It is decision time for Rishi Sunak. Perhaps as early as this week, the Government could put forward its plans for finally getting the Rwanda scheme off the ground and deporting illegal migrants to the east African country.

The Rwanda plan is not perfect: in particular, it would only entail a limited number of deportations. But there is no way in which the numbers crossing the Channel can be seriously reduced without a credible deterrent, and the Prime Minister has made stopping the boats one of his core pledges to the public. He cannot afford to betray the voters on this now.

The Government is understood to be considering a range of proposals for counteracting the criticisms made of the policy by the Supreme Court, which ruled it unlawful last month. A Bill is expected to be introduced that will declare Rwanda safe for asylum seekers and enshrine in law a new treaty with the country.

But on whether to go further, ministers are split. Some favour merely disapplying the UK Human Rights Act in asylum claims. Others fear that this would not go far enough. Conservative backbenchers such as Sir Bill Cash who writes in this paper today, argue that a full-fat alternative, including “notwithstanding” clauses, would remove the right of judicial review.

This could permit the Government to ignore the European Convention on Human Rights without leaving it. Alegally sound Bill may also have to account for a much wider range of treaties which underpin the principle of non-refoulement, perhaps including the 1984 UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the 1966 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

There is some disquiet over whether this latter option, even if it only focuses on the ECHR, would get through Parliament, principally because of opposition in the House of Lords, but also because of a rump of Conservative MPs who have set their faces against their own voters. The Prime Minister cannot allow the defeatism or cowardice of some of his Tory colleagues to get in the way of ending this scandal.

The thousands of migrants entering the country illegally every year are infuriating the public, and potentially constitute a security threat given that we do not know who they are. But the fact that outdated international conventions can stop our representatives from doing what they were elected to do also threatens to undermine faith in democracy itself.

The Prime Minister needs to take a similarly hard-headed approach to legal migration. The current numbers are making a mockery of the promise inherent in Brexit that Britain would once again have control over its borders.

Mr Sunak should not be afraid of a fight on migration – illegal or legal. A semi-skimmed version of the Rwanda plan will not be enough. It would only confirm to the voters that the Government, too terrified of offending bien pensant opinion, is not serious about stopping the boats.

Source : Yahoo

The post The Rwanda Policy Needs an Iron-Clad Bill appeared first on Policy Print.