The government has chosen to avoid a showdown with MPs on the ratification of its new treaty with Rwanda, after the House of Lords voted to delay the finalisation of the deal.
While the Lords can only advise on ratification, MPs in the Commons have the power to delay the signing of a treaty – although they have never used it.
Politics latest: UK facing ‘dangerous moment’
Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG), the government has to lay a treaty before parliament and wait 21 sitting days before an international agreement is ratified. However, this treaty is set to be ratified on 31 January – Wednesday next week.
Critics argue it is “disappointing” the government has not set aside time for MPs to debate the treaty.
The government claims enough scrutiny will be offered by debates on the Safety of the Rwanda Bill, which is based on the treaty.
This bill passed initial votes in the Commons but is awaiting inspection and amending in the House of Lords, with many votes yet to come.
But the home affairs select committee in the Commons recommended there be a debate and a vote on the treaty after it was announced last year.
This was backed by the Conservatives on the committee – including former Tory deputy chair Lee Anderson, who resigned from his Tory party role to try to make the Safety of Rwanda Bill tougher last week.
The treaty contains the agreements upon which the UK government bases its argument that Rwanda is safe in a bid to address the ruling by the Supreme Court last year.
‘We look forward to debating the bill’
Defending the government’s approach, Home Office minister Tom Pursglove said: “The government places great importance in providing opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny.
“We have sought to provide this opportunity during various parliamentary activity, but most notably as part of the passage of the bill which is intrinsically…
