The Archbishop of Canterbury will make a rare intervention to condemn Suella Braverman’s Illegal Migration Bill as it faces its first test in the House of Lords.
Justin Welby is set to speak out against the legislation aimed at detaining and swiftly removing those who arrive in small boats, either to their home country or a third country such as Rwanda.
The intervention would mark Rev Welby’s second major rebuke of government policy on asylum seekers – having warned last year against “harmful rhetoric” that treats small boat arrivals “invaders”.
Ahead of the legislation returning to the Lords, the home secretary warned peers not to stand in the way of the “will of the British people” by blocking the Rishi Sunak government’s migration policies.
Writing in The Times, Ms Braverman and justice secretary Alex Chalk urged peers to “remember it is designed to meet the will of the British people in a humane and fair way, and back the bill”.
But in a rare parliamentary move, Liberal Democrat peer Lord Paddick has proposed a so-called fatal motion to the proposed legislation – aimed at stopping it in its tracks at its first Lords hurdle.
His amendment argues the draft legislation would see Britain fail to meet its international law commitments by allowing ministers to ignore the directions of judges and undermine “the UK’s tradition of providing sanctuary to refugees”.
However, the blocking bid looks destined to fail without the backing of Labour – who warned it could backfire and deny the peers the chance to amend the bill.
A Labour source said: “We’re not supporting the motion. If successful, which they never are, the government could just Parliament Act the Bill in the next King’s Speech and peers would lose the opportunity to make any amendments.
They added: “It is therefore an irresponsible way to deal with legislation that has already gone through the elected House.”
The unelected chamber will sit earlier from 11am to consider the bill at second reading after it passed the Commons, with almost 90 speakers including the Archbishop of Canterbury listed.
Two Green party peers will be among those supporting the Lib Dems’ fatal motion, with Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb saying: “This bill is illegal because it breaks international law and should be opposed for that reason alone. It is also immoral and plain nasty.”
Lady Jones said it was “hugely disappointing that Labour are failing to oppose this legislation outright, but unsurprising given their recent track record of caving in on voter ID and the Public Order Bill.”
And the former head of the British Army Sir Richard Dannatt has also attacked the plan to send migrants who arrived on small boats to Rwanda.
Lord Dannatt told The Independent that Rwanda has a “dark history”, still living under the “shadow of genocide” and is not the kind of country to which people fleeing conflicts should be sent.
The attempted asylum clampdown has been prompted by Mr Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” bringing migrants across the English Channel.
The bill includes provisions that would limit the ability of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to prevent the deportation of asylum seekers.
Critics argue the flagship immigration reforms break international law. And former Tory leaders Theresa May and Iain Duncan Smith have warned the bill threatens modern slavery protections.
A group of 174 human rights groups and charities have signed an open letter calling for the government to ditch the bill – saying it was “effectively a ban on asylum”.
More than 6,000 migrants have been detected crossing the channel so far in 2023. The government plans to use disused military camps and a giant barge off the coast of Dorset as accommodation centres.
The Bibby Stockholm barge – set to be docked in Portland, Dorset and house 500 asylum seekers – arrived in the UK on Tuesday. Some on social media compared it to a “prison hulk”, while the Greens’ migrant spokesperson Benali Hamdache said it was “cruel, insensible and immoral”.
It comes as the plan to clear the asylum backlog by fast-tracking applications from five war-torn countries is in a “complete mess,” a government source told The Times.
Only 10 percent of the forms offered to asylum seekers from countries including Afghanistan and Syria are said to have been filled properly which mean a lengthier process of interviews have had to take place.
Meanwhile, it was alledged Boris Johnson confronted King Charles III over the plan to send some failed asylum seekers to Rwanda – “squaring up” to him for branding the plan “appalling”.
Guto Harri, No 10’s director of communications under the former PM, claimed Mr Johnson told him he “went in quite hard” on the then-Prince of Wales in a remarkable meeting over royal interference in politics.
