MPs must back Sunak’s deportation plan because it is the only game in town

On Tuesday, the House of Commons will debate the Safety of Rwanda Bill, the Government’s response to the Supreme Court ruling against the plan to send those arriving illegally on small boats to the east African country.

MPs should back the Bill, rather than let the best be the enemy of the good. The Bill deems Rwanda a safe place to send those arriving illegally. It disapplies the key provisions of the Human Rights Act. It prevents the UK courts from relying on interim measures from the European Court of

Human Rights in Strasbourg as grounds for blocking removal.

Could it be more robust? There is always a measure of risk that the judiciary will find the means to frustrate legislation, and the Bill leaves open the possibility that the individual circumstances of a case could render a migrant at particular risk, even though Rwanda is generally regarded as safe. The Bill would, however, put the Supreme Court in a deeply uncomfortable position if it sought to rely on such narrow grounds.

This Supreme Court has been far less creative and interventionist than its predecessors. I suspect that it would need truly exceptional circumstances to bar removal.

If MPs wish to tighten up the drafting, the time to do so is at the Committee Stage of the Bill, not at Second Reading on Tuesday. Equally, ‘There is always a measure of risk that the judiciary will find a way of frustrating legislation’

I doubt the kind of “belt and braces” ouster clauses being mooted will be as effective as some think.

Ousting the effect of international treaties is pointless, unless Parliament also ousts all the legislative and common law prohibitions on torture which underpin them. This would be wrong and cause support for the Bill to haemorrhage.

So I urge colleagues to back the proposed legislation. The former Supreme Court justice, Lord Sumption, says that the UK courts would have to give effect to the Bill. However, he doubts the Strasbourg court would let it stand. I’m not so sure, but in any case it is the right “dialogue” to have with Strasbourg, and when we are reasonable and resolute – as we were over prisoner voting – Parliament’s view has prevailed.

We are making wider progress on