Tory deputy chairmen resign party roles as government suffers significant rebellion on Rwanda bill
Two deputy chairs of the Conservative Party have resigned from their roles after they both supported rebel amendments to Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill.
Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith both said they would support proposed changes designed to toughen up Mr Sunak’s bill, which seeks to declare Rwanda a safe country to deport asylum seekers to.
Jane Stevenson, a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) in the Department for Business and Trade, resigned from her role after she supported two key rebel amendments.
On Tuesday night, MPs voted on a series of amendments to the Safety of Rwanda Bill, including one submitted by veteran Tory MP Sir Bill Cash, whose amendment sought to disapply international law with regard to Rwanda being a safe country.
Politics latest: ‘Big’ Tory rebellion on PM’s Rwanda bill will cause ‘jitters’ in Tory high command
In total, 70 MPs backed Sir Bill’s amendment.
Sixty Tories, including two tellers who verify the count, supported the amendment, as did two independent MPs who were formerly in the Conservative parliamentary party – Scott Benton and Andrew Bridgen.
They were joined by eight MPs in the Democratic Unionist Party.
However, the amendment was rejected by 529 votes to 68, leaving a majority of 461.
Jane Stevenson resigned from her role as parliamentary private secretary to Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch
Among the names who backed the amendment were former prime minister Liz Truss, ex-home secretary Suella Braverman, former immigration minister Robert Jenrick and the leaders of the New Conservatives Miriam Cates and Danny Kruger.
The result represents a significant rebellion and potentially spells trouble for the prime minister ahead of the third reading vote on the whole bill on Wednesday, when rebels may vote against it.
Speaking to Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby, Tory MP Mark Francois said the numbers “speak for themselves” and that he hoped the government “will listen and take stock” and possibly tighten the bill.
Mr Kruger, the co-chair of the New Conservatives, told the Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge he was “prepared” to vote against the bill at third reading.
Warning signs for the prime minister
Tory Rwanda rebels have shown their hand.
They have been able to demonstrate their side is willing to go further than before Christmas – and that they have the numbers to defeat the government on Wednesday.
The question now is whether the government is prepared to risk a defeat by going ahead on Wednesday, or whether ministers abandon a plan to hold a vote in fear of defeat.
“I really hope that the scale of the vote in favour of the amendments that were debated today will convince the government that they really should adopt these amendments as their own,” he said.
However, in an illustration of the dilemma Mr Sunak faces in appeasing the various factions of his party, Damian Green, chair of the One Nation group of moderate Tory MPs, said he would vote against the bill if it was toughened up further as the right-wing rebels demand.
But, he said he believed the “high watermark” of the Rwanda rebellion was reached on Tuesday evening.
Mr Sunak had been prepared for a collision with right-wing Tories over the bill, which is aimed at reviving Mr Sunak’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda if they attempt to come to the UK via small boat crossings in the Channel.
The bill, which is designed to enable parliament to confirm Rwanda is a “safe country”, gives ministers the powers to disregard sections of the Human Rights Act, but does not go as far as allowing them to dismiss the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) entirely – a demand of some on the right.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘The numbers speak for themselves’
As well as the amendment by Sir Bill, MPs also voted on an amendment by Mr Jenrick which sought to make it more difficult for individuals to make claims against their deportation.
MPs rejected it by 525 votes to 61 votes, among them 59 Tories, including tellers.
In a joint resignation letter, Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith said they supported the amendments “not because we are against the legislation, but because like everybody else we want it to work”.
“Our support for the party and this government remains as strong as ever and that is why we are so passionate about making this legislation work.
“However, we fully appreciate that with such important roles there is also the issue of being bound by collective responsibility.
“It is with this in mind that we fully appreciate that whilst our main wish is to strengthen the legislation, this means that in order to vote for amendments we will therefore need to offer you our resignations from our roles.”
Read more:
Rwanda bill rebels – full list of Tories who voted for Cash amendment
Robert Jenrick ‘prepared’ to vote down Rwanda bill as Tory divide deepens
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael MP said: “Sunak’s Rwanda scheme just won’t work – and even the deputy chairmen of his own party know it.
“Rishi Sunak has yet again been embarrassed by his own MPs.”
A Downing Street source said Mr Sunak accepted the resignations of Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith and added: “This is the toughest legislation ever brought before parliament to tackle illegal migration.
“This bill will make it clear that if you come here illegally you will not be able to stay. We must pass this bill to deliver what all Conservatives want – a credible plan to stop the boats.”
The last blast furnaces left operating in Britain could see their fate sealed within days, after their Chinese owners took the decision to cut off the crucial supply of ingredients keeping them running.
Jingye, the owner of British Steel in Scunthorpe, has, according to union representatives, cancelled future orders for the iron ore, coal and other raw materials needed to keep the furnaces running.
The upshot is that they may have to close next month – even sooner than the earliest date suggested for its closure.
Read more: Thousands of jobs at risk as British Steel consults unions over closure
The fate of the blast furnaces – the last two domestic sources of virgin steel, made from iron ore rather than recycled – is likely to be determined in a matter of days, with the Department for Business and Trade now actively pondering nationalisation.
The upshot is that even as Britain contends with a trade war across the Atlantic, it is now working against the clock to secure the future of steelmaking at Scunthorpe.
The talks between the government and Jingye broke down last week after the Chinese company, which bought British Steel out of receivership in 2020, rejected a £500m offer of public money to replace the existing furnaces with electric arc furnaces.
The sum is the same one it offered to Tata Steel, which has shut down the other remaining UK blast furnaces in Port Talbot and is planning to build electric furnaces – which have far lower carbon emissions.
These steel workers could soon be out of work
However, the owners argue that the amount is too little to justify extra investment at Scunthorpe, and said last week they were now consulting on the date of shutting both the blast furnaces and the attached steelworks.
Since British Steel is the main provider of steel rails to Network Rail – as well as other construction steels available from only a few sites in the world – the closure would leave the UK more reliant on imports for critical infrastructure sites.
However, since the site belongs to its Chinese owners, a decision to nationalise the site would involve radical steps government officials are wary of taking.
They also fear leaving taxpayers exposed to a potentially loss-making business for the long run.
The dilemma has been heightened by the sharp turn in geopolitical sentiment following Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
The incipient trade war and threatened cut in American support to Europe have sparked fresh calls for countries to act urgently to secure their own supplies of critical materials, especially those used for defence and infrastructure.
Read more:
Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion
There were no winners from Trump’s tariff gameshow
Gareth Stace, head of UK Steel, the industry lobby group, said: “Talks seem to have broken down between government and British Steel.
“My advice to government is: please, Jonathan Reynolds, Business Secretary, get back round that negotiating table, thrash out a deal, and if a deal can’t be found in the next few days, then I fear for the very future of the sector, but also here for Scunthorpe steelworks.”
British Steel declined to comment.
UK
Prince Andrew’s Pitch@Palace branded ‘crude attempt to enrich himself’ as Chinese spy documents set to be released
Prince Andrew’s efforts to make money from his Pitch@Palace project have been branded as a “crude attempt to enrich himself” at the expense of “unsuspecting tech founders”, as new documents may shed more light on what he and his team have been attempting to sell.
Today is the deadline for documents to be released relating to Prince Andrew‘s former senior adviser Dominic Hampshire and his interactions with the alleged Chinese spy Yang Tengbo.
In February, an immigration tribunal heard how the intelligence services had contacted Mr Hampshire about Mr Yang back in 2022. Mr Yang helped set up Pitch@Palace China, a branch of the duke’s scheme to help young entrepreneurs.
The alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo, has links with Prince Andrew
Yang Tengbo. Pic: Pitch@Palace
Judges banned Mr Yang from the UK, saying his association with a senior royal had made Prince Andrew “vulnerable” and posed a threat to national security. Mr Yang challenged that decision at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC).
Since that hearing, media organisations have applied for certain documents relating to the case and Mr Hampshire’s support for Mr Yang to be made public. SIAC agreed to release some information of public interest. It is hoped they may include more details on deals that he was trying to do on behalf of Prince Andrew.
So what do we know about potential deals for Pitch@Palace so far?
In February, Sky News confirmed that palace officials had a meeting last summer with tech funding company StartupBootcamp to discuss a potential tie-up between them and Prince Andrew relating to his Pitch@Palace project.
The palace wasn’t involved in the fine details of a deal but wanted guarantees to make sure it wouldn’t impact the Royal Family in the future. Sky News understands from one source that the price being discussed for Pitch was around £750,000 – there are, however, reports that a deal may have stalled.
Photos we found on the Chinese Chamber of Commerce website show an event held in Asia between StartupBootcamp and Innovate Global, believed to be an offshoot of Pitch.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Who is alleged Chinese spy, Yang Tengbo?
Documents, released in relation to the investigations into Mr Tengbo, have also shown how much the duke has always seen Pitch as a way of potentially making money. One document from 21 August 2021 clearly states “the duke needed money at the time, and saw the relationships with China through Pitch as one possible source of funding”.
But Prince Andrew’s apparent intention to use Pitch to make money has led to concerns about whether he is unfairly using the contacts and information he gained when he was a working royal.
Norman Baker, former MP and author of books on royal finances, believes it is “a crude attempt to enrich himself” and goes against what the tech entrepreneurs thought they were signing up for.
Read more:
Who is Yang Tenbo?
Virginia Giuffre says she has days to live
Emails between Andrew and Epstein revealed
He told Sky News: “The data given by these business people was given on the basis it was an official operation and not something for Prince Andrew, and so in my view, Prince Andrew had no right legally or morally to take the data which has been collected, a huge amount of data, and sell it…
“And quite clearly if you’re going to sell it off to StartupBootcamp, that is not what people had in mind. The entrepreneurs who joined Pitch@Palace did not do so to enrich Prince Andrew,” he said.
Rich Wilson was one tech entrepreneur who was approached at the start of Pitch@Palace to sign up, but he stepped away when he spotted a clause in the contract saying they’d be entitled to 2% equity in any funding he secured.
He feels Prince Andrew is continuing to use those he made a show of supporting.
He said: “It makes me feel sick. I think it’s terrible – that he is continuing to exploit unsuspecting tech founders in this way. A lot of them, I’m quite grey and old in the tooth now, I saw it coming, but clearly most didn’t. And a lot of them were quite young.
“It’ll be their first venture and you’re learning on the trot, so to speak. So to take advantage of people in such a major way – that’s an awful, sickening thing to do.”
We approached StartupBootcamp who said they had no comment to make, and the Duke of York’s office did not respond.
With reports that a deal may have stalled, it could be a big setback for the duke – especially with questions still about how he’ll continue to pay for his home on the Windsor estate now that the King no longer gives him financial support.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports12 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway