Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda deportation plan has been given a fresh beating by peers, amid a continuing stand-off over the controversial policy.
Despite MPs overturning previous changes by the House of Lords, the unelected chamber again pressed demands for revisions to the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.
The latest Government setbacks mean a continuation of wrangling at Westminster over the proposed law that aims to clear the way to send asylum seekers who cross the Channel in small boats on a one-way flight to Kigali.
However, the margin of the defeats was narrowed as the Tory administration drafted in rarely seen peers to bolster numbers.
The Bill and a treaty with Rwanda are intended to prevent further legal challenges to the stalled asylum scheme after the Supreme Court ruled the plan was unlawful.
As well as compelling judges to regard the east African country as safe, it would give ministers the power to ignore emergency injunctions.
But the Lords insisted on an amendment to restore the jurisdiction of domestic courts in relation to the safety of Rwanda and enable them to intervene.
Peers also renewed their demand for the Bill to have “due regard” for international and key domestic laws, including human rights and modern slavery legislation.
In addition, they backed a requirement that Rwanda cannot be treated as a safe country until an independent monitoring body has verified that protections contained in the treaty are fully implemented and remain in place.
An exemption from removal for those who worked with the UK military or government overseas, such as Afghan interpreters, secured renewed support.
The Lords’ insistence on the amendments ensures a third round of “ping-pong” over the Bill, where legislation is batted between the two Houses until agreement is reached.
Ahead of the next election, Mr Sunak has made “stopping the boats” a key pledge of his leadership.
Earlier, a Number 10 spokeswoman said: “We remain focused on getting the Bill passed as soon as possible so we can get flights off the ground and break the business model of the criminal gangs.
“The Prime Minister’s message to parliamentarians across both Houses hasn’t changed. We need to act to save lives and that’s what this Bill will help us to do.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here