- Lib Dems oppose Rwanda bill
- Defying Salisbury-Addison Convention
- Government faces Lords’ resistance
The Salisbury-Addison Convention was instituted to facilitate the negotiation process between majoritarian governments in the House of Commons and the House of Lords when such governments lacked a majority in the upper chamber. However, Conservatives intend to defy this convention.
Liberal Democrat colleagues are preparing to defy a Gladstone-era convention and demonstrate in the House of Lords against the Rwanda measure.
The Lib Dem group has declared that on the following Monday, its second reading, eighty of its colleagues will vote against the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill.
Peers in the Labour Party will not support this extremely unusual move, considering it a publicity stunt by smaller parties (e.g., the Lib Dems) to attract media attention.
Furthermore, Downing Street urges peers “not to frustrate the will of the people” by asserting that the Lords should approve the Rwanda measure since it supports the House of Commons.
Opposition parties customarily oppose government legislation during the second reading in the House of Lords by introducing amendments during the committee stage. These amendments are subsequently subject to a vote during the report stage.
The Conservatives and Labour, however, do not support the convention on Rwanda policy, according to the Liberal Democrats, because that policy was not included in the Conservatives’ general election platform.
Lib Dems Defying Convention
The Liberal Democrats introduced a motion to “decline” the Illegal Migration Bill during its second reading in the House of Lords last year. That was rejected by 179 votes to 76, and a similar outcome is probable.
The Salisbury-Addison Convention is the agreement reached between the main parties. It arose due to substantial Conservative majorities in the House of Lords under Liberal and Labour administrations.
Before and after Liberal colossus William Gladstone, Lord Salisbury was Conservative prime minister in the 1880s and 1990s. Lord Addison was Labour leader in the Lords following Clement Attlee’s 1945 general election landslide.
However, this week’s defeat by the government in the House of Lords on a motion to postpone ratification of the Rwanda treaty pending the implementation of safeguards has inspired the Liberal Democrats to defy the convention once more.
Rishi Sunak encountered unfavorable outcomes as his colleagues voted 214 to 171, an overwhelming majority of 43. They supported calls for implementing safeguards before the departure of deportation flights to Rwanda.
A spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats stated, indicating the party’s intention to vote against the measure, “From the start, Liberal Democrats have been adamant: We have no faith in the Conservatives’ failing Rwanda plan.
“It is utterly impractical and prohibitively costly for the general public.” While it is universally desired to prevent boat crossings in the Channel, this policy will not affect that end.
“A tremendous amount of money and time has been wasted thus far with no tangible results.” On the contrary, our objective is to establish a viable and enduring resolution. This encompasses a streamlined processing system to unclog asylum applications and secure lawful refugee pathways.
“We have voted against the bill at every stage in the House of Commons, opposing it at every stage.” Unsurprisingly, our approach will remain unchanged when facing the Lords.”
Labour’s Opposition and Motivations
Furthermore, “The Rwanda bill is not a manifesto bill,” stated a party source. We would not vote against it if it were included in the manifesto. Furthermore, the convention served as an agreement between the Labour Party and the Tories. We are not formally involved in it.
“We cast our vote in opposition to the Illegal Migration measure during its second reading, and our stance on the Rwanda measure is identical. It is rational to vote against the bill like the Lords opposed the treaty this week.
“No,” a Labour source responded. We have no basis for it. What would motivate us to abandon our enduring dedication to the Salisbury-Addison convention?
Minor parties try to stop a second reading to get publicity for an event that won’t happen.
Downing Street’s No. 10 source commented on the bill’s second reading in anticipation of the bill’s defeat on the Rwanda treaty: “It is disappointing, but Labour is voting against our plans to stop the boats once more.”
The Lords are urged not to thwart the will of the people.
This is the most stringent anti-illegal migration legislation ever introduced in Parliament. It makes abundantly evident that those who enter the country illegally will not be permitted to remain.
Currently, in the House of Lords, the measure has the backing of the House of Commons. This must be passed to allow aircraft to Rwanda, discourage dangerous Channel crossings, and stop vessel traffic.
