Post by Handyman on Jan 22, 2024 21:20:45 GMT
First blood has been drawn by peers over Rishi Sunak’s controversial Rwanda deportation plan.
Inflicting a defeat against the Government, the House of Lords backed by 214 votes to 171, majority 43, an unprecedented move seeking to delay a treaty with the east African nation that paves the way for the divisive asylum scheme.
The unelected chamber supported a call by the Lords International Agreements Committee (IAC) that Parliament should not ratify the pact until ministers can show Rwanda is safe.
The Government agreed the legally-binding treaty with Kigali in December, saying 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 the cross-party committee said promised safeguards in the agreement are “incomplete” and must be implemented before it can be endorsed.
Unlike the Commons which has the power to delay ratification of a treaty, the Lords can only advise.
However, ignoring the demand by peers could later be used in a legal challenge against the Government.
Inflicting a defeat against the Government, the House of Lords backed by 214 votes to 171, majority 43, an unprecedented move seeking to delay a treaty with the east African nation that paves the way for the divisive asylum scheme.
The unelected chamber supported a call by the Lords International Agreements Committee (IAC) that Parliament should not ratify the pact until ministers can show Rwanda is safe.
The Government agreed the legally-binding treaty with Kigali in December, saying 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 the cross-party committee said promised safeguards in the agreement are “incomplete” and must be implemented before it can be endorsed.
Unlike the Commons which has the power to delay ratification of a treaty, the Lords can only advise.
However, ignoring the demand by peers could later be used in a legal challenge against the Government.
