Rishi Sunak’s government opts to avoid Rwanda treaty ratification showdown with MPs after Lords defeat
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.
Politics latest: UK facing ‘dangerous moment’
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.
But the home affairs select committee in the Commons recommended there be a debate and a vote on the treaty after it was announced last year.
This was backed by the Conservatives on the committee – including former Tory deputy chair Lee Anderson, who resigned from his Tory party role to try to make the Safety of Rwanda Bill tougher last week.
The treaty contains the agreements upon which the UK government bases its argument that Rwanda is safe in a bid to address the ruling by the Supreme Court last year.
‘We look forward to debating the bill’
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.”
The opposition voiced in the Lords was unprecedented, when the upper house voted by a majority of 43 against ratification.
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
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.”
Read more:
How plan has become a leadership issue
Success harder again after Lords defeat
Lib Dem Lords to vote against bill
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
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.”
The government has been approached for comment.
Opinion by: James Strudwick, executive director, Starknet Foundation
The outlook surrounding the use of new technologies has shifted in Washington. Tesla CEO and presidential adviser Elon Musk’s proposition to incorporate blockchain technology into the US Treasury has placed blockchain and its use for state finances at the forefront of the global debate. According to Musk, much of this drive is rooted in the concern over the unsustainability of current government spending. With its immutable ledgers and transparent audit trails, blockchain is waiting in the wind, offering a potential solution to managing vast public finances.
Musk advocates for a unified information system that can track real-time payments, credentials and government resources, spurring a debate within the fintech community about the pros and cons of introducing such a tool at the government level. The idea is compelling, as the description on the blockchain tin effectively promises accountability, traceability and streamlined operations. The shift here, namely to a blockchain-powered government infrastructure, presents several challenges that may prove to be beyond what the new administration has expected thus far.
Blockchain as state appendage
A concern for stakeholders orbiting the blockchain world revolves around the sheer scale of government operations. Every day, the US government handles thousands of transactions across various departments. The feasibility of Musk’s vision is put into question simply as a result of its own complexity. The provable security that blockchain technology must offer while handling millions of daily transactions without buckling under the load to succeed at this scale is enormous.
A proposed solution by Musk is a hybrid model that uses “Validium” zero-knowledge rollups. The speed and efficiency of modern ZK-rollups, which can handle hundreds of millions of transactions daily, have the potential to make sure each citizen’s share of government transactions is intact and verifiable. The technology’s rapidly evolving nature, scaling to handle even higher transaction volumes in the coming years, indicates that this could be achievable.
Unfortunately, this in itself comes with its own hurdles, particularly when integrating public services, which tend to operate in silos.
The human question
The great irony here is that Musk’s declarations of government inefficiency as a reason for the ongoing shakeups could be one of the biggest reasons not to go ahead with the plan. The real obstacle here is not so much technological as it is deeply, irrevocably human. The transition from archaic legacy systems to the more modern infrastructure of blockchain requires not just software updates but an entire reprogramming of the workforce. Government employees embedded in bureaucracy are used to outdated systems, and retraining them will be no small task.
Recent: US housing dept mulls blockchain, stablecoin to pay and monitor grants: Report
Moreover, current government databases are a labyrinth of poorly documented, indecipherable data. Extracting and migrating this data to a blockchain infrastructure is itself a task that may require serious investment. For all its elegance, blockchain wasn’t built to contend with such inefficiency. Despite its potential for handling complex, distributed environments, the difficulties present in the system itself could make the transition more complicated than the hassle is worth.
Balancing transparency and confidentiality
Transparency of federal spending is also a factor worth highlighting. The innate strength of blockchain and its much-lauded appeal is its strength. It permits citizens to track how public funds are allocated and spent. Musk’s premise could foster a so-far unseen level of accountability, which makes transactions, every delegation of power and every resource distribution visible to the public in real-time.
The problem is that sensitive government data, classified information or personal identification could be dangerously exposed on a public blockchain. Musk’s response is to try to tether sensitive data to private channels in the blockchain and ensure that only individuals with the appropriate authorization or from specific departments can access confidential information. Theoretically, this addresses the security concern while allowing blockchain’s public verifiability.
Musk’s offer could lead to a more efficient, accountable system. The social drive behind this is the longstanding criticism of wasted spending and resource misallocation. There is also a possibility of strengthening democratic processes by holding public officials more accountable. A decentralized authority has the broader impact of empowering citizens through real-time access.
There is a forward-thinking aspect to the vision. It raises a profound question. Technology could address human governance challenges, but we run the risk of a fundamental shift in how we understand privacy and accountable authority. As we question the nature of governance, it warrants careful consideration of the role of blockchain and what it could ultimately mean for the future of society as a whole.
Opinion by: James Strudwick, executive director, Starknet Foundation.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
Sir Keir Starmer has said the government has been preparing “for all eventualities” ahead of Donald Trump announcing global tariffs later on Wednesday.
The US president is set to announce details of fresh tariffs on imports into the US after he said all countries will be targeted in his bid to “rebalance” trade agreements.
Mr Trump is expected to announce 20% tariffs on most US imports on what he has called “Liberation Day”.
Politics latest: PM admits ‘pressures bearing down on businesses and working people’
Sir Keir told Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs): “We’ve been preparing for all eventualities ahead of the confirmation of US tariffs later today.
“Let me be clear with the House: a trade war is in nobody’s interest, and the country deserves, and we will take, a calm, pragmatic approach.
“That is why constructive talks are progressing to agree a wider economic prosperity deal with the US.”
He said the government is working with all industries and sectors in the UK that are likely to be impacted.
Sir Keir Starmer met Donald Trump at the White House in February. Pic: PA
The prime minister added his government “will rule nothing out” as he again hinted at retaliatory tariffs.
However, he said he believes the UK’s interests are “best served by calmly trying to secure a deal”.
On Monday, Sir Keir told Sky News political editor Beth Rigby US-UK trade talks are “well advanced” and “rapid progress” had been made.
However, he admitted it is likely “there will be tariffs” as negotiators had not managed to fend them off in time.
At PMQs, Sir Keir rejected jumping into a trade war with the US, saying: “That cannot be the first response of the United Kingdom.”
The impact of potential retaliatory tariffs from the EU on Northern Ireland was also raised, with DUP MP Gavin Robinson reminding the prime minister not to forget the unique trade situation in Northern Ireland.
He said while exports from Northern Ireland are UK exports, imports to the country could be hit by tariffs imposed by the EU as it shares a border with the European bloc.
Read more:
Trump tariffs latest – Uncertainty around world on ‘Liberation Day’
Starmer rejects ‘knee-jerk’ response to Trump tariffs
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
PM holding fire on Trump’s Liberation Day tariffs
The Belfast East MP asked whether government trade teams are attempting to exempt Northern Ireland from any EU action.
Sir Keir reacted by saying what is needed is to be “calm and pragmatic”.
He added the business secretary had spoken to the Northern Ireland government on Wednesday morning, “because this is a serious issue and we need to work together to resolve the interests of everybody in Northern Ireland”.
Last week, Mr Trump said he was open to carving out deals with countries seeking to avoid US tariffs, but those agreements would be negotiated after 2 April.
He previously said he “may give a lot of countries breaks, but it’s reciprocal”, adding: “We might be even nicer than that.”
Politics
More than 400 Sikh groups call on Starmer to launch ‘promised’ inquiry on Golden Temple massacre
More than 400 Gurdwaras and Sikh organisations are calling on Sir Keir Starmer to launch an inquiry he promised into potential British involvement in the Golden Temple Massacre.
The groups have signed a letter that was sent to the prime minister urging him to follow through on a commitment made in 2022.
The calls relate to questions around what part the UK and British special forces played in the 1984 killings, in which hundreds of Sikhs died after the Indian military entered the temple complex where separatists had sought refuge.
Politics latest: PM admits ‘pressures’ as bills rise
In 2014, the UK government accidentally revealed Margaret Thatcher was aware of the Indian state’s intention to raid the temple and in the months before the raid, a British SAS officer provided advice to the Indian government.
A subsequent investigation commissioned by David Cameron found that a single officer provided advice – and there was “no evidence of UK government involvement in the operation itself”.
However, this investigation was criticised as a cover-up due to its limited scope and quick timeframe.
In 2022, Sir Keir wrote to all Gurdwaras and Sikh organisations, saying: “A future Labour government will open an independent inquiry into Britain’s military role in the Indian army’s 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar. It is important that we are open, transparent and above reproach in understanding any role the UK may have played in such events.
“This is something I know is important to our Sikh communities here and throughout the world.”
However, an announcement on the inquiry is yet to materialise.
In the letter sent to the prime minister by the Sikh Federation, seen by Sky News, Sir Keir is told: “If what is eventually proposed by a Labour government fails to deliver the ‘truth’ as promised by you this will have massive political ramifications for the Sikh community’s support for Labour in future elections for many generations.”
The federation says an inquiry “must” be announced by 31 May.
Read more:
Groups ‘disappointed’ by silence on massacre
Sikh Activists fear for their life
Sikh campaigners want Starmer to keep his word. Pic: PA
In a letter to Labour MPs, the Sikh Federation also called on them to put pressure on the government to start an inquiry.
The organisation also said it had heard “extremely worrying rumours” that the Foreign, Commonwealth And Development Office has been under pressure from the Indian government to “avoid or limit” an independent inquiry.
It added: “Civil servants are understood to be advising that a public inquiry is expensive and could damage relations with India.”
The UK is currently trying to negotiate a new trade agreement with India in the wake of Brexit. Attempts by the Conservative government failed due to a difference in position over visas.
There is a campaign among some in the Sikh community for an independent nation to be established – known as Khalistan – out of parts of the Punjab region in northern India.
👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈
These efforts are strongly opposed by Narendra Modhi’s Hindu nationalist BJP movement.
The FCDO and Downing Street have been approached for comment.
-
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