Conservative MPs on the right of the party have called on the government to scrap its Rwanda bill, just 24 hours before it is due to be voted on in parliament.

It comes as a number of Tory MPs revealed to Sky News’ deputy political editor Sam Coates that Number 10 is threatening to call an early election if they vote against the legislation in the Commons on Tuesday – though some were sceptical Downing Street would follow through.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak revealed the new law last week in an attempt to revive the scheme that would see asylum seekers arriving by small boat crossings deported to the African nation, after the Supreme Court ruled in November that it was unlawful.

The bill would declare Rwanda a safe country, and empower ministers to ignore parts of the Human Rights Act to limit any appeals against people being removed from the UK.

But the chairman of the European Research Group, Mark Francois, said the legislation had “so many holes in it” that the consensus from his wing of the party was to “pull the bill” and put forward a “revised version that works better”.

Politics live: ‘Deeply sorry’ – Sunak gives evidence to COVID inquiry

The so-called “five families” of Tory right-wing factions, representing around 100 MPs, were invited to a meeting on Monday to discuss legal advice on the legislation, led by the ERG – which became a household name in the Brexit years.

In the summary of the ERG’s conclusions – put together by their so-called “star chamber” of legal experts – the group said: “The bill overall provides a partial and incomplete solution to the problem of legal challenges in the UK courts being used as stratagems to delay or defeat the removal of illegal migrants to Rwanda.

“The prime minister may well be right when he claims that this is the ‘toughest piece of migration legislation ever put forward by a UK government’, but we do not believe that it goes far enough to deliver the policy as intended.

“Resolving, comprehensively, the issues raised by this analysis would require very significant amendments, some of which would potentially be outside the current title’s scope, and the final bill would look very different.”

Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge

Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.

Tap here for more

In the ERG’s document, they listed numerous problems they had with the bill, including what they saw as a “limited disapplication” of the UK’s Human Rights Act and only “limited exclusions” of international human rights treaties.

The group did not say in their conclusions whether they planned to vote against the bill on Tuesday, or instead abstain on it to give them the chance to make amendments to the law at a later parliamentary stage.

But speaking later on Monday, Mr Francois said: “The feeling very much in the meeting is that the government would be best advised to pull the bill and to come up with a revised version that works better than this one, which has so many holes in it.

“In as much as there was a consensus, that was the consensus.”

He added: “We all want to stop the boats. There have been two legislative attempts at this already… that didn’t quite work so this is kind of three strikes and you’re out, isn’t it?

“What is really important if we are going to put a bill through parliament is to have a piece of legislation which is fit for purpose. As the bill is currently drafted, it isn’t.”

His thoughts were echoed by the deputy chair of the ERG, and fellow Tory MP, David Jones, who added: “I don’t think the bill is easily amendable and really I think the government needs to review it and maybe consider a completely new piece of legislation.

“Because this leaves so many gaps in the legislation and so many ways that people could actually evade the legislation if they wanted to remain in this country.”

But posting on X – formerly known as Twitter – another ERG member and Tory MP, Michael Fabricant, said he would still vote in favour of the government bill, writing: “It is not perfect (no bill ever is), but I agree with its principle: to deter the slavers providing dangerous channel crossings. Amendments can then be made later in the usual way.”

Mr Francois confirmed right-wing MPs would be holding another meeting on Monday evening to decide on what action to take in the Commons.

Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick, who resigned last week over his opposition to the bill, will speak at the gathering.

New Conservatives co-chairman Danny Kruger also revealed the MPs would be having “further conversations with government over the course of the next 24 hours” – with Sky News understanding the PM will host a breakfast meeting with 20 or so of the right-wing group’s members on Tuesday morning.

At the same time, the more centrist faction of the Conservatives, known as the One Nation caucus, will also meet to discuss the bill, with reports some of their MPs think it goes too far in disavowing human rights legislation.

Meanwhile, Home Secretary James Cleverly held his own briefing for MPs on Monday afternoon to try to get them onboard.

Speaking to Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby as he left the gathering, he said: “I’m determined to get [the bill] through. It’s important legislation and part of our plan to break the people smuggling that cost lives.”

Rwanda battle lines drawn – and it’s going to get ugly

Sam Coates

Deputy political editor

@SamCoatesSky

Battle lines are now drawn on different sides of the Tory party, and the moment of conflict is fast approaching.

All sides are quite dug in. This is going to get ugly.

The European Research Group of Brexiteers has published its conclusions about Rishi Sunak’s emergency legislation.

They say it needs “very significant” changes – some of which might be outside the scope of this bill – to get their support.

This is a hard ask. Any legislation that emerges from such a negotiation would, they say, “look very different” to what was published by parliament last week

Rishi Sunak already says he went as far as he possibly could. Now this group wants him to go a lot further.

Although we do not yet know how Tory MPs will vote on the bill come Tuesday, this sets up a significant clash either this week or post-Christmas.

The ERG’s legal judgement now represents the formal view of the group, but it remains unclear how far their writ can go.

The New Conservatives – the post-2016 Tory right – the Northern Research Group and others were invited to this meeting but did not attend.

Yet it is hard to see many people in these groups not agreeing with this judgement, and at some point displaying their dissatisfaction in the division lobbies.

The clash could yet be deferred beyond Tuesday – we will find that out later. But this is very serious and it is unclear how Rishi Sunak deals with it.

Soon after the ERG’s conclusions were published, the government took the unusual move of publishing a summary of its legal advice this afternoon in light of “significant interest” and the “need to be as clear as possible for the public and parliamentarians”.

In the advice, it said completely blocking any court challenges – something right-wing Tory MPs are keen on – would be “a breach of international law and alien to the UK’s constitutional tradition of liberty and justice, where even in wartime the UK has maintained access to the courts in order that individuals can uphold their rights and freedoms”.

The document also said the government of Rwanda had been clear it would withdraw from the scheme if the UK breached its international obligations, which would “render the bill unable to work in achieving the policy intention of deterrence – as there would be no safe country for the purposes of removal”.

Publishing the advice was seen as an attempt by the government to woo MPs into supporting the bill, but the ERG’s latest statement deals that hope a massive blow.

Only 29 Tory MPs need to vote against the government – or 57 need to abstain – for the bill to be defeated when it comes to the Commons on Tuesday.

It would be the first time a government bill has fallen at the second reading since the 1980s.