Sunak's Rwanda Plan in Peril: House of Lords Obstruction and Internal Tory Tensions
Sunak's Rwanda bill encounters a new opponent: the unelected House of Lords.
The House of Lords has urged the government not to back the Rwanda treaty, and senior Tory MP Simon Clarke has called for Sunak to be replaced. From this, it is clear that:
For context on the Rwanda Scheme, see here.
Sunak’s Rwanda Headache
Peers in the House of Lords have backed a motion that urges the government not to ratify the Rwanda treaty. The motion passed by 214 votes to 171. The International Agreements Committee listed 10 issues with Rwanda’s asylum system, and thus argued that the treaty should be delayed until these are rectified.
Lord Goldsmith argued that, based on the Home secretary’s own evidence, Rwanda has not been proven to be a safe country. He added that ratification of the treaty should not place until Parliament is completely satisfied. In short, the Lords believe that Rwanda unsafe, contrary to the government’s new Safety of Rwanda bill, and that its asylum systems are inadequate. The vote is not binding on the government, but could still delay the implementation of the Rwanda plan even further, as well as giving further legitimacy to rebel Tory MPs.
In a press conference last Thursday, following the passing of Sunak’s Rwanda treaty in the House of Commons, he called on the Lords to follow suit. He quite clearly stressed that the ‘elected’ MPs had passed the bill, and that the ‘appointed’ Lords should pass it as well. This press conference was not just bizarre, but comically hypocritical, as Sunak himself is an unelected Prime Minister. He declared that any opposition to this treaty would ‘frustrate the will of the people’, despite the Rwanda plan not featuring in the 2019 Conservative manifesto, and thus having no tangible mandate.
Sunak also can’t pretend that this Rwanda bill had a smooth path through the Commons. An amendment that aimed to toughen the legal protections to the scheme was supported by 60 Conservative MPs, with 11 of those voting against the final legislation, including former immigration minister Robert Jenrick. The ongoing struggle to pass this Rwanda bill, 18 months after it was initially proposed, proves that it is destined to fail.
Moreover, he has spent the last year so focused on illegal migration, and trying to get his Rwanda scheme up and running, that he was oblivious to the high levels of legal migration. Figures released in November revealed that net migration was 672k in 2023, and 745k in 2022. These figures are an insult to Brits, who have endured the cost-of-living crisis, the highest ever peacetime tax burden, a broken housing market, and barely functioning public services.
The House of Lords
Despite my disagreement with the Rwanda bill in principle, this debacle has highlighted the inherent democratic deficit of the House of Lords. The fact that this unelected and appointed body can delay legislation passed by the House of Commons is dumbfounding.
领英推荐
Following the appointment of David Cameron to the Lords by Rishi Sunak, which allowed him to become Foreign Secretary, I argued that at the very least peers should not be ministers. This system is fundamentally undemocratic, as PMs appoint their allies, who can then frustrate and delay legislation passed by elected MPs. Moreover, appointed peers keep their job for life, allowing Prime Ministers to retain a lasting influence over our politics long after they leave office.
Lord Carlisle had the audacity to complain about the criticism of the Lords, and declared that it was their job to ‘protect democracy from itself’. This argument is tenuous, as their real job is to scrutinise and recommend amendments to government legislation. Tony Blair’s removal of hereditary peers has seemingly given the Lords an increased feeling of legitimacy, and thus it now feels it can take a more active role.
In reality, these unelected peers should not be there at all, and their job certainly isn’t to delay or reject the will of the democratically elected chamber. The 1919 and 1949 Parliament Acts mean that the Commons can overrule the Lords, but the upper chamber is still able to delay the passing of legislation for up to a year.
Getting back to 2024, this means that the Lords could prevent flights to Rwanda taking off before the general election. While I don’t think the bill will work anyway, it is wrong that the Lords can frustrate legislation like this. These unelected elites represent yet another obstacle to Sunak’s plans, and it will be interesting to see how he responds.
The Tory Civil War - Simon Clarke
Sunak presides over a divided party, and the House of Lords is an obstacle he could really do without. To make matters worse, senior Tory MP Simon Clarke wrote an article in the Telegraph this week, calling for the Conservatives to replace Rishi Sunak, or else be ‘massacred’ in the general election.
In a scathing attack on the Prime Minister, he criticised Sunak’s failure to address immigration and cut taxes, arguing that ‘extinction is a very real possibility for our party’. As I have previously stated, he fears that their electoral decline could be exacerbated by the return of Nigel Farage, who could help Reform UK steal disillusioned Conservative voters. He said that Sunak’s ‘uninspiring leadership’ was the ‘main obstacle to our recovery’.
In a pre-emptive response to critics, he said that he was ‘speaking out because the stakes for our country and my party are too high to stay silent’, and denied that he was doing this for personal gain. A YouGov poll suggested that a new Tory leader could secure victory over Labour, likely prompting Clarke to call for Sunak’s ousting. While this poll is certainly eye-opening, it cannot be taken entirely seriously, as it is unclear if this magical and perfect Tory leader actually exists.
Clarke’s assessment of the situation is accurate, as optimistic polls suggest that the Conservatives could fall from 350 to 169 MPs, and that Labour are expected to win a 120-seat majority. Tory infighting will cripple the party, and crush any slim chances they might have still had of electoral success. The fact that Sunak’s former Treasury deputy has passionately called for his removal tells you everything you need to know about the state of the Tory party. Nothing he is doing is working, and everything continues to suggest that electoral oblivion is on the horizon.
Conclusions
The first month of 2024 has been difficult for Sunak, and things don’t look as if they are getting any easier. His party is divided, the country is unimpressed by his minor tax cuts, and now the House of Lords is frustrating his plans. The Rwanda scheme looked destined to fail from the start, but Sunak has triumphantly pushed on with this futile and unworkable policy, digging deeper and deeper into taxpayers pockets.
We now wait to see what his response to the Lords will be, and if he will enact measures to prevent further delays to his policy. Even if the scheme gets up and running, its unlikely to succeed, and the Tory party is unlikely to suddenly unite around him. Simon Clarke has called for Sunak to be replaced, which could prompt other Tory MPs to submit letters of no confidence in his leadership. Divided parties don’t win elections. Parties that have consistently failed to address immigration, despite promising to, don’t win elections. Parties that increase taxes and then expect praise for cutting them slightly, don’t win elections.