Lord Tugendhat Criticizes Government Over Rwanda Plan
Uncle of Tory Minister Voices Concerns
Lord Tugendhat, the uncle of Tory Home Office minister Tom Tugendhat, has strongly criticized the Government, accusing them of behaving like “despots” in their handling of the Rwanda plan. Expressing his disbelief over the proposed legislation, Lord Tugendhat, a former Tory MP, raised serious doubts about the direction the Conservative Party is taking.
Concerns Over Undermining Rule of Law
Lord Tugendhat highlighted that the proposed Safety of Rwanda Bill goes against the principles that the Conservative Party once stood for, emphasizing that former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher would have never supported a bill that undermines the rule of law. He expressed his disappointment by stating, “What we’re being asked to do really represents the sort of behaviour that the world associates with despots and autocracies, not with an established democracy like the UK.”
Opposition in the House of Lords
During discussions in the House of Lords, ministers faced strong opposition to the bill, with concerns raised by senior church leaders and peers. The Bishop of Southwark emphasized that declaring Rwanda a safe country does not automatically make it safe for vulnerable asylum seekers. He called for a delay in the project until the UNHCR deems it safe, highlighting the complexity of the situation faced by individuals seeking asylum.
Calls for Judicial Intervention
Several members of the House of Lords advocated for giving courts more authority to assess the safety of sending asylum seekers to Rwanda. They argued that the decision should be based on factual considerations rather than solely relying on legislation. Former Tory minister Viscount Hailsham criticized the claim that Rwanda is a safe destination for asylum seekers, labeling it as “manifestly untrue”.
Debate on the Bill’s Implementation
Former judge Lord Kerr and Tory Lord Garnier both raised concerns about the timing of implementing the Bill, suggesting that it should only come into effect once Rwanda is genuinely considered safe. Lord Garnier emphasized that passing a law does not alter the reality on the ground, stating, “Parliament can pass a law saying that Rwanda is a safe country, but it doesn’t make it a safe country.”
Continued Scrutiny and Opposition
Despite efforts by the Government to push the legislation forward, there remains significant opposition and calls for further scrutiny before any decisions are made. The debate in the House of Lords reflects a deep concern over the implications of declaring Rwanda a safe country for asylum seekers.
FAQs
What is the main concern raised by Lord Tugendhat regarding the Rwanda plan?
Lord Tugendhat criticized the Government for acting like “despots” and expressed disbelief over the proposed Rwanda plan, emphasizing the departure from conservative values.
Why did the Bishop of Southwark call for a delay in the project?
The Bishop of Southwark raised concerns about the safety of vulnerable individuals being sent to Rwanda and advocated for a delay until the UNHCR confirms the country’s safety.
What key point did former Tory minister Viscount Hailsham make about Rwanda?
Viscount Hailsham disputed the claim that Rwanda is a safe country for asylum seekers, stating that it is “manifestly untrue” and highlighting the risks involved.
Why did Tory Lord Garnier argue against the implementation of the Bill?
Tory Lord Garnier emphasized that passing a law does not change the actual safety conditions in Rwanda, stating that the country’s safety cannot be altered merely through legislation.
