Connect with us

Published

on

Rishi Sunak has said he will introduce emergency legislation to make sure his Rwanda plan is not blocked again – and insisted “flights will be heading off in the spring as planned”.

After the Supreme Court ruled the flagship asylum policy is unlawful, the prime minister said he had been working on a new international treaty with the East African nation to address the judges’ concerns and ensure it is “safe”.

He said: “This will provide a guarantee in law that those who are relocated from the UK to Rwanda will be protected against removal from Rwanda and it will make clear that we will bring back anyone if ordered to do so by a court.

“We will finalise this treaty in light of today’s judgment and ratify it without delay.”

Politics latest: Labour frontbencher resigns over Starmer’s Gaza stance

Mr Sunak insisted the legislation would “end the merry-go-round” of legal challenges that have stopped flights from taking off since the controversial plan was announced in April last year.

The policy would see anyone arriving in the UK by unauthorised means deported to Rwanda to claim asylum there – not the UK.

“We need to end the merry-go-round,” Mr Sunak told a Downing Street news conference.

“I said I was going to fundamentally change our country, and I meant it.”

The PM said he would be taking the “extraordinary step of introducing emergency legislation”, which will “enable parliament to confirm that with our new treaty, Rwanda is safe”.

But he also acknowledged that even if domestic laws are changed, the government could still face legal challenges from the European Court of Human Rights and vowed: “I will not allow a foreign court to block these flights.”

“If the Strasbourg court chooses to intervene against the express wishes of parliament, I am prepared to do what is necessary to get flights off,” he said.

Read more:
Why Sunak’s promise looks extremely hard to keep | Beth Rigby analysis
Explainer – how did the government policy end up in the courts?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Supreme Court rules Rwanda plan unlawful

In its ruling on Wednesday, the UK’s highest court said refugees sent to Rwanda would be at “real risk” of being returned to their country of origin, whether their grounds to claim asylum were justified or not – breaching international law.

It has fuelled calls from some Tory MPs to pull the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in order to push forward with the plan – something Mr Sunak has so far resisted doing.

An eleventh-hour injunction from the ECHR stopped the first scheduled flights from taking off to Rwanda’s capital Kigali last June, and no one has been deported since.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Asylum seekers celebrate Rwanda verdict

The Supreme Court judges said it is not only the ECHR which is relevant to their ruling, pointing out that the UK is signed up “other international treaties which also prohibit the return of asylum seekers to their countries of origin without a proper examination of their claims”.

What happens now?


Sam Coates

Sam Coates

Deputy political editor

@SamCoatesSky

The prime minister set out a two part plan – first, putting the Rwanda agreement into a treaty, ensuring once asylum seekers are taken to the country, they will stay there.

But it was the second bit that we didn’t know was coming that could prove controversial – the emergency legislation.

It sounds as if the PM is planning to pass a law that declares Rwanda a ‘safe’ country and that cannot be challenged in the UK courts on the basis of the European Human Rights Convention and other international human rights laws.

In effect, the UK courts would have to accept that judgment as parliament is sovereign. So, providing this legislation doesn’t get gummed up in the House of Lords, that’s the domestic courts sorted.

However, that legislation would not override the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

An asylum seeker would be able to take their claim to that court, which would then make its own judgment on whether Rwanda is ‘safe’, as the UK government would have declared.

Even before they have ruled, the Strasbourg court could issue a “rule 39” order to block flights. It sounds from the news conference as if Sunak would simply ignore that if it came again. This means there’s a much higher chance flights to Rwanda might be able to take off.

A judgment from the Strasbourg court that Rwanda is not, in fact, a safe country would in time likely set up a huge political and legal battle for the government.

Would they simply ignore the ruling and send flights to Rwanda anyway? Is the government happy to be in breach of the European Convention of Human Rights? Would we be expelled or leave?

Big questions, but perhaps ones not settled this side of an election. Which might just be the point.

Mr Sunak was not clear about how he thinks he can circumvent human rights laws and international conventions.

However he said he was confident that his new plan will work.

The PM said he is “delivering” on his pledge to stop the boats, and the new treaty is “ready to go” to reassure the courts.

“We will clear the remaining barriers and flights will be heading off in the spring as planned,” he added.

The news conference came shortly after new snap polling from YouGov show most people believe the policy should now be scrapped.

However, some Tory MPs want Mr Sunak to go further and disapply human rights laws so the scheme can go ahead.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rwanda ruling ‘massive blow’ to PM

Suella Braverman, who was sacked as home secretary on Monday, has called for emergency legislation to “block off the ECHR and other routes of legal challenge”.

Conservative Party deputy chairman Lee Anderson said the government should “ignore the laws” and send migrants back the same day they arrive in the UK.

The New Conservatives, a right-wing pressure group of MPs, said Mr Sunak’s new legislation “must disapply the Human Rights Act and give effect to the policy *notwithstanding* the ECHR and Refugee Convention”.

“It must restate the power of Govt to disregard interim rulings from Strasbourg,” they posted on X.

Britain is expected to pay Rwanda more money for the new treaty, having already handed over £140m under the plans that have seen not one asylum seeker removed since it was announced.

Earlier, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer demanded an apology to the nation from Mr Sunak for wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers’ cash on the “ridiculous, pathetic spectacle”.

Continue Reading

Politics

China’s crypto liquidation plans reveal its grand strategy

Published

on

By

China’s crypto liquidation plans reveal its grand strategy

China’s crypto liquidation plans reveal its grand strategy

China’s plan to liquidate confiscated crypto through Hong Kong exchanges isn’t simply a policy — it’s to control global digital asset markets and outmaneuver the US.

Continue Reading

Politics

Make ‘significant adjustments’ to Online Safety Act, X urges govt

Published

on

By

X criticises Online Safety Act - and warns it's putting free speech in the UK at risk

The Online Safety Act is putting free speech at risk and needs significant adjustments, Elon Musk’s social network X has warned.

New rules that came into force last week require platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, TikTok and X – as well as sites hosting pornography – to bring in measures to prove that someone using them is over the age of 18.

The Online Safety Act requires sites to protect children and to remove illegal content, but critics have said that the rules have been implemented too broadly, resulting in the censorship of legal content.

X has warned the act’s laudable intentions were “at risk of being overshadowed by the breadth of its regulatory reach”.

It said: “When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of ‘online safety’.

“It is fair to ask if UK citizens were equally aware of the trade-off being made.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What are the new online rules?

X claims the timetable for platforms to meet mandatory measures had been unnecessarily tight – and despite complying, sites still faced threats of enforcement and fines, “encouraging over-censorship”.

More on Online Safety Bill

“A balanced approach is the only way to protect individual liberties, encourage innovation and safeguard children. It’s safe to say that significant changes must take place to achieve these objectives in the UK,” it said.

A UK government spokesperson said it is “demonstrably false” that the Online Safety Act compromises free speech.

“As well as legal duties to keep children safe, the very same law places clear and unequivocal duties on platforms to protect freedom of expression,” they added.

Users have complained about age checks that require personal data to be uploaded to access sites that show pornography, and 468,000 people have already signed a petition asking for the new law to be repealed.

In response to the petition, the government said it had “no plans” to reverse the Online Safety Act.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why do people want to repeal the Online Safety Act?

Reform UK’s leader Nigel Farage likened the new rules to “state suppression of genuine free speech” and said his party would ditch the regulations.

Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said on Tuesday that those who wanted to overturn the act were “on the side of predators” – to which Mr Farage demanded an apology, calling Mr Kyle’s comments “absolutely disgusting”.

Regulator Ofcom said on Thursday it had launched an investigation into how four companies – that collectively run 34 pornography sites – are complying with new age-check requirements.

Read more from Sky News:
British children who drowned off Spain named
Man charged after children fell ill at summer camp

These companies – 8579 LLC, AVS Group Ltd, Kick Online Entertainment S.A. and Trendio Ltd – run dozens of sites, and collectively have more than nine million unique monthly UK visitors, the internet watchdog said.

The regulator said it prioritised the companies based on the risk of harm posed by the services they operated and their user numbers.

It adds to the 11 investigations already in progress into 4chan, as well as an unnamed online suicide forum, seven file-sharing services, and two adult websites.

Ofcom said it expects to make further enforcement announcements in the coming months.

Continue Reading

Politics

Inside Jeremy Corbyn’s new party and the battle for leadership

Published

on

By

Inside Jeremy Corbyn's new party and the battle for leadership

Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn may be the figureheads of a new left-wing party, but already there is a battle over leadership.

The confusion behind the initial launch speaks to a wider debate happening behind closed doors as to who should steer the party – now and in the future.

Already, in the true spirit of Mr Corbyn’s politics, there is talk of an open leadership contest and grassroots participation.

Some supporters of the new party – which is being temporarily called “Your Party” while a formal name is decided by members – believe that allowing a leadership contest to take place honours Mr Corbyn’s commitment to open democracy.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Jeremy Corbyn open to ideas on new party name

They point out that under Mr Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, members famously backed plans to make it easier for local constituency parties to deselect sitting MPs – a concept he strongly believed in.

His allies now say the former Labour leader, who is 76, is open to there being a leadership contest for the new party, possibly at its inaugural conference in the autumn, where names lesser known than himself can throw their hat into the ring.

“Jeremy would rather die than not have an open leadership contest,” one source familiar with the internal politics told Sky News.

More on Jeremy Corbyn

However, there have been suggestions that Ms Sultana appears to be less keen on the idea of a leadership contest, and that she is more committed to the co-leadership model than her political partner.

Those who have been opposed to the co-leadership model believe it could give Ms Sultana an unfair advantage and exclude other potential candidates from standing in the future.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Corbyn’s new political party isn’t ‘real deal’

One source told Sky News they believed Mr Corbyn should lead the party for two years, to get it established, before others are allowed to stand as leader.

They said Ms Sultana, who became an independent MP after she was suspended from Labour for opposing the two-child benefit cap, was “highly ambitious but completely untested as leader” and “had a lot of growing into the role to do”.

“It’s not about her – it’s about taking a democratic approach, which is what we’re supposed to be doing,” they said.

“There are so many people who have done amazing things locally and they need to have a chance to emerge as leaders.

“We are not only fishing from a pool of two people.

“It needs to be an open contest. Nobody needs to be crowned.”

Read more:
Where insiders think Corbyn’s new party could win
PM would be foolish not to recognise threat party poses

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Corbyn’s new party shakes the left

While Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana undoubtedly have the biggest profiles out of would-be leaders, advocates for a grassroots approach to the leadership point to the success some independent candidates have enjoyed at a local level – for example, 24-year-old British Palestinian Leah Mohammed, who came within 528 votes of unseating Health Secretary Wes Streeting in Ilford North.

Fiona Lali of the Revolutionary Communist Party, who stood in last year’s general election for the Stratford and Bow constituency, has also been mentioned in some circles as someone with potential leadership credentials.

However, sources close to Mr Corbyn and Ms Sultana downplayed suggestions of any divide over the leadership model, pointing out that their joint statement acknowledged that members would “decide the party’s direction” at the inaugural conference in the autumn, including the model of leadership and the policies that are needed to transform society.

A spokesperson for Mr Corbyn told Sky News: “Jeremy will be working with Zarah, his independent colleagues, and people from trade unions and social movements up and down the country to make an autumn conference a reality.

“This will be the moment where people come together to launch a new democratic party that belongs to the members.”

Sky News has approached Ms Sultana for comment.

Continue Reading

Trending