Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Comment
Simon Jenkins

No matter how bad the Rwanda bill is, a bunch of unelected peers shouldn’t decide its fate

The state opening of parliament in the House of Lords, November 2023.
The state opening of parliament in the House of Lords, November 2023. Photograph: Leon Neal/Getty Images

Almost everyone agrees the government’s Rwanda bill is a bad idea. Its effects on deterring immigration will be trivial. It fails to show that Rwanda will be a humane recipient of migrants. It delivers appalling value for huge sums of public money, and is a mere sop to rightwing voters. All these are reasons why the House of Commons should not have voted in its favour. But it did so, repeatedly, at the request of the elected government of the day. That request was made in order to meet the pledge Rishi Sunak made to “stop the boats”, despite polling showing that support for the Rwanda bill was low.

It follows a reverse last year of that policy in the supreme court, where the bill was found to be unlawful, necessitating the present bill to overrule its predecessor. The government desperately wants its bill to allow some deportation to take place this summer, which is why it has resisted a flurry of amendments passed by the House of Lords.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.