MPs Critique Conservative Efforts to Sustain the Controversial Rwanda Law

Members of Parliament criticized the Conservative Party’s attempt to save the Rwanda law, which has been labeled ineffective and costly. The law, linked to asylum seeker deportations, failed to deter crossings despite an estimated £700 million expenditure. Labour and SNP MPs condemned the initiative, asserting accountability and highlighting humanitarian concerns in Rwanda.

Members of Parliament (MPs) have openly criticized the Conservative Party for its failed attempt to maintain the contentious Rwanda law, which government officials have described as “hare-brained.” Labour Minister Dame Angela Eagle accused the Conservatives of existing in a “fantasy land” following an amendment proposed by Conservative frontbencher Matt Vickers, which was rejected by a significant margin. The Rwanda scheme, intended to deter small boat crossings, has been deemed costly and ineffective, spending over £700 million while only securing four volunteers for the initiative.

The cross-party committee voted against Mr. Vickers’ amendment by a margin of 11 to 3. SNP MP Pete Wishart expressed his discontent, stating that instead of attempting to revive the scheme, the Tories should be apologizing and ensuring such reckless proposals do not arise again. He criticized the Conservatives for their audacity in trying to reinstate the Act, highlighting the ongoing humanitarian issues in Rwanda.

The Safety of Rwanda Act was initially legislated following a ruling from the Supreme Court that prevented asylum seekers from being sent to Rwanda. Overshadowing this initiative is the UK’s condemnation of Rwanda due to its alleged involvement in fueling regional conflicts, particularly with accusations of supporting militia groups involved in severe human rights violations. Mr. Wishart further criticized the Tories, claiming they were naïve in believing Rwanda could be deemed a safe country.

Labour MP Kenneth Stevenson condemned the continued spending linked to the Rwanda scheme, describing it as a series of ongoing mistakes made by the Conservative Party. He lamented the lack of accountability for the funds wasted on this ineffective initiative, reiterating concerns expressed by fellow party members. Mr. Vickers defended the program, asserting it was the only means to deter dangerous crossings by small boats, while Tory MP Katie Lam acknowledged the previous government’s genuine attempts to solve complex issues surrounding immigration.

Dame Angela Eagle raised alarm over the significant number of crossings to the UK since the announcement of the Rwanda scheme, attributing this to its impending failure. Dover MP Mike Tapp, from the Labour Party, further condemned the initiative as a “legal and moral dead end.” The future repeal of the Act is set under Labour’s proposed Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently under review.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy accused the Rwandan government of acting in violation of international law, suggesting that its actions could potentially destabilize the region. His statements align with previous reports indicating that government officials were preparing for possible conflict in Rwanda while the Tories maintained it was a secure destination. Mr. Lammy has since announced the cessation of bilateral aid to Rwanda, stressing that further violations would not go unaddressed and could lead to serious consequences.

The attempt by the Conservative Party to retain the Rwanda law has faced overwhelming criticism from MPs who argue it represents a long history of ineffective legislation. Labour and SNP MPs have challenged the integrity and rationale behind this initiative, highlighting its costly failure and arguing for accountability. The ongoing scrutiny of this Act within the context of humanitarian emergencies further emphasizes the need for responsible governance in addressing immigration issues in the UK.

Original Source: www.mirror.co.uk