The majority of deputies voted in favor of the government's second reading bill. In the future, refugees will be sent to Rwanda without their asylum application being considered.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak escaped a historic defeat in parliament in the dispute over his asylum policy. On Tuesday night, the majority of deputies in the House of Commons voted in second reading for a bill with which the Conservative government wants to save its asylum pact with Rwanda, which the Supreme Court declared illegal.
Previously, there were huge doubts about whether Sunak would be able to obtain the necessary majority. Both the right and moderate wings of his party had major reservations about the proposed law. However, at the last minute, the government managed to convince ultra-conservative deputies not to vote against the project, offering the prospect of concessions.
In the end, 313 deputies voted in favor of the bill and 269 against. Otherwise, according to reports, it would have been the first time since 1986 that a bill failed at second reading – Sunak could have faced political extinction. However, the dispute is unlikely to be resolved by a successful vote. The Prime Minister was just biding his time.
At the heart of the dispute is an asylum pact with Rwanda. To deter migrants, London wants to send irregular arrivals to the East African country in the future, without examining their asylum applications and regardless of their origin. Instead, they should seek protection there – there are no plans to return to Britain. However, the British High Court raised concerns about Rwanda's asylum process and declared the plan illegal in mid-November.
Rwanda declared a safe third country
To overcome this obstacle, the government in London now wants to declare Rwanda a legally safe third country and, at the same time, exclude legal recourse in Britain, citing human rights.
Critics, including from his own party, accused Sunak of ignoring the principles of the rule of law. For others, the progress was not enough. They demanded that the possibility of appealing to international courts be excluded by law. Several arch-conservative groups within the Conservative group announced shortly before the vote that they would abstain. However, they threatened to fail the third reading of the bill in the new year. The disputes were reminiscent of the chaotic Brexit period, when then-Prime Minister Theresa May repeatedly failed to reach her Brexit deal in the House of Commons.
Sunak, whose Conservative Party trails the opposition Labor Party in the polls, has made it a central priority to end the irregular entry of migrants in small boats across the English Channel. In 2022 alone, around 45,000 people came to Britain this way. So far this year, the number is a third lower than last year. However, the promise is not considered fulfilled.
It's already election season
For the British Prime Minister, this is already an election campaign issue: a new parliament must be elected by January 2025, commentators expect a vote in autumn 2024 at the latest. Conservatives still see an opportunity to win over Brexit supporters among workers. class in the harsh repression of irregular immigrants to maintain the pole.
Experts such as political scientist Matthew Flinders, from the University of Sheffield, talk about symbolic politics with high costs. So far, £240 million has been transferred to Rwanda and a further £50 million is due to be paid next year – but so far not a single migrant has been transferred there.
The law violates international law
Parliament's human rights committee warned that the law violated international law and could lead to an unprecedented constitutional conflict between ministers and British courts. Radicals even call for the withdrawal of the European Convention on Human Rights, so that those affected cannot continue to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Sunak has so far rejected this.
But if the prime minister changes course, the moderate part of the parliamentary group, also with around 100 members, will likely rebel. These conservatives fear for the country's reputation if Britain ignores international human rights. Therefore, the 43-year-old is stuck between fronts. “The prime minister no longer has any cards in his hand,” said political scientist Flinders.
According to observers, Sunak himself is to blame for the increasingly heated debate. He let the discussion last for days, relying on so-called whips, responsible for the group's discipline, as well as the charm of his foreign minister and predecessor, David Cameron. Until recently, neither flattery – even seats in the House of Lords were said to have been offered – nor threats of early elections could bring Downing Street relief.
Exactly four years after their brilliant election victory in 2019, the Conservatives have now avoided serious bankruptcy, for now. But it will likely remain uncomfortable. The former are already demanding that the winner of that time take over the party again to avoid an electoral disaster. His name: Boris Johnson. (APA)