Rishi Sunak gives press conference after tough PMQs over Supreme Court ruling Rwanda policy unlawful
The Supreme Court has ruled Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda policy is unlawful and would have endangered those being sent to the country.
It's a massive blow to the Prime Minister, and one that will only fuel anger from the Tory right, with Suella Braverman already claiming the Prime Minister has no “credible Plan B”.
It's followed by PMQs and then a vote on a ceasefire late tonight.
Here we go
Good morning, and welcome to another feral day in Westminster. There's the Rwanda verdict at 10:00, a spicy PMQs at midday, then the prospect of Labour sackings over a vote on a ceasefire in Gaza. Put the kettle on, it's going to be a big one.
Going down swinging
Ministers this morning were in a buoyant mood after the UK Government met Rishi Sunak's pledge of halving inflation, now sitting at 4.6 per cent.
Remember, external factors are to blame when inflation goes up, when it comes down it's all because of the Prime Minister.
For more info, here's a helpful piece on how we got here, and what it means.
Good credit
Inflation falling is good news for the Prime Minister, but widely regarded as the easiest of his five pledges to achieve, given it's largely outside the Government's hands, or so economists say.
It also prompts calls for tax cuts from his MPs, something Rishi Sunak absolutely isn't going to do. Here's Priti Patel giving the Prime Minister yet another headache.
This is fine
After Suella Braverman was sacked and David Cameron brought in as Foreign Secretary, you may be wondering how angry Tory MPs on the right are.
Well fret not, some brilliant journalist has helpfully put together a list of who the fuming MPs are and what they've said. Enjoy!
Out of order
Not every right-wing Tory is backing Suella Braverman, with Philip Davies claiming she had, in what isn't exactly parliamentary language, a "hissy fit".
He told GB News: “I think Suella has fallen victim, as some people do, which is when they get sacked, they can have a hissy fit about it and start thrashing around.
“I don't think it does her any credit at all and I say that as somebody who likes Suella, and who agrees with virtually everything. But this is not a very edifying letter to send.
“All I would say is if Suella felt so strongly about all of these things, why didn’t she resign and send this letter.
“She was there clinging on to her job and this is now somebody who's basically bitter because she has been sacked".
Ouch.
Taking it well
If you missed the letter that's got Tory MPs so riled up, here's Suella Braverman's response to being sacked.
At three pages long, it is also in dire need of an edit.
Decisions decisions
Verdict expected within minutes. The Government were bullish months ago, but got less confident as the verdict moved closer. Big moment imminent.
Skip to the end
Supreme Court currently making clear that this is not a political judgement, it is a legal decision that has been expedited because of public interest.
That said, they are taking their sweet time in announcing the verdict.
GOVERNMENT LOSE GOVERNMENT LOSE
Unanimous decision, Supreme Court finds the Rwanda scheme is unlawful.
Massive, massive blow to Rishi Sunak.
How the verdict was made
Lord Reed, the President of the Supreme Court, said in a summary of the ruling that the five justices unanimously agreed with the Court of Appeal’s conclusion that the Rwanda policy was unlawful.
They argued the UK Government cannot guarantee that refugees would not be returned to their country of origin, which would break international and domestic law.
'Wrong and inhumane'
SNP's Home Affairs Spokesperson, Alison Thewliss absolutely delighted with the verdict.
She says: "It is right that the Supreme Court has shut down the Tory party's cruel plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda - the policy should never have been put on the table. It is morally wrong and inhumane. "Under the Tories, there are rising numbers of people awaiting asylum decisions, safe and legal routes have been closed down, and many Home Office staff are being left without the resources they need".
Happy Days
Safe to say charities and human rights activists are absolutely buzzing, emotional scenes outside the Supreme Court.
Sonya Sceats, chief executive at charity Freedom from Torture said: “This is a victory for reason and compassion.
“We are delighted that the Supreme Court has affirmed what caring people already knew: the UK Government’s ‘cash for humans’ deal with Rwanda is not only deeply immoral, but it also flies in the face of the laws of this country.”
Never in doubt
General view among MPs, charities, and legal experts is that this verdict was inevitable.
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson Alistair Carmichael MP said: “It was clear from the get-go that the Conservatives’ Rwanda scheme was destined to fail. Not only is it immoral, unworkable and incredibly costly for taxpayers - but the Supreme Court has confirmed that it’s unlawful too. “So much time and money has already been wasted. It’s time for James Cleverly to get serious and get on with fixing the broken asylum system. “Tackling the sky-high asylum backlog and creating safe and legal routes for sanctuary will make far more progress towards that than this pet project policy ever could.”
It's not you it's Reed
Lord Reed said the “legal test” in the case was whether there were “substantial grounds” for believing that asylum seekers sent to Rwanda would be at “real risk” of being sent back to the countries they came from where they could face “ill treatment”.
He said: “In the light of the evidence which I have summarised, the Court of Appeal concluded that there were such grounds.
“We are unanimously of the view that they were entitled to reach that conclusion. Indeed, having been taken through the evidence ourselves, we agree with their conclusion.”
Try again
Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer welcomes the verdict.
She said: "The government must now admit that its cruel and inhumane policy is finished and drop it.
"The new Home Secretary has the chance now to turn over a new leaf and make clear that there is no intention to quit the European Convention on Human Rights.
He should pledge to create an asylum system that works. That is one with clear, open, safe and legal routes for applicants, quick and efficient determinations and support for resettlement into local communities with properly funded local services.”
ECHR? I hardly know er
Those on the right of the party believe leaving the European Convention on Human Rights will make the Rwanda scheme workable, but given the Supreme Court verdict, that idea looks dead in the water.
Lord Reed says "it's not only the European Convention on Human rights which is relevant to this case.
"There are other international treaties which would also prohibit the return of asylum seekers to their countries of origin without a proper examination of their claims".
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.