The Conservative Party is currently grappling with internal dissent over the Prime Minister’s Rwanda bill, as murmurs of a deepened split within the party gain momentum. The illegal migration minister has downplayed the apparent divisions, emphasizing that the differences among MPs are mere nuances and asserting a united front. This comes on the heels of notable resignations and growing discontent within the party ranks over the proposed legislation.
The focal point of contention revolves around Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill, with dissenting voices challenging its efficacy and urging a more robust approach. Two deputy chairs, Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith, along with parliamentary private secretary Jane Stevenson, have resigned, aligning themselves with right-wing factions pushing for a more stringent bill. The upcoming third reading of the legislation faces the risk of rebellion from around a dozen Tory MPs, and only 29 rebels are needed to thwart the bill.
Despite the notable resignations, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and the illegal migration minister, Michael Tomlinson, have sought to downplay the internal discord, framing it as a manifestation of the “lively debate” within the Conservative Party. Tomlinson contends that the differences among MPs are minimal, with an “inch” of variance, and he projects a unified front in the overarching aim of making the policy work.
The Rwanda bill, aimed at curbing illegal migration, faces a critical juncture as MPs prepare for the third reading. The illegal migration minister expressed confidence in the bill’s passage, highlighting its projected 94% deterrent rate. However, concerns persist within the party, with MPs questioning the sustainability and effectiveness of the proposed measures.
While internal debates continue, certain Tory MPs, including Jonathan Gullis, have expressed reservations about the legislation. Gullis warned Sunak that if the bill fails, it would be perceived as “three strikes and you’re out.” The former minister stressed the need for a sustainable deterrent and raised concerns about potential public perception of the legislation as a mere gimmick.
In response to internal dissent, the Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, Alex Chalk, unveiled plans to expand court capacity and recruit new judges to expedite asylum appeals. Additionally, there are reports that civil servants may be directed to adhere to ministerial decisions even if they contradict European court orders. The government is contemplating adjustments to the civil service code to reinforce the adherence of officials to ministerial directions.
The proposed interventions have triggered reactions from legal quarters, with Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr asserting that decisions on deploying judges should remain within the purview of the judiciary. Concerns about the government encroaching on matters of judicial responsibility have surfaced, raising questions about the delicate balance between political objectives and judicial independence.
As the Conservative Party navigates internal strife over the Rwanda bill, the third reading becomes a pivotal moment that could determine the fate of the proposed legislation. The delicate interplay between political imperatives, public sentiment, and judicial independence underscores the complexities facing the government. The coming days will reveal the extent of dissent within the party and shed light on the future trajectory of the controversial Rwanda bill.
