I didn't vote for the Second Reading of the Safety of Rwanda Bill last night, but it passed comfortably and now proceeds to the committee stage where, in theory, it can be amended.
My reason for abstaining on the vote is that I support the purpose of the Bill but I don't think it will work as currently drafted. I'm doubtful it can be made to work at all, given the statements by other colleagues, and the state of opinion in the House of Lords. But we have to try.
The Government is right that we will only stop this terrible traffic in human beings, and free up our asylum system for the genuinely vulnerable (not the fit, comparatively rich young men who are the great majority of cross-channel migrants, all of whom are coming from a safe third country), is by introducing an effective deterrent which makes the crossing not worth it. That means detaining them straight away and removing them swiftly back to their own country or a safe third country, like Rwanda with whom we have an agreement to take them.
My concerns are that the Bill allows illegal migrants to lodge claims that removing them to Rwanda will put them personally at risk in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights; and the potential for the European Court of Human Rights to stop removals by issuing a 'Rule 39' interim order which the Government will feel obliged to obey.
I recognise the very real concern that without these provisions, there is a danger migrants will suffer harm. My view is that we have the necessary safeguards in British law; we are a decent and humane country and we don't need contested notions of international law to decide how we manage our borders. As I said in my speech in the Commons yesterday (see here) I would welcome further changes that protect vulnerable individuals and ensure there are safe and legal routes for refugees to seek asylum in the UK.
I've had a number of conversations with the PM and other ministers about this Bill and I'll continue to work with them to try and get a version we can all support. The most important thing is that the Bill succeeds in its mission to 'stop the boats' and restores control of our borders. We have promised this; so far we have failed; we must not fail again.
