The government’s Rwanda bill will finally become law after the Lords decided there would be no further amendments in a late-night session.

For weeks, peers have been pushing back on the scheme – which seeks to deport asylum seekers arriving in the UK via small boats to the African nation – and trying to get ministers to make changes to the controversial legislation.

But after further rounds of so-called “ping pong” saw the bill flit between both Houses throughout Monday evening, both MPs and peers have now agreed to the plan, and it will soon become law – with Rishi Sunak pledging the first flights will take off “in 10 to 12 weeks”.

Latest reaction after government’s Rwanda bill passes Lords

Home Secretary James Cleverly has said the bill will become law “within days”, adding that its passage through the Lords was a “landmark moment in our plan to stop the boats”.

The Rwanda scheme was first proposed by Boris Johnson two years ago as a way to deter people from making dangerous journeys across the Channel.

But it has faced a raft of criticism from opposition parties, charities and even some of the government’s own backbenchers, and no flights have taken off – despite the prime minister’s earlier pledge to see them leave “in the spring”.

The UK’s Supreme Court also ruled the plan unlawful last November.

After the bill was accepted by the Lords, Freedom From Torture, Amnesty International and Liberty said the UK was increasingly gaining a reputation for “playing fast and loose with its international obligations”.

A spokesperson for the organisations said: “We all deserve the chance to live a safe life, and to seek protection when we need it most. This shameful Bill trashes the constitution and international law whilst putting torture survivors and other refugees at risk of an unsafe future in Rwanda.

“No matter how many times the prime minister says so, we know this is not the will of the people.”

But Mr Sunak – who has made “stopping the boats” a central part of his leadership – introduced changes in this bill to establish Rwanda as a “safe country” in British law, and negotiated a new treaty with the nation, believing the measures would solve the legal issues raised.

Despite these revisions, and Mr Sunak calling it “emergency legislation”, the parliamentary process has dragged on for months, with peers sending it back on multiple occasions to push for changes.

But at a press conference on Monday morning, the prime minister said “enough is enough”, and promised the bill would pass by close of play on the day, “no ifs, no buts”.

In its latest parliamentary round on Monday night, the Lords won a concession from the government over its demands to ensure asylum seekers who had worked with British armed forces abroad were not deported to Rwanda.

In a last-minute attempt to see the bill through, they promised to reassess all those from Afghanistan whose claims had been rejected under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) scheme, with Home Office minister Lord Sharpe saying: “We will not let them down.”

However, there was no compromise on offer for Lord Hope’s amendment, which would have required an independent body to rule Rwanda as a “safe country”, rather than just declaring it in law – and peers pushed once more for its inclusion on the bill, backing his call by 240 votes to 211.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Returning to the Commons shortly after 10pm, MPs again rejected the amendment thanks to the Conservatives’ majority, and the Lords was once more asked to approve the bill – with hopes from the government that it was the final fight.

Around midnight, the Lords agreed there would be no further amendments to the bill, sending it to King Charles for final approval.

Two men, one of whom is a parliamentary researcher, have been charged with spying for China after allegedly supplying information which could be “useful to an enemy”.

Former parliamentary researcher Christopher Cash, 29, of Whitechapel, London, was charged under the Official Secrets Act after a counterterrorism investigation.

Christopher Berry, 32, of Witney, Oxfordshire, was also charged under the same act.

It is alleged that between December 2021 and February 2023, the men obtained, recorded and published information “for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the state” and which could be “directly or indirectly, useful to an enemy”.

Cash worked in parliament for the China Research Group, and has links to senior Conservative MPs, including Alicia Kearns, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and now security minister, Tom Tugendhat.

Ms Kearns said: “Regarding the Crown Prosecution’s announcement this afternoon that two men will be charged on espionage offences on behalf of China: As this matter is now sub judice it is essential that neither I, nor anyone else, say anything that might prejudice a criminal trial relating to a matter of national security.

“I will not be commenting further.”

Both men were arrested in March last year and have since been on police bail while the investigation continued.

They will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday.

Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Met’s counterterrorism command, said: “This has been an extremely complex investigation into what are very serious allegations.

“We’ve worked closely with the Crown Prosecution Service as our investigation has progressed and this has led to the two men being charged today.

“We’re aware there has been a degree of public and media interest in this case, but we would ask others to refrain from any further comment or speculation, so that the criminal justice process can now run its course.”

Nick Price, head of the Crown Prosecution Service Special Crime and counterterrorism division, said: “Christopher Berry, 32, and Christopher Cash, 29, will be charged with providing prejudicial information to a foreign state, China, and will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday 26 April.”

The campaigner at the centre of an antisemitism row with the Metropolitan Police has criticised “outrageous” comments made by a former senior officer who said he would have considered arresting him for assault.

Gideon Falter, the chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, spoke to Sky News’s Kay Burley at Breakfast after footage showed a police officer preventing him from crossing a road near a pro-Palestinian march in London because he was “openly Jewish”.

The officer also told Mr Falter, who was wearing a kippah skull cap near the march on Saturday 13 April, that he was “worried about the reaction to your presence”.

Mr Falter has called on Met Police chief Sir Mark Rowley to resign and accused the force of “victim-blaming” after the encounter.

Sky News understands Sir Mark will meet the home secretary today.

He also met a delegation from the Jewish community to discuss their concerns alongside other senior officers.

Following the meeting, the Community Security Trust said the Met representatives repeated their apologies and agreed to “consult more closely” with the Jewish community, including senior Jewish police officers, “to ensure greater cultural sensitivity in future communications”.

The statement said the groups would continue their dialogue with the police regarding the “cumulative impact of the repeated anti-Israel protests”.

“We urge the police and government to work together to find ways to limit this impact through reducing the number of protests, moving them to less disruptive locations and acting firmly and consistently whenever offences are committed by people on the demonstrations,” they added.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has said he has confidence in Sir Mark but that he needs to rebuild “confidence and trust” with the Jewish community.

Retired senior officer defends Met’s response

Meanwhile, former Met Chief Superintendent Dal Babu said he has seen the full 13-minute video of the incident on Sky News and saw a “different encounter” to the one Mr Falter had described.

Mr Babu said that if he had been policing the march he would have considered arresting the campaigner for “assault on a police officer and a breach of the peace”.

Mr Falter said in response: “I think it’s a pretty outrageous thing to say, I think it’s a pretty outrageous thing to be giving any credence to.

“I was Jewish. I was crossing the street”.

Mr Falter added: “I did not assault a police officer. How on Earth can anybody say that? I’m quite clearly in the video trying to continue to walk where I was going.”

Mr Babu later reaffirmed his view of the encounter and said the video shows Mr Falter pushing policing officers “out of the way” which amounts to “common assault”.

He also defended the police’s handling of the situation and said: “I think the police dealt with it and tried to be as sensitive as possible.

“I think the police officer was offering to take Mr Falter and his group to a place where they could cross more appropriately. Mr Falter was refusing to move and wanted to cross at that particular place against the march.”

Campaigner will walk near march again

The force apologised on Friday for using the term “openly Jewish”, but then had to apologise for their apology after suggesting opponents of pro-Palestinian marches “must know that their presence is provocative”.

The Met said in its initial apology that its aim was to keep people safe.

Mr Falter has said he is planning to go for a walk in the vicinity of a pro-Palestinian march again on Saturday 27 April, adding that he “should be allowed to do that”.

Earlier on the show, black journalist Seyi Rhodes said that although he wouldn’t want to, he would avoid a far-right march if he knew one was being held in a certain place in London.

Mr Falter said in response: “It is outrageous to put to me that the correct response of Jewish people to these marches, where we have seen such brazen antisemitism the whole time is to just stay away from them.”

Read more from Sky News:
Baby saved from womb of mother killed in Israeli strike
Iran minister downplays attack
Trail of destruction in Lebanon’s ‘ghost towns’

Falter insists he was not there to ‘counter-protest’

Ben Jamal, director of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign, has said Mr Falter is wrong to have suggested he was “innocently going for a walk”.

“The reality was he came to the march with an entourage of four to five people and a film crew and sought to break through the stewards.

“He physically pushes himself past the police in order to walk in front of the march… he was trying to provoke a confrontation. That’s what happened.”

Mr Jamal accused the Campaign Against Antisemitism of “using the tactic of coming to the marches to provoke an incident so that they can say there are scenes of disorder and therefore the marches cannot go ahead”.

Mr Falter said he found Mr Jamal’s remarks to be “absolutely astonishing”.

He added: “I was not going to try and provoke something… what exactly does he think I’m trying to provoke by being ‘openly Jewish’?

“I was not there to counter-protest. I was not there with film crews or anything of the sort. I was simply Jewish in the vicinity of these marches.”