Labour claims appeal court ruling shows Rwanda policy ‘completely unravelling’ – UK politics live

Penny Mordaunt, the leader of the Commons, told MPs this morning that they would get a chance to debate the privileges committee’s report about interference with its Boris Johnson inquiry on Monday 10 July. She said the fact that a debate had been scheduled a debate showed “how seriously the government takes these matters of privilege”.

At the Downing Street lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson was unable to say “this far in advance” whether Rishi Sunak would be attending the debate, or voting.

Asked if the PM still had confidence in Zac Goldsmith, the only serving minister named in the report as one of those Tories who undermined the inquiry’s work, the spokesperson said he did.

Asked if the PM was relaxed about what Lord Goldsmith had done, the spokesperson said Sunak had spoken publicly about how he supported and respected the work of the committee.

In its report, the committee criticises Goldsmith for retweeting a tweet, on the day Boris Johnson announced his resignation as an MP, calling its inquiry into him a witch-hunt and a kangaroo court. Goldsmith also said:

Exactly this. There was only ever going to be one outcome and the evidence was totally irrelevant to it.

It is also worth highlighting the final paragraph of Rishi Sunak’s statement. (See 12.26pm.)

The policy of this government is very simple: it is this country – and your government – who should decide who comes here, not criminal gangs. And I will do whatever is necessary to make that happen.

There is a debate within the Conservative party over whether or not it should consider withdrawing from the European convention on human rights to enable the government to deport asylum seekers without risk of legal challenge. Suella Braverman, the home secretary, has called for this publicly in the past, and there is a smallish cohort of Tory backbenchers who strongly agree.

Rishi Sunak has been more equivocal. In the past he has suggested there is no need for Britain to leave the convention, but he has not ruled out the idea, and the line in his statement today about being willing to do “whatever is necessary” to ensure the UK controls its borders will encourage those Conservatives who want him to move in this direction.

Some in the party want to turn this into an issue at the next general election.

Rishi Sunak has just issued a statement saying that he “fundamentally” disagrees with the court of appeal’s ruling on the Rwanda policy. He has confirmed that the government will appeal to the supreme court.

Here is the statement in full.

While I respect the court I fundamentally disagree with their conclusions.

I strongly believe the Rwandan government has provided the assurances necessary to ensure there is no real risk that asylum seekers relocated under the Rwanda policy would be wrongly returned to third countries – something that the lord chief justice agrees with.

Rwanda is a safe country. The high court agreed. The UNHCR have their own refugee scheme for Libyan refugees in Rwanda. We will now seek permission to appeal this decision to the supreme court.

The policy of this government is very simple: it is this country – and your government – who should decide who comes here, not criminal gangs. And I will do whatever is necessary to make that happen.

Labour claims appeal court ruling shows Rwanda policy ‘completely unravelling’

Ben Quinn

Labour says the court of appeal ruling today shows the government’s policy on so-called small boats is “completely unravelling”. In a statement Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said:

Today’s judgment shows that Rishi Sunak has no plan to fix the Tories’ small boats chaos and his only idea is completely unravelling.

Ministers were forced to admit this week that it will cost £169,000 to send each person to Rwanda on top of the £140m of taxpayers’ money they have already spent. Now the court has found that ministers didn’t even do the basic work to make sure the scheme was legal or safe.

Time and again, ministers have gone for gimmicks instead of getting a grip, and slogans instead of solutions, while the Tory boats chaos has got worse. The Rwanda scheme is unworkable, unethical and extortionate, a costly and damaging distraction from the urgent action the government should be taking.

They should now put that money into Labour’s plan to go after the criminal gangs, clear the asylum backlog and stop dangerous boat crossings that are undermining our border security and putting lives at risk.

Cooper will be facing Suella Braverman, the home secretary, in the Commons later when Braverman makes a statement on the court of appeal ruling. It is now expected around 3.30pm.

Labour is challenging Rishi Sunak to condemn the Tory MPs and peers criticised in today’s privileges committee report. (See 9.19am.) In a statement on it, Thangam Debbonaire, the shadow leader of the Commons, accused him of allowing them “to undermine and attack Britain’s democratic institutions”. She said:

Rishi Sunak has allowed senior members of his own party to undermine and attack Britain’s democratic institutions. This includes a serving government minister and two former cabinet ministers.

It’s yet another example of the prime minister’s weakness and failure to hold his own ministers to high standards that Zac Goldsmith is still a government minister.

It’s time Rishi Sunak condemned his Conservative colleagues who have sought to override parliament’s standards system to get one of their own off the hook. He must accept the committee’s damming conclusions and make time for MPs to approve the report in full.

Campaigners welcome appeal court ruling on Rwanda policy

Diane Taylor

The court of appeal judgment has been welcomed by campaigners and charities who work with asylum seekers. Here are some of the their comments.

From Alison Pickup, director of Asylum Aid (which was one of the parties involved in the appeal):

We are delighted that the court of appeal has upheld the argument that Rwanda is not a safe country for asylum seekers. While we are disappointed that the court has held that the process can be made fair, we are pleased that it has not upheld the high court’s judgment and has made it clear that the government needs to ensure that Home Office officials give people more time when they need it.

From Detention Action (which was involved in the original high court case, but not the appeal):

We are relieved that the UK’s court of appeal has recognised the unlawfulness of this government’s controversial and dangerous deal with the Rwandan regime … The intervention of the court proves that in the UK we still recognise our responsibility to protect people seeking asylum, even if the home secretary does not.

From Sonya Sceats, chief executive of Freedom from Torture (which was represented at the appeal hearing):

This is a victory for reason and compassion … As we outlined in our intervention in the court of appeal, this dirty deal with Rwanda does too little to identify and protect survivors and other vulnerable groups and would see them placed at risk of further harm.

From Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council:

We are relieved that the court of appeal has ruled that Rwanda is not a safe country for people who claim asylum. However, we’re disappointed that they have not concluded that the overall policy is unlawful.

Let’s remember that the UK made an international commitment under the refugee convention to provide a safe haven for those fleeing for their lives who seek protection on our soil.

From Sacha Deshmukh, Amnesty International UK’s chief executive:

This judgment is very welcome, but it can’t undo the enormous suffering, harm and expense already caused by the government’s long and reckless pursuit of a patently unjust scheme.

From Aisha Dodwell, head of campaigns for the Catholic aid agency Cafod:

It is time for the government to look again at its shameful policy and its treatment of migrants and refugees. As Pope Francis has made clear, the world needs to show maximum respect for the dignity of each migrant by building bridges, not walls, as well as providing routes for safe and regular migration.

Rwanda ruling highlights possible need for UK to leave ECHR, says former Tory cabinet minster

Ben Quinn

The ruling of the court of appeal on Rwanda was described as “deeply disappointing” by the Tory MP and former levelling up secretary Sir Simon Clarke, who said he would anticipate “an immediate appeal” to the supreme court.

“We have to be able to control our borders. If the ECHR continues to forestall this, we have to revisit the question of our membership,” he added, referring to the European convention on human rights, cited in the judgment today as the reason for the Rwanda policy being unlawful. (See 10.29am.)

Some Tories want the UK to leave the ECHR, to remove legal objections to the deportation of asylum seekers, and some MPs want the party to make this a manifesto proposal at the next election.

Other rightwingers were also critical of the ruling. Nigel Farage, the former Ukip and then Brexit party leader, said the judiciary would “always do their best to assist illegal immigration”.

And Richard Tice, leader of Reform UK (the successor to the Brexit party), said the ruling was “disgraceful”.