Connect with us

Published

on

Liberal Democrat peers are poised to ignore a convention dating back to Gladstone’s day to stage a protest against the Rwanda bill in the House of Lords.

The Lib Dem group has announced that its 80 peers will vote against the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill at its second reading next Monday.

It’s a highly unusual move and won’t win support from Labour peers, who regard such tactics as a publicity stunt used by smaller parties like the Lib Dems to gain media coverage.

Politics latest:
Red Sea crisis ‘may get more tricky’

And Downing Street is urging peers “not to frustrate the will of the people”, claiming that as the Rwanda bill has the support of the Commons it should be passed by the Lords.

Traditionally, opposition parties don’t vote against government bills at second reading in the Lords, but instead move amendments at committee stage which are then voted on at report stage.

But the Liberal Democrats claim that since the Rwanda policy wasn’t in the Conservative general election manifesto, the convention supported by Labour and the Tories doesn’t apply.

More on Conservatives

Last year, the Lib Dems moved a motion to “decline” the government’s Illegal Migration Bill at its second reading in the Lords. That was rejected by 179 votes to 76 and a similar result is likely this time.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sunak warns Lords over Rwanda Bill

The deal between the major parties is known as the Salisbury-Addison Convention, which evolved because of big Conservative majorities in the House of Lords during Liberal and Labour governments.

Lord Salisbury was Conservative prime minister in the 1880s and 90s, before and after Liberal giant William Gladstone, and Lord Addison was Labour leader in the Lords after Clement Attlee’s 1945 general election landslide.

But a government defeat in the Lords this week, on a motion to delay ratifying the Rwanda treaty until safeguards have been implemented, has emboldened the Lib Dems to defy the convention again.

In a defeat that spells trouble for Rishi Sunak, peers voted by 214 votes to 171, a hefty majority of 43, in favour of calls for protections to be introduced before deportation flights can take off for Rwanda.

Read more:
Rwanda plan suffers first defeat in House of Lords
Path to plan success harder after symbolic Lords defeat

What is the plan and why is it controversial?
How policy became a leadership issue for Sunak

Revealing the Lib Dems’ intention to vote against the bill, a spokesperson told Sky News: “From the beginning, Liberal Democrats have been clear: We have no faith in the Conservatives’ failing Rwanda scheme.

“It’s totally unworkable and extortionately expensive for the taxpayer. Of course, we all want to stop boat crossings in the channel, but this policy will do nothing of the sort.

“So much time and money has already been wasted, with nothing to show for it. Instead, we want a long-term sustainable solution, which must include an efficient processing system to clear the asylum backlog, and safe and legal routes for refugees.

“We have opposed the bill every step of the way, voting against it at every stage in the Commons. It should be no surprise that our strategy will be the same in the Lords.”

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

A party source added: “The Rwanda bill is not a manifesto bill. We wouldn’t be voting against it if was in a manifesto. And the convention was a pact between the Tories and Labour. We’re not formally a party to it.

“We voted against the Illegal Migration Bill at second reading and we feel the same way about the Rwanda bill. Since the Lords voted against the treaty this week it makes logical sense to vote against the bill as well.”

But a Labour source told Sky News: “No. We’re not backing it. Why would we stop abiding by our long-term commitment to the Salisbury-Addison convention?

“The whole thing of trying to stop a second reading is obviously a way of a smaller party getting some coverage for something that won’t happen.”

Reacting to the defeat on the Rwanda treaty and looking ahead to the bill’s second reading, a Number 10 Downing Street source told Sky News: “It’s disappointing, but Labour are once again voting against our plans to stop the boats.

“We urge the Lords not to frustrate the will of the people.

“This is the toughest legislation ever introduced in Parliament to tackle illegal migration and makes clear that if you come here illegally you will not be able to stay.

“The bill has the support of the Commons, it is now in the House of Lords. We need to get this through to ensure we get flights off to Rwanda, deter people from making perilous journeys across the Channel and stop the boats.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Ethereum gaming network Xai sues Musk’s xAI for trademark infringement

Published

on

By

Ethereum gaming network Xai sues Musk’s xAI for trademark infringement

Ethereum gaming network Xai sues Musk’s xAI for trademark infringement

Ethereum gaming network Xai claims Elon Musk’s AI firm xAI has caused market confusion and reputational harm.

Continue Reading

Politics

Fast-track asylum appeals process to be introduced – as average time for decisions is more than one year

Published

on

By

Fast-track asylum appeals process to be introduced - as average time for decisions is more than one year

A new fast-track asylum appeals process will be introduced to speed up the process of deporting people without a right to remain in the UK, the home secretary has said.

As it currently takes, on average, more than a year to reach a decision on asylum appeals, the government plans to set up a new independent panel focused on asylum appeals to help reduce the backlog.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said “completely unacceptable” delays in the appeals process left failed asylum seekers in the system for years.

There are about 51,000 asylum appeals waiting to be heard.

The new independent body will use professionally-trained adjudicators, rather than relying on judges.

Ministers are introducing a new 24-week deadline for the first-tier tribunal to determine asylum appeals by those receiving accommodation support and appeals by foreign offenders.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Police clash with protesters in Bristol

But they believe the current tribunal system, which covers a wide range of different cases, is still failing to ensure failed asylum seekers can be returned as swiftly as possible, nor can it accommodate a fast-track system for safe countries.

More on Asylum

It comes amid protests about the use of hotel accommodation for migrants.

The home secretary said the overhaul would result in a system which is “swift, fair and independent, with high standards in place”.

Read more from Sky News:
UK set to bask in 30C sunshine over bank holiday weekend
Coca-Cola brews up sale of high street coffee giant Costa

She said: “We inherited an asylum system in complete chaos with a soaring backlog of asylum cases and a broken appeals system with thousands of people in the system for years on end.

“That is why we are taking practical steps to fix the foundations and restore control and order to the system.

“We are determined to substantially reduce the number of people in the asylum system as part of our plan to end asylum hotels.

“Already since the election, we have reduced the backlog of people waiting for initial decisions by 24% and increased failed asylum returns by 30%.

“But we cannot carry on with these completely unacceptable delays in appeals as a result of the system we have inherited which mean that failed asylum seekers stay in the system for years on end at huge cost to the taxpayer.”

Official figures released earlier this month showed a total of 111,084 people applied for asylum in the UK in the year to June 2025, the highest number for any 12-month period since current records began in 2001.

Continue Reading

Politics

Reform UK’s new immigration plans would have been seen as extreme just a few years ago

Published

on

By

Reform UK's new immigration plans would've been extreme just a few years ago

Mass deportations. Prison camps. Quitting the Refugee Convention and the UN Convention on Torture.

A shrug of the shoulders at the idea of the UK sending asylum seekers back to places like Afghanistan or Eritrea, where they could be tortured or executed.

“I’m really sorry, but we can’t be responsible for everything that happens in the whole of the world,” says Nigel Farage.

“Who is our priority?”

The Reform UK leader has been setting out his party’s new plans to address illegal migration in an interview with The Times newspaper – a set of policies, and a use of language, which would surely have been seen as extreme just a few years ago.

Only last autumn the Reform leader repeatedly shied away from the concept of “mass deportations”, describing the idea as “a political impossibility”.

But now he’s embraced Trump-style immigration rhetoric.

More on Asylum

It’s not surprising that Reform want to capitalise on the outpouring of public anger over the use of hotels to house asylum seekers. The policy was started by the previous Conservative government, in response to housing shortages – and Labour has failed to make significant progress on its promise to stop it.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Asylum hotel protests set to rise

But all the major parties have shifted firmly to the right on this issue.

There’s been very little political criticism of the aggressiveness of Farage’s policy suggestions, and the premise that the UK should no longer offer sanctuary to anyone who arrives here illegally.

The Tory response has been to complain that he’s just copying the ideas they didn’t quite get round to implementing before calling the general election.

“Four months late, this big reveal is just recycling many ideas the Conservatives have already announced,” said Chris Philp MP, the shadow home secretary.

“Labour’s border crisis does urgently need to be fixed with tough and radical measures, but only the Conservatives have done – and will continue to do – the detailed work to deliver a credible plan that will actually work in practice.”

Read more from Sky News:
Menendez brothers denied parole – but they could still taste freedom

Five killed after tour bus returning from Niagara Falls crashes

Certainly, the ambition to arrest and deport everyone who arrives in a small boat – regardless of whether or not they have legitimate grounds for asylum – has clear echoes of the Tories’ Rwanda policy.

Despite spending £700m on the controversial idea, only four volunteers were ever sent to Kigali before it was cancelled by Sir Keir Starmer, who branded it a gimmick.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Reform putting ‘wheels in motion’ for migrant hotel legal challenges

Labour have suggested they’ve diverted Home Office resources that were freed up by that decision into processing asylum claims more quickly and increasing deportations.

They’re hoping tougher action against the criminal gangs and the new “one in one out” deal with France will help deter the number of people crossing the Channel in small boats in the first place, currently at record levels.

But rather than offering any defence of the principle of offering asylum to genuine refugees – Labour’s Angela Eagle MP, the border security minister, has also focused on the feasibility of Farage’s policies.

“Nigel Farage is simply plucking numbers out of the air, another pie in the sky policy from a party that will say anything for a headline,” she said.

“We are getting a grip of the broken asylum system. Making sure those with no right to be here are removed or deported.”

Even the Liberal Democrats have taken a similar approach.

“This plan sums up Nigel Farage perfectly, as like him it doesn’t offer any real solutions,” they said.

“Whilst Farage continues to stoke division, we Liberal Democrats are more interested in delivering for our local communities.”

It’s been left to the Refugee Council to defend the principle of asylum.

“After the horrors of the Second World War, Britain and its allies committed to protecting those fleeing persecution,” said CEO Enver Solomon.

“The Refugee Convention was our collective vow of ‘never again’ – a legal framework ensuring that people who come to our country seeking safety get a fair chance to apply for asylum.

“That commitment remains vital today. Whether escaping conflict in Sudan or repression under regimes like the Taliban, people still need protection.

“Most find refuge in neighbouring countries. But some will seek sanctuary in Europe, including Britain.

“We can meet this challenge by upholding a fair, managed system that determines who qualifies for protection and who does not.”

But with Reform leading in the polls, and protests outside hotels across the country – politicians of all stripes are under pressure to respond to public frustration over the issue.

A recent YouGov poll found half of voters now believe immigration over the last ten years has been mostly bad for the country – double the figure just three years ago.

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

While the government has made some progress in reducing the cost of asylum hotels – down from £8.3m a day in 2023/4 to £5.77m a day in 2024/5 – the overall numbers accommodated in this way have gone up by 8% since Labour took charge, thanks to the surge in new claims.

Sir Keir has previously said he won’t make a promise he can’t keep.

But current efforts to end the use of asylum hotels by 2029 are clearly not working.

That’s a credibility gap Farage is more than ready to exploit.

Continue Reading

Trending