The government has chosen to avoid a showdown with MPs on the ratification of its new treaty with Rwanda, after the House of Lords voted to delay the finalisation of the deal.
While the Lords can only advise on ratification, MPs in the Commons have the power to delay the signing of a treaty – although they have never used it.
Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG), the government has to lay a treaty before parliament and wait 21 sitting days before an international agreement is ratified. However, this treaty is set to be ratified on 31 January – Wednesday next week.
Critics argue it is “disappointing” the government has not set aside time for MPs to debate the treaty.
The government claims enough scrutiny will be offered by debates on the Safety of the Rwanda Bill, which is based on the treaty.
This bill passed initial votes in the Commons but is awaiting inspection and amending in the House of Lords, with many votes yet to come.
Defending the government’s approach, Home Office minister Tom Pursglove said: “The government places great importance in providing opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny.
“We have sought to provide this opportunity during various parliamentary activity, but most notably as part of the passage of the bill which is intrinsically linked and gives legal effect to the treaty.
“Most recently, we have had the two days of Commons committee stage – Tuesday 16 and Wednesday 17 January – on the floor of house, allowing members to scrutinise this policy.
“We look forward to debating all aspects of the bill as it is scrutinised by both houses.”
However, such a defeat for the government in the Commons would be unlikely due to the size of the government’s majority.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:28
Sunak warns Lords over Rwanda Bill
MPs ‘should be able to debate significant treaty’
In its report, the Commons home affairs committee said: “Whatever view one may take of its merits or otherwise, the new UK-Rwanda treaty is clearly of significant legal and political importance.”
It added: “The House of Commons should be able to debate and reach a view on a treaty of such significance.
“This is particularly important in this case, because the treaty could be ratified and have effect even in the absence of the bill becoming an Act for any reason.”
One of the concerns raised about the treaty is whether the measures it said would be established in Rwanda to address concerns voiced by the Supreme Court had actually been put in place – and how this could be monitored.
Dame Diana Johnson, the chair of the home affairs select committee, said: “It is disappointing the government has chosen not to dedicate time in the House of Commons for members to debate the Rwanda treaty.
“Along with the Rwanda bill, the treaty is a key element of the government’s strategy to fundamentally change the UK’s approach to asylum and immigration.
“Given its huge legal and political importance, there should be an opportunity for debate beyond that allowed for the Rwanda bill.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Richard Atkinson, the vice president of the Law Society of England and Wales, said: “Given the Supreme Court found serious risks in the government’s Rwanda plan, this treaty ought to be scrutinised carefully to ensure the risks identified are fully addressed.
“MPs’ calls for a proper debate on the treaty are being ignored. It’s crucial to debate the substance of the treaty because any shortcomings will fatally undermine the Safety of Rwanda Bill and the government’s wider asylum policy.”
A 15-year-old boy who was operated on twice by a now unlicensed Great Ormond Street surgeon is living with “continuous” pain.
Finias Sandu has been told by an independent review the procedures he underwent on both his legs were “unacceptable” and “inappropriate” for his age.
The teenager from Essex was born with a condition that causes curved bones in his legs.
Aged seven, a reconstructive procedure was carried out on Finias’s left leg, lengthening the limb by 3.5cm.
A few years later, the same operation was carried out on his right leg which involved wearing an invasive and heavy metal frame for months.
He has now been told by independent experts these procedures should not have taken place and concerns have been raised over a lack of imaging being taken prior to the operations.
Image: Yaser Jabbar rescinded his UK medical licence last year. Pic: LinkedIn
His doctor at London’s prestigious Great Ormond Street Hospital was former consultant orthopaedic surgeon Yaser Jabbar. Sky News has spoken to others he treated.
Mr Jabbar also did not arrange for updated scans or for relevant X-rays to be conducted ahead of the procedures.
The surgeries have been found to have caused Finias “harm” and left him in constant pain.
“The pain is there every day, every day I’m continuously in pain,” he told Sky News.
“It’s not something really sharp, although it does get to a certain point where it hurts quite a lot, but it’s always there. It just doesn’t leave, it’s a companion to me, just always there.”
Mr Jabbar rescinded his UK medical licence in January last year after working at Great Ormond Street between 2017 and 2022.
The care of his 700-plus patients is being assessed, with some facing corrective surgery, among them Finias.
“Trusting somebody is hard to do, knowing what they have done to me physically and emotionally, you know, it’s just too much to comprehend for me,” he said.
“It wasn’t something just physically, like my leg pain and everything else. It was emotionally, because I put my trust in that specific doctor. My parents and I don’t really understand the more scientific terms, we just went by what he said.”
Doctors refused to treat Finias because of his surgeries
Finias and his family relocated to their native Romania soon after the reconstructive frame was removed from his right leg in the summer of 2021.
The pain worsened and they sought advice from doctors in Romania, who refused to treat Finias because of the impact of his surgeries.
Dozens of families seeking legal claims
His mother Cornelia Sandu is “furious” and feels her trust in the hospital has been shattered. They are now among dozens of families seeking legal claims.
Cyrus Plaza from Hudgell Solicitors is representing the family. He said: “In cases where it has been identified that harm was caused, we want to see Great Ormond Street Hospital agreeing to pay interim payments of compensation for the children, so that if they need therapy or treatment now, they can access it.”
Finias is accessing therapy and mental health support as he prepares for corrective surgery later in the year.
A spokesperson for Great Ormond Street Hospital told Sky News: “We are deeply sorry to Finias and his family, and all the patients and families who have been impacted.
“We want every patient and family who comes to our hospital to feel safe and cared for. We will always discuss concerns families may have and, where they submit claims, we will work to ensure the legal process can be resolved as quickly as possible.”
Image: Finias with his mother and sister
Service not ‘safe for patients’
Sky News has attempted to contact Mr Jabbar.
An external review into the wider orthopaedic department at the hospital began in September 2022.
It was commissioned after the Royal College of Surgeons warned the hospital’s lower limb reconstruction service was not “safe for patients or adequate to meet demand”.
The investigation is expected to be completed by the end of the year.
Sir Keir Starmer has said closer ties with the EU will be good for the UK’s jobs, bills and borders ahead of a summit where he could announce a deal with the bloc.
The government is set to host EU leaders in London on Monday as part of its efforts to “reset” relations post-Brexit.
A deal granting the UK access to a major EU defence fund could be on the table, according to reports – but disagreements over a youth mobility scheme and fishing rights could prove to be a stumbling block.
The prime minister has appeared to signal a youth mobility deal could be possible, telling The Times that while freedom of movement is a “red line”, youth mobility does not come under this.
His comment comes after Kaja Kallas, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs, said on Friday work on a defence deal was progressing but “we’re not there yet”.
Sir Keir met European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen later that day while at a summit in Albania.
Image: Ursula von der Leyen and Sir Keir had a brief meeting earlier this week. Pic: PA
Sir Keir said: “First India, then the United States – in the last two weeks alone that’s jobs saved, faster growth and wages rising.
“More money in the pockets of British working people, achieved through striking deals not striking poses.
“Tomorrow, we take another step forward, with yet more benefits for the United Kingdom as the result of a strengthened partnership with the European Union.”
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has said she is “worried” about what the PM might have negotiated.
Ms Badenoch – who has promised to rip up the deal with the EU if it breaches her red lines on Brexit – said: “Labour should have used this review of our EU trade deal to secure new wins for Britain, such as an EU-wide agreement on Brits using e-gates on the continent.
“Instead, it sounds like we’re giving away our fishing quotas, becoming a rule-taker from Brussels once again and getting free movement by the back door. This isn’t a reset, it’s a surrender.”
Roman Lavrynovych appeared at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Friday and was remanded in custody.
Officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Command led the investigation because of the connections to the prime minister.
Emergency services were called to a fire in the early hours of Monday at a house in Kentish Town, north London, where Sir Keir lived with his family before the election.