The Illegal Migration Bill is heading back to the House of Lords later after MPs voted against almost all of the changes previously proposed by peers.
The controversial legislation bans people from claiming asylum if they arrived in the UK illegally, and puts a legal duty on the Home Office to remove them.
Tonight the bill will go through a process known as parliamentary “ping pong” – with the bill going between the two houses until both are in agreement.
The Illegal Migration Bill had an extremely bumpy ride in the Lords last time around, with the government suffering a record 20 defeats. Peers sent the bill back to the Commons with a long list of amendments which MPs debated and voted on last night.
In a marathon session of 18 separate formal votes, lasting nearly four hours, the Lords’ amendments were almost all entirely overturned, despite a small group of Tory rebels fighting to keep the peers’ proposals on unaccompanied children, safe and legal routes, and modern slavery protections.
The only proposals from the Lords that remained came in the form of a series of government amendments that were tabled as concessions. These were announced at the eleventh hour by the Home Office, caving to Tory rebels on a number of key issues like reducing the length of time unaccompanied children and pregnant women can be detained, as well as u-turning on the plan to retrospectively apply the new law to illegal migrants arriving in the UK since March.
While the prime minister’s spokesperson insisted yesterday there was no timetable for the legislation, these changes were clearly designed to try and speed its passage through Parliament before the summer recess.
The bill is the cornerstone of Rishi Sunak’s key pledge to stop the small boat crossings – and with the numbers virtually as high as last year, and the Rwanda plan stalled in the courts – the government is determined to make some kind of tangible progress.
Advertisement
But it was clear from the debate and the number of Conservative rebels that many Tory backbenchers are still deeply concerned about the bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:13
Tamara Cohen: It’s not ideal for the prime minister to have a group of his own MPs pushing him to take a harder line on immigration
Former Prime Minister Theresa May made a fervent speech objecting to the fact the bill limits the ability of modern slavery victims to seek help from the authorities, arguing it would ‘consign more people to slavery’ as a result.
She told MPs this would mean someone illegally trafficked into sexual exploitation would receive no support from the police if they were able to escape and urged the government to support the Lords on this issue.
The amendment was voted down – but 16 Tory MPs rebelled, including Mrs May, and a number of other former ministers and senior party figures including Damian Green, Sir Robert Buckland, Caroline Noakes and Sir Ian Duncan Smith.
15 Conservatives voted against their own government’s proposals about the detention of unaccompanied children. Former children’s minister Tim Loughton was highly critical of the late appearance of the government’s concessions, arguing “assurances that we were promised have not materialised or, if they have, I am afraid nobody understands them”.
Former Justice Secretary Sir Robert Buckland meanwhile urged the government to move faster on the publication of safe and legal routes for migrants. In response, Immigration Minister Robert Jenrick would only say that they would do this as soon as practicable, and certainly by the end of 2024. This wasn’t good enough for many of the rebels – with 13 Tories voting to accept the Lords amendment on this point.
In his opening speech during the debate Mr Jenrick was bullish in tone, accusing the Lords of passing a series of “wrecking amendments” filled with “exceptions and get out clauses” which would prevent the legislation from fulfilling its function in stopping the small boats. He urged peers to respect the will of the elected House of Commons.
But is the strength of rebellion enough to force further concessions from the government before the game is over?
Elon Musk is being sued for failing to disclose his purchase of more than 5% of Twitter stock in a timely fashion.
The world’s richest man bought the stock in March 2022 and the complaint by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) said the delay allowed him to continue buying Twitter stock at artificially low prices.
In papers filed in Washington DC federal court, the SEC said the move allowed Mr Musk to underpay by at least $150m (£123m).
The commission wants Mr Musk to pay a civil fine and give up profits he was not entitled to.
In response to the lawsuit a lawyer for the multi-billionaire said: “Mr Musk has done nothing wrong and everyone sees this sham for what it is.”
An SEC rule requires investors to disclose within 10 calendar days when they cross a 5% ownership threshold.
The SEC said Mr Musk did not disclose his state until 4 April 2022, 11 days after the deadline – by which point he owned more than 9% of Twitter’s shares.
More on Elon Musk
Related Topics:
Twitter’s share price rose by more than 27% following Mr Musk’s disclosure, the SEC added.
Mr Musk later purchased Twitter for $44bn (£36bn) in October 2022 and renamed the social media site X.
Since the election of Donald Trump, Mr Musk has been put in charge of leading a newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) alongside former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy.
The president-elect said the department would work to reduce government bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies.
US president-elect Donald Trump has suggested Israel and Hamas could agree a Gaza ceasefire by the end of the week.
Talks between Israeli and Hamas representatives resumed in the Qatari capital Doha yesterday, after US President Joe Biden indicated a deal to stop the fighting was “on the brink” on Monday.
A draft agreement has been sent to both sides. It includes provisions for the release of hostages and a phased Israeli troop withdrawal from Gaza.
Qatar says Israel and Hamas are at their “closest point” yet to a ceasefire deal.
Two Hamas officials said the group has accepted the draft agreement, with Israel still considering the deal.
An Israeli official said a deal is close but “we are not there” yet.
More than 46,500 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched its ground offensive in the aftermath of the 7 October attacks, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.
President Biden said it would include a hostage release deal and a “surge” of aid to Palestinians, in his final foreign policy speech as president.
“So many innocent people have been killed, so many communities have been destroyed. Palestinian people deserve peace,” he said.
“The deal would free the hostages, halt the fighting, provide security to Israel, and allow us to significantly surge humanitarian assistance to the Palestinians who suffered terribly in this war that Hamas started.”
Qatari mediators have sent Israel and Hamas a draft proposal for an agreement to halt the fighting.
President-elect Donald Trump has also discussed a possible peace deal during a phone interview with the Newsmax channel.
“We’re very close to getting it done and they have to get it done,” he said.
“If they don’t get it done, there’s going to be a lot of trouble out there, a lot of trouble, like they have never seen before.
“And they will get it done. And I understand there’s been a handshake and they’re getting it finished and maybe by the end of the week. But it has to take place, it has to take place.”
Israeli official: Former Hamas leader held up deal
Speaking on Tuesday as negotiations resumed in Qatar, an anonymous Israeli official said that an agreement was “close, but we are not there”.
They accused Hamas of previously “dictating, not negotiating” but said this has changed in the last few weeks.
“Yahya Sinwar was the main obstacle for a deal,” they added.
Sinwar, believed to be the mastermind of the 7 October attacks, led Hamas following the assassination of his predecessor but was himself killed in October last year.
Under Sinwar, the Israeli official claimed, Hamas was “not in a rush” to bring a hostage deal but this has changed since his death and since the IDF “started to dismantle the Shia axis”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:14
Biden: ‘Never, never, never, ever give up’
Iran ‘weaker than it’s been in decades’
Yesterday, President Biden also hailed Washington’s support for Israel during two Iranian attacks in 2024.
“All told, Iran is weaker than it’s been in decades,” the president said.
Mr Biden claimed America’s adversaries were weaker than when he took office four years ago and that the US was “winning the worldwide competition”.
“Compared to four years ago, America is stronger, our alliances are stronger, our adversaries and competitors are weaker,” he said.
“We have not gone to war to make these things happen.”
The US president is expected to give a farewell address on Wednesday.
The deal would see a number of things happen in a first stage, with negotiations for the second stage beginning in the third week of the ceasefire.
It would also allow a surge in humanitarian aid into Gaza, which has been devastated by more than a year of war.
Details of what the draft proposal entails have been emerging on Tuesday, reported by Israeli and Palestinian officials.
Hostages to be returned
In the first stage of the potential ceasefire, 33 hostages would be set free.
These include women (including female soldiers), children, men over the age of 50, wounded and sick.
Israelbelieves most of these hostages are alive but there has not been any official confirmation from Hamas.
In return for the release of the hostages, Israel would free more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees.
People serving long sentences for deadly attacks would be included in this but Hamas fighters who took part in the 7 October attack would not be released.
An arrangement to prevent Palestinian “terrorists” from going back to the West Bank would be included in the deal, an anonymous Israeli official said.
The agreement also includes a phased withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, with IDF troops remaining in the border perimeter to defend Israeli border towns and villages.
Security arrangements would be implemented at the Philadelphi corridor – a narrow strip of land that runs along the border between Egypt and Gaza – with Israel withdrawing from parts of it after the first few days of the deal.
The Rafah Crossing between Egypt and Gaza would start to work gradually to allow the crossing of people who are sick and other humanitarian cases out of Gaza for treatment.
Unarmed North Gaza residents would be allowed to return to their homes, with a mechanism introduced to ensure no weapons are moved there.
“We will not leave the Gaza Strip until all our hostages are back home,” the Israeli official said.
What will happen to Gaza in the future?
There is less detail about the future of Gaza – from how it will be governed, to any guarantees that this agreement will bring a permanent end to the war.
“The only thing that can answer for now is that we are ready for a ceasefire,” the Israeli official said.
“This is a long ceasefire and the deal that is being discussed right now is for a long one. There is a big price for releasing the hostages and we are ready to pay this price.”
The international community has said Gaza must be run by Palestinians, but there has not been a consensus about how this should be done – and the draft ceasefire agreement does not seem to address this either.
In the past, Israel has said it will not end the war leaving Hamas in power. It also previously rejected the possibility of the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited governing powers in the West Bank, from taking over the administration of Gaza.
Since the beginning of its military campaign in Gaza, Israel has also said it would retain security control over the territory after the fighting ends.