Dozens of migrants were heading to the UK in a “small boat” to cross the Channel just hours after Parliament backed Rishi Sunak’s controversial Rwanda Bill.
The pictures of the asylum seekers and economic migrants clambering into an overcrowded flimsy vessel immediately raised questions over whether the Government’s Rwanda Plan will achieve its aim.
BREAKING: A suspected migrant boat has left the coast of France and heading in the direction of the UK.
— Sky News (@SkyNews) April 23, 2024
It comes after Rishi Sunak's Rwanda Bill was finally passed through the Lords yesterday.https://t.co/xItZsH7tea
📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 and YouTube pic.twitter.com/z5jbeK343T
Illegal migration minister Michael Tomlinson claimed on BBC Breakfast that the Bill would have a “deterrent effect” over live pictures of a crowded dinghy leaving French shores to cross the Channel, said to be carrying migrants from Afghanistan, Eritrea and South Sudan.
The video of the migrants boarding the boat, some without life jackets, came shortly after MR Sunak declared on Tuesday that “nothing will stand in our way” in getting deportation flights off the ground after Parliament passed his controversial Rwanda Bill.
The Prime Minister also claimed that the legislation would change the “global equation on migration”.
Peers finally bowed to the will of the elected Commons late on Monday and stopped their attempts to amend the bill which was branded “post-truth” legislation by one of them by stating Rwanda is safe for asylum seekers from Britain.
In an early morning statement, Mr Sunak said: “The passing of this landmark legislation is not just a step forward but a fundamental change in the global equation on migration.
“We introduced the Rwanda Bill to deter vulnerable migrants from making perilous crossings and break the business model of the criminal gangs who exploit them. The passing of this legislation will allow us to do that and make it very clear that if you come here illegally, you will not be able to stay.
“Our focus is to now get flights off the ground, and I am clear that nothing will stand in our way of doing that and saving lives.”
For weeks Lords have been pushing back against the plan, which seeks to deport asylum seekers who arrive in the UK on small boats to the African nation.
The government warned ‘enough is enough’ as the parliamentary stand-off continued late into Monday night and the Bill “ping ponged" between the two Houses.
Peers finally relented just before midnight and said they would not table any new amendments for debate.
It means the scheme will soon become law, with the Prime Minister pledging the first flights to Rwandan capital Kigali will take off "in 10 to 12 weeks".
Earlier on Monday, peers had tabled two amendments which were voted down by Tory MPs.
The upper chamber had wanted to ensure that Rwanda is not declared a “safe” country until an independent monitoring committee had ruled as such.
They also wanted people who had served with British forces abroad to be exempt from deportation, even if they came to the UK illegally on small boats.
The amendment, by former Labour defence secretary Lord Browne, was designed to particularly protect Afghan interpreters who had fled the Taliban.
But after hours of debate in both Houses opposition Lords did not push the demands following a government “concession”.
Lord Sharpe, said there would be a review of cases brought under the Arap scheme that allows Afghans to settle in the UK.
Ministers agreed that anyone found to be eligible for the settlement program who was already in Britain could stay, regardless of how they got there.
Lord Sharpe said: "Once this review of Arap decisions for those with credible links to Afghan specialist units has concluded, the Government will not remove to Rwanda those who received a positive eligibility decision as a result of this review where they are already in the UK as of today."
Lord Browne of Ladyton said: "The minister does not believe this to be a concession, it is to him a restatement of what he has been telling us for some time, but in a different form."
However, pointing out it would now mean people not being removed, Lord Browne argued "that is a concession in anybody's language".
Peers initially refused to back down over a requirement that Rwanda could not be treated as “safe” until the Home Secretary made a statement to the Commons confirming as such, following consultation with the independent monitoring committee. They then sent the Bill back for debate in the Commons for a fifth time.
Home Office minister Michael Tomlinson said the Lords changes were "almost identical" to the previous ones rejected by MPs.
He told the Commons: "These amendments have already been rejected, enough is enough."
Crossbench peer Lord Anderson, whose amendment had been the last one standing, said there was little purpose in continuing to fight.
"The time has come to accept the primacy of the elected house and withdraw from the fray," he said.
The legislation will now head for Royal Assent and become law.
The Bill and a treaty with Rwanda are intended to prevent further legal challenges to the stalled asylum scheme after the Supreme Court ruled the plan was unlawful.
As well as compelling judges to regard the country as safe, it gives ministers the power to ignore emergency injunctions.
The Prime Minister claims this will act as a deterrent to migrants attempting the perilous journey across the English Channel in small boats.
Earlier on Monday, Mr Sunak blamed Labour peers for holding up the Bill.
The scheme, which was first proposed two years ago by then PM Boris Johnson, had initially been due to start in Spring.
Mr Sunak acknowledged he will miss his self-imposed deadline.
He said the first flights carrying asylum seekers to Rwanda will leave in 10 to 12 weeks, and the government will ensure they happen “come what may”.
The PM used the press conference in Downing Street to outline the “robust” operational plan, vowing: “We will start the flights and we will stop the boats."
But Labour’s shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper branded the policy an “extortionately expensive gimmick rather than a serious plan to tackle dangerous boat crossings”.
She added: “The Rwanda scheme will cost more than half a billion pounds for just 300 people, less than one per cent of asylum seekers here in the UK - and there is no plan for the 99 per cent.
“Instead of spending £2million per asylum seeker on this failing scheme they should be putting that money into boosting our border security instead - that is Labour’s practical plan.”
