no problem with the amendments to the bill.

Related Stories

Government’s Rwanda Bill Suffers Heavy Defeat in House of Lords

Government Spends £15 Million a Day on Hotels for Illegal Immigrants: Labour

Referring to the courts’ ability to assess claims based on Rwanda’s safety, Conservative Viscount Hailsham expressed concerns about preventing individuals from seeking court protection.

Labor frontbencher Lord Coaker emphasized the importance of testing laws in court.

“The courts ensure that justice is served. Justice in this case requires legal scrutiny of the impact of the law on individuals. This is fundamental to the operation of the rule of law,” he informed the House of Lords.

Contrary to some peers, others argued that the bill has faced continuous challenges and delays regarding Rwanda’s safety, despite evidence provided by both Rwanda and the UK.

Senior government law officer Lord Stewart of Dirleton stated that the amendments would contradict the bill’s underlying purpose, emphasizing the existing safeguards in the legislation.

Former leader of the Welsh Liberal Democrats, Lord German, questioned the screening procedure proposed in the bill to identify victims of modern slavery.

“Determining someone’s status as a victim of modern slavery is not a simple process and cannot be based solely on a brief physical assessment,” Lord German expressed.

An amendment proposed by Baroness Lister of Burtersett aimed at including protections to prevent unaccompanied children from being mistakenly categorized as adults and sent to Rwanda.

The peer highlighted the risk of misjudging the age of a child based on a visual assessment by immigration officers, contrary to the Home Office’s guidance that physical appearance is an unreliable age assessment.

The amendment received a majority backing of 84 votes.

Mr. Sunak had previously cautioned against the unelected House of Lords obstructing the will of the people as expressed by the elected House of Commons.

Following scrutiny by the upper chamber, the bill will be returned to the Commons, where the government’s majority is expected to overturn the amended provisions.

Source link