Rishi Sunak ‘crystal clear’ he will ‘ignore’ international law to get asylum seekers sent to Rwanda

Published

10 months ago

January 18, 2024

admin

Rishi Sunak has insisted he will “ignore” international law in order to ensure asylum seekers get deported to Rwanda.

The prime minister managed to get his controversial policy through its latest parliamentary stage last night after days of rebellions from Conservative MPs, who want to see the bill toughened up.

But despite two rebel sources telling Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby that ‘no confidence’ letters had now been submitted over his leadership, he insisted his party was “completely united in wanting to stop the boats”.

Mr Sunak also claimed his plan to stop small boat crossings in the Channel was “working” – despite government figures showing a further 358 asylum seekers arrived in the UK on Wednesday.

Politics live: Sunak warns peers not to ‘frustrate will of the people’

Government legal advice states that failing to comply with so-called section 39 orders from European courts – used previously to stop deportation flights taking off before additional court hearings – would be a breach of international law.

Rule 39 orders are issued by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on an exceptional basis, where there is a “real risk of serious and irreversible harm”.

Asked a press conference whether he would be willing to ignore such rulings, Mr Sunak said: “I’ve been crystal clear repeatedly that I won’t let a foreign court stop us from getting flights off and getting this deterrent up and running.

“The bill specifically contains a power that makes clear that ministers are the ones that make these decisions. Parliament has supported that.

“[The bill also] makes it perfectly clear that the domestic courts should respect that decision.”

He added: “I would not have put that clause in the bill if I was not prepared to use it. So, look, if you’re asking me are there circumstances in which I will ignore rule 39, then answer is clearly yes.”

The prime minister insisted at the end of last year that the first flights to Rwanda would take off “in the spring”.

Asked if this was still the case, Mr Sunak said: “I want to see this happen as soon as practically possible. Of course I do.”

But he threw the deadline to the House of Lords – where the bill will face its next round of scrutiny and is expected to be bitterly opposed by numerous peers.

He said: “The question is will the House of Lords understand the country’s frustration, see the will of the elected House [the Commons] and move as quickly as we have to support this legislation so we can it on the statue books and then get flights up and running?”

The prime minister also said he was “proud of the progress” the government had made on tackling small boat crossings, and claimed his plan was “working” – albeit admitting there was “not one single silver bullet that will fix it”.

But shortly after the press conference, the latest statistics showed 358 people in eight boats had made the dangerous journey to the UK shore alone on Tuesday, bring the total for 2024 so far to 621.

Sunak ignores party drama to focus ire on the Lords

Amanda Akass

Political correspondent

@amandaakass

The prime minister began his press conference by attempting to dismiss all the drama and debate of the past few days – the questions about his leadership, the doubts the policy would work – with the optimistic claim “the Conservative Party has come together.”

That’s highly debatable on a morning in which rebels are claiming to have submitted ‘several’ letters of no confidence.

Rather than dwelling on the internal divisions within his party, however, he optimistically wanted to project himself as a man intent on tackling the “biggest challenges that face the country”, that he’s getting on with the job, and that his plan is working.

But the key focus was to lecture the House of Lords on the importance of passing the legislation as soon as possible – urging them to “get on board and do the right thing” and “move as quickly as we have” – stressing the “appointed” nature of members of the Upper House compared to the “elected” Commons.

He’s singling out the “opposition” in the Lords – and while it’s true that Labour categorically oppose the plan, it’s worth remembering the last time the scheme was debated there, the most stinging criticism came from the archbishops and law lords, who are non-affiliated.

While you’d expect a Conservative prime minister to focus his attacks on Labour for “sniping from the side-lines” of his policy, taking on the Lords more broadly is an odd strategy.

Some of the language used – suggesting they might “try and frustrate the will of the people” – was reminiscent of the Brexiteer condemnation of Supreme Court judges as “enemies of the people”.

Mr Sunak has found it hard enough to keep his MPs on board. He certainly doesn’t have the same power over the Lords – but he’s come out fighting.

It seems he is pre-emptively seeking to blame the Lords for any further delay to the plan too.

Repeatedly asked by journalists whether he’s sticking to his pledge to see deportation flights taking off by the spring, he was unable to repeat that previous commitment – indeed, he wasn’t even able to say planes would take off before the next general election, which seems likely to be in the Autumn.

The controversial Rwanda bill is designed to send asylum seekers arriving in the UK on small boats to the African nation, and act as a deterrent to others from making Channel crossings.

Around 60 Tory MPs defied the government by voting for amendments to toughen up the law – including proposals to limit appeals and stop interventions against deportation flights from international courts.

But none of the changes were approved in the Commons, and when it came to a vote on the bill in its entirety, only 11 Conservatives – including former home secretary Suella Braverman and ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick – chose to rebel.

In fact, several of the prominent figures who publicly argued the legislation needed to be tougher fell into line when the crunch vote came late last night – with two MPs who resigned their party posts in order to back rebel amendments walking through the yes lobby.

However, Ms Braverman, who was fired as home secretary in Mr Sunak’s last reshuffle, posted on X that the Rwanda bill would “not stop the boats” in its current form and “leaves us exposed to litigation and the Strasbourg court”.

She added: “I engaged with the government to fix it but no changes were made. I could not vote for yet another law destined to fail.”

Despite overcoming disquiet on his backbenches, Mr Sunak is not out of the woods yet, with Tory rebel sources telling Sky News’s political editor Beth Rigby that “several” MPs had submitted no confidence letters in the prime minister as a result of the internal row.

Asked by Sky News what his message was to those Tories who had voted down his bill in parliament last night, Mr Sunak said: “The plan is working right across the board. You can see that progress is being made. And our job is to stick to that plan, deliver for the country.”

UK

UK economy grows by 0.1% between July and September – slower than expected

Published

31 mins ago

November 15, 2024

admin

UK economy grows by 0.1% between July and September - slower than expected

The UK economy grew by 0.1% between July and September, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS).

However, despite the small positive GDP growth recorded in the third quarter, the economy shrank by 0.1% in September, dragging down overall growth for the quarter.

The growth was also slower than what had been expected by experts and a drop from the 0.5% growth between April and June, the ONS said.

Economists polled by Reuters and the Bank of England had forecast an expansion of 0.2%, slowing from the rapid growth seen over the first half of 2024 when the economy was rebounding from last year’s shallow recession.

And the metric that Labour has said it is most focused on – the GDP per capita, or the economic output divided by the number of people in the country – also fell by 0.1%.

Reacting to the figures, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said: “Improving economic growth is at the heart of everything I am seeking to achieve, which is why I am not satisfied with these numbers.

“At my budget, I took the difficult choices to fix the foundations and stabilise our public finances.

“Now we are going to deliver growth through investment and reform to create more jobs and more money in people’s pockets, get the NHS back on its feet, rebuild Britain and secure our borders in a decade of national renewal,” Ms Reeves added.

The sluggish services sector – which makes up the bulk of the British economy – was a particular drag on growth over the past three months. It expanded by 0.1%, cancelling out the 0.8% growth in the construction sector.

The UK’s GDP for the most recent quarter is lower than the 0.7% growth in the US and 0.4% in the Eurozone.

The figures have pushed the UK towards the bottom of the G7 growth table for the third quarter of the year.

It was expected to meet the same 0.2% growth figures reported in Germany and Japan – but fell below that after a slow September.

The pound remained stable following the news, hovering around $1.267. The FTSE 100, meanwhile, opened the day down by 0.4%.

The Bank of England last week predicted that Ms Reeves’s first budget as chancellor will increase inflation by up to half a percentage point over the next two years, contributing to a slower decline in interest rates than previously thought.

Announcing a widely anticipated 0.25 percentage point cut in the base rate to 4.75%, the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) forecast that inflation will return “sustainably” to its target of 2% in the first half of 2027, a year later than at its last meeting.

The Bank’s quarterly report found Ms Reeves’s £70bn package of tax and borrowing measures will place upward pressure on prices, as well as delivering a three-quarter point increase to GDP next year.

UK

Meeting the deeply radical anti-tax group that is ‘growing in popularity’

Published

31 mins ago

November 15, 2024

admin

Meeting the deeply radical anti-tax group that is 'growing in popularity'

“If you are a member of something, it means you’ve accepted membership. Anything with ‘ship’ on the end, it’s giving you a clue: it’s telling you that’s maritime law. That means you’ve entered into a contract.”

This isn’t your standard legal argument and it is becoming clear that I am dealing with an unusual way of looking at the world.

I’m in the library of a hotel in Leicestershire, a wood-panelled room with warm lighting, and Pete Stone, better known as Sovereign Pete, is explaining how “the system” works. Mr Stone is in his mid-50, bald with a goatee beard and wearing, as he always does for public appearances, a black T-shirt and black jeans.

With us are six other people, mainly dressed in neat jumpers. They’re members of the Sovereign Project (SP), an organisation Mr Stone founded in 2020, which, he says, now has more than 20,000 paying members.

As arcane as this may sound, it represents a worldview that is becoming more influential – and causing problems for authorities. Loosely, they’re defined as “sovereign citizens” or “freemen on the land”.

Their fundamental point is that nobody is required to obey laws they have not specifically consented to – especially when it comes to tax. They have hundreds of thousands of followers in the UK across platforms including YouTube, Facebook and Telegram.

Increasingly, they are coming into conflict with governments and the law. Sovereign citizens have ended up in the High Court in recent months, challenging the legalities of tax bills and losing on both occasions.

In October, four people were sentenced to prison for the attempted kidnapping of an Essex coroner, who they saw as acting unlawfully. The self-appointed “sheriffs” attempted to force entry to the court, one of them demanding: “You guys have been practising fraud!”

The Sovereign Project is not connected to any of those cases, nor does it promote any sort of political action, let alone violence.

Instead, they are focused on issues like questioning the obligation to pay taxes, as Mr Stone explains, referencing the feudal system that operated in the Middle Ages.

“Do you know about the feudal system when people were slaves and were forced to pay tax?” he asks.

“Now, unless the feudal system still operates today, and we still have serfs and slaves, then the only way that you can pay taxes is to have a contract, you have to agree to it and consent to it.”

Another member, Karl Deans, a 43-year-old property developer who runs the SP’s social media, says: “We’re not here to dodge tax.”

Local government tends to be a target beyond just demands for tax. Mr Stone speaks of “council employee crimes”.

I ask whether, considering the attempted kidnapping in Essex, there is a danger that people will listen to these accusations of crimes by councils and act on them.

“Well that’s proved,” Mr Stone says. “We only deal with facts.”

Evidence suggests this approach is becoming an issue for councils across the UK, as people search online for ways to avoid paying tax.

Sky News analysis shows that out of 374 council websites covering Great Britain, at least 172 (46%) have pages responding to sovereign citizen arguments around avoiding paying council tax. They point out that liability for council tax is not dependent on consent, or a contract, and instead relies on the Local Government Finance Act 1992, voted on by Parliament.

But the Sovereign Project’s worldview extends beyond council tax. It is deeply anti-establishment, at times conspiratorial. Stone suggests the summer riots may have been organised by the government.

“The sovereign fraternity operates above all of this,” he says. “We look down at the world like a chessboard. We see what’s going on.”

He explains that, really, the UK government isn’t actually in control: there is a shadow government above them.

“These are the people who control government,” he explains.

“A lot of people say this could be the crown council of 13, this could be a series of Italian families.”

Professor Christine Sarteschi, an expert in sovereign citizens at Chatham University, Pittsburgh, says she’s worried about the threat sovereign citizens may pose to the rule of law, especially in the US where guns are readily available.

“The movement is growing and that’s evidenced by seeing it in different countries and hearing about different cases. The concern is that they will become emboldened and commit acts of violence,” she says.

“Because sovereigns truly believe in their ideas and if they feel very aggrieved by, you know, the government or whomever they think is oppressing them or controlling them… they can become emotionally involved.

“That emotional involvement sometimes leads to violence in some cases, or the belief that they have the power to attempt to overthrow a government in some capacity.”

Much of this seems to be based on an underlying and familiar frustration at the state of this country and of the world.

Mr Stone echoes some of the characteristic arguments also made by the right, that there is “two-tier policing”, that refugees arriving in the UK are “young men of fighting age”, that the government is using “forced immigration to destroy the country”.

Another SP member, retired investment banker David Hopgood, 61, says: “I firmly believe it is the true Englishman – and woman – of this country – that has the power to unlock this madness that’s happening in the West.

“We’ve got the Magna Carta – all these checks and balances. We just need to pack up, go down to Parliament and say: It’s time to dismiss you. You’re not fit for purpose.”

The members of the Sovereign Project are unfailingly patient and polite in explaining their understanding of the world.

But there is no doubt they hold a deeply radical view, one that is apparently growing in popularity.

UK

Wes Streeting ‘crossed the line’ by opposing assisted dying in public, says Labour peer Harriet Harman

Published

31 mins ago

November 15, 2024

admin

Wes Streeting 'crossed the line' by opposing assisted dying in public, says Labour peer Harriet Harman

Wes Streeting “crossed the line” by opposing assisted dying in public and the argument shouldn’t “come down to resources”, a Labour peer has said.

Speaking on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Baroness Harriet Harman criticised the health secretary for revealing how he is going to vote on the matter when it comes before parliament later this month.

MPs are being given a free vote, meaning they can side with their conscience and not party lines, so the government is supposed to be staying neutral.

But Mr Streeting has made clear he will vote against legalising assisted dying, citing concerns end-of-life care is not good enough for people to make an informed choice, and that some could feel pressured into the decision to save the NHS money.

He has also ordered a review into the potential costs of changing the law, warning it could come at the expense of other NHS services if implemented.

Baroness Harman said Mr Streeting has “crossed the line in two ways”.

👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈

“He should not have said how he was going to vote, because that breaches neutrality and sends a signal,” she said.

“And secondly… he’s said the problem is that it will cost money to bring in an assisted dying measure, and therefore he will have to cut other services.

“But paradoxically, he also said it would be a slippery slope because people will be forced to bring about their own death in order to save the NHS money. Well, it can’t be doing both things.

“It can’t be both costing the NHS money and saving the NHS money.”

Baroness Harman said the argument “should not come down to resources” as it is a “huge moral issue” affecting “only a tiny number of people”.

She added that people should not mistake Mr Streeting for being “a kind of proxy for Keir Starmer”.

“The government is genuinely neutral and all of those backbenchers, they can vote whichever way they want,” she added.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously expressed support for assisted dying, but it is not clear how he intends to vote on the issue or if he will make his decision public ahead of time.

The cabinet has varying views on the topic, with the likes of Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood siding with Mr Streeting in her opposition but Energy Secretary Ed Miliband being for it.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is being championed by Labour backbencher Kim Leadbeater, who wants to give people with six months left to live the choice to end their lives.

Under her proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.

The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.

MPs will debate and vote on the legislation on 29 November, in what will be the first Commons vote on assisted dying since 2015, when the proposal was defeated.