The Rwanda bill spearheaded by Chancellor Rishi Sunak is undergoing its first examination as discussions commence in the House of Lords. Notably, figures such as the Archbishop

of Canterbury have criticized the bill's principles, while the Liberal Democrats are actively seeking to thwart it entirely.

Despite expectations that the attempt to nullify the bill will fail, peers have indicated their intent to remove crucial powers from the legislation's progression. The primary objective of the government's plan is to counter legal challenges against the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda.

In a recent setback, peers delivered a blow to the proposal by calling for a delay in the UK-Rwanda treaty until Kigali improves its asylum procedures.

Key votes on the legislation in the Lords are anticipated in the coming month, but any modifications made by peers are likely to face reversal in the Commons. The government aims to initiate flights to Rwanda by spring.

Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, criticized the bill, describing it as "damaging" to the UK's reputation, national unity, and the well-being of asylum seekers. Lord David Blunkett, former home secretary for the Labour Party, labeled the bill as "shoddy and less than this country deserves," contending that it punishes asylum seekers instead of addressing smuggling gangs.

On the contrary, Conservative Lord Hannan defended the bill as part of a comprehensive set of measures acting as a deterrent against illegal migration. Former Conservative chancellor Lord Clarke expressed his opposition, asserting that designating Rwanda as a safe country contradicts the Supreme Court's findings that deemed it unsafe for asylum seekers.

Downing Street affirmed its support for the Rwanda Bill, emphasizing its role in preventing criminal gangs from exploiting vulnerable individuals and maintaining fairness for those pursuing legal routes to enter the UK.

The bill's journey through the Commons witnessed internal Conservative divisions, with some rebels advocating for amendments to bypass certain human rights law provisions. Despite the initial turmoil, the bill passed in the Commons, reflecting ongoing debates within the Conservative Party.

Tory divisions came to the forefront as two deputy chairmen, Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith, resigned from their positions to vote in favor of the rebel amendments. While more than 60 Conservative MPs initially supported such amendments, only 11 ultimately voted against the bill.

The bill has drawn criticism from Labour, which views it as an expensive "gimmick," while Sunak contends that deporting some asylum seekers to Rwanda serves as a deterrent against Channel crossings. The ongoing discussions in the House of Lords underscore the contentious nature of the Rwanda Bill within the political landscape. Photo by UK government, Wikimedia commons.