UK

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRishi Sunak’s authority has been dealt a fresh blow as two Tory deputy chairmen resigned to join a major Conservative rebellion over his Bill aimed at reviving the stalled Rwanda deportation plan.Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith stepped down in order to vote for two amendments that right-wing MPs claim will help to protect the government’s flagship asylum policy from legal challenge. Jane Stevenson also quit her role as a parliamentary private secretary in the Department for Business and Trade to back the amendments. Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith backed the changes tabled by former immigration minister Robert Jenrick and veteran Tory Sir Bill Cash “not because we are against the legislation, but because like everybody else we want it to work”, they said.Around 60 Tories voted in favour of changes to the Safety of Rwanda Bill put forward by Conservative backbencher Sir Bill, which seek to ensure UK and international law cannot be used to block a person being removed to Rwanda.Conservative MP Lee Anderson has stepped down The amendment was rejected by a majority of 461, but the rebellion gives an indication of the scale of unease within the Conservative Party during an election year.The scope of the rebellion would be more than enough to sink the Bill and overturn the government’s working majority of 54 if it were repeated at its final Commons hurdle – third reading – which is expected on Wednesday.Former prime minister Liz Truss, former ministers Suella Braverman and Sir Simon Clarke and former leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith were also among those to back the amendments.Mr Jenrick had aimed to change the Bill to severely limit individual asylum seekers’ ability to appeal against being put on a flight to Kigali. The Commons later rejected his amendment 525 to 58, majority 467.Here we take a look at all the Tory MPs to back the amendments:Sir Bill Cash’s amendment: MPs voted 529 to 68, majority 461, to reject Conservative MP Sir Bill Cash’s amendment, which aimed to ensure UK and international law cannot be used to prevent or delay a person being removed to Rwanda.Here is a look at the 58 Conservatives who backed the amendment: Lee Anderson (Ashfield), Sarah Atherton (Wrexham), Jake Berry (Rossendale and Darwen), Bob Blackman (Harrow East), Ben Bradley (Mansfield), Suella Braverman (Fareham), Jack Brereton (Stoke-on-Trent South), Paul Bristow (Peterborough), William Cash (Stone), Rehman Chishti (Gillingham and Rainham), Christopher Chope (Christchurch), Simon Clarke (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland), Brendan Clarke-Smith (Bassetlaw), Philip Davies (Shipley), Sarah Dines (Derbyshire Dales), Richard Drax (South Dorset), James Duddridge (Rochford and Southend East) (Proxy vote cast by Marcus Jones), Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green), Michael Fabricant (Lichfield),Nick Fletcher (Don Valley), Kevin Foster (Torbay), Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford), Chris Green (Bolton West), James Grundy (Leigh), Jonathan Gullis (Stoke-on-Trent North), John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings), Darren Henry (Broxtowe), Philip Hollobone (Kettering), Adam Holloway (Gravesham), Eddie Hughes (Walsall North), Tom Hunt (Ipswich), Robert Jenrick (Newark), Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham), David Jones (Clwyd West), Danny Kruger (Devizes), Andrew Lewer (Northampton South), Marco Longhi (Dudley North), Jonathan Lord (Woking), Craig Mackinlay (South Thanet) (Proxy vote cast by John Redwood), Karl McCartney (Lincoln), Robin Millar (Aberconwy), Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot), Jill Mortimer (Hartlepool), Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills), Lia Nici (Great Grimsby), Neil O’Brien (Harborough),Matthew Offord (Hendon), Tom Randall (Gedling), John Redwood (Wokingham), Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury), Gary Sambrook (Birmingham, Northfield), Greg Smith (Buckingham), Henry Smith (Crawley), Jane Stevenson (Wolverhampton North East), Desmond Swayne (New Forest West), Elizabeth Truss (South West Norfolk), Bill Wiggin (North Herefordshire).Tellers for the ayes were Conservative MPs Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) and Miriam Cates (Penistone and Stocksbridge).Robert Jenrick’s amendment: MPs voted 525 to 58, majority 467, to reject an amendment from Conservative former minister Robert Jenrick that aimed to severely limit individual asylum seekers’ ability to appeal against being put on a flight to Rwanda.The division list released after the Commons vote contained 59 names for the ayes and 523 for the noes, but updates to the list can occur. Conservative Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (The Cotswolds) was listed on both the ayes and noes. He voted with the Government on the earlier amendment tabled by Sir Bill CashHere are the 57 Tory MPs who backed Mr Jenrick’s amendment:Adam Afriyie (Windsor), Lee Anderson (Ashfield), Sarah Atherton (Wrexham), Jake Berry (Rossendale and Darwen), Bob Blackman (Harrow East), Ben Bradley (Mansfield), Suella Braverman (Fareham), Jack Brereton (Stoke-on-Trent South), Paul Bristow (Peterborough), William Cash (Stone), Christopher Chope (Christchurch), Simon Clarke (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland), Brendan Clarke-Smith (Bassetlaw), Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (The Cotswolds), Philip Davies (Shipley), Sarah Dines (Derbyshire Dales), Richard Drax (South Dorset), James Duddridge (Rochford and Southend East) (Proxy vote cast by Marcus Jones), Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green), Michael Fabricant (Lichfield), Nick Fletcher (Don Valley), Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford), Chris Green (Bolton West), James Grundy (Leigh), Jonathan Gullis (Stoke-on-Trent North), John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings), Darren Henry (Broxtowe), Philip Hollobone (Kettering), Adam Holloway (Gravesham), Eddie Hughes (Walsall North), Tom Hunt (Ipswich), Robert Jenrick (Newark), Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham), David Jones (Clwyd West), Danny Kruger (Devizes), Edward Leigh (Gainsborough), Andrew Lewer (Northampton South), Marco Longhi (Dudley North), Craig Mackinlay (South Thanet) (Proxy vote cast by John Redwood), Karl McCartney (Lincoln), Robin Millar (Aberconwy), Nigel Mills (Amber Valley), Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot), Jill Mortimer (Hartlepool), Lia Nici (Great Grimsby), Neil O’Brien (Harborough), Matthew Offord (Hendon), Tom Randall (Gedling), John Redwood (Wokingham), Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury), Gary Sambrook (Birmingham, Northfield), Greg Smith (Buckingham), Henry Smith (Crawley), Jane Stevenson (Wolverhampton North East), Desmond Swayne (New Forest West), Elizabeth Truss (South West Norfolk), Bill Wiggin (North Herefordshire).Tellers for the ayes were Conservative MPs Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg (North East Somerset) and Miriam Cates (Penistone and Stocksbridge). More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRishi Sunak’s plan to force his flagship Rwanda bill through parliament was thrown into fresh turmoil as two Conservative Party deputy chairs quit after backing rebel amendments.Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith resigned after siding with right-wing Tory MPs trying to force the PM to toughen up the bill with last-minute changes.It came as ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick and other hardliners insisted that they were ready to defy the government at Wednesday’s showdown vote after their amendments were voted down.Lee Anderson backed rebel amendments to Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda billTory rebels told The Independent that there could be more than 30 MPs willing to defy Mr Sunak and hand him a humiliating defeat if he does not make his changes ahead of the vote on Wednesday evening.Former minister Sir Simon Clarke said he wasn’t “f***ing around” as he vowed to vote against the bill, while Boris Johnson encouraged the insurrection by insisting Mr Sunak’s legislation was changed to be made as “robust as possible”.Understood to have been pushed out by the government whips over their insurrection, Mr Anderson and Mr Clarke-Smith announced their exit in a joint resignation letter.The pair said they wanted to “strengthen” the bill and told the PM they would “need to offer you our resignations from our roles”. They also argued that Mr Sunak was allowing himself to be “bound by a Blair-era legal framework and international agreements which are out of date”.Speaking after his resignation, Mr Anderson told GB News: “I don’t think I could carry on in my role when I fundamentally disagree with the Bill. I can’t be in a position to vote for something I don’t believe in.” He added he believes the Bill “could work” and insisted the prime minister still had “100%” of his support.Jane Stevenson, the parliamentary private secretary (PPS) to business secretary Kemi Badenoch, also quit after backing the rebel amendment. She said she did not consider her votes to have been “anti-government, but they do warrant resignation”. It is difficult to vote for it unamended. It’s very hard to vote for something you don’t think is going to workTory MP John HayesIn bigger-than-expected rebellions, some 68 MPs – including almost 60 Tories – voted for Sir Bill Cash’s amendment aimed at restricting the use of international law to thwart Rwanda flights. And 58 MPs voted in favour of Mr Jenrick’s amendment aimed at severely limiting individual asylum seekers’ ability to appeal. It would take just 29 Tory MPs to overturn Mr Sunak’s 56-seat majority and defeat the government at the final Commons vote on Wednesday.Dozens of senior Tory MPs on the right – including former PM Liz Truss, ex-home secretary Suella Braverman, former leader Iain Duncan Smith and ex-cabinet minister Jacob Rees-Mogg – gathered in parliament on Tuesday night to discuss how to vote.One senior Tory rebel told The Independent: “Even if half of the 65 signatories [to amendments] voted against the bill it would be enough to defeat the government – the government should be aware it’s possible if they don’t accept amendments.”They added: “A defeat would be very serious for the prime minister. It would probably mean Labour putting forward a no-confidence vote in the Commons. Nobody in the party wants that.”Rishi Sunak faces a battle to get his Rwanda bill through the Commons Tory whips were said to be in “overdrive” trying to persuade MPs to back the government. The government does not plan to accept any of the rebel amendments – but could still produce its own changes, or even delay the crunch vote if it is facing defeat.John Hayes, the Common Sense Group leader, told The Independent: “It is difficult to vote for it unamended. It’s very hard to vote for something you don’t think is going to work.”Mr Hayes – often described as Suella Braverman’s mentor – said rebel MPs were “increasingly enthusiastic about our position”. He added: “The government could produce their own amendment or delay [the vote]. They would be wise to do so.”Tory rebel Mark Francois, chair of the European Research Group (ERG), did not rule out voting against the government. Asked if the rebels have the numbers to defeat Mr Sunak, he said: “All I will say at this stage is I think the numbers [on amendments] tonight speak for themselves.”Mr Jenrick warned in the Commons that attempts by the right to strengthen the Rwanda plan were Mr Sunak’s “last opportunity” to stop small boat crossings.The ex-immigration minister – who quit over the “weak” legislation – said he could see “no reason” why the PM could not accept his amendments and fix the flaws in his Rwanda plan “once and for all”.Ex-immigration minister Robert Jenrick said Sunak was on ‘last chance’ to fix the Rwanda planThe hardliner said: “I am prepared to vote against the bill … because this bill doesn’t work, and I do believe that a better bill is possible.”In a last-ditch attempt to calm hardliners’ concerns, Mr Sunak’s justice secretary Alex Chalk said he has asked more judges to be appointed to the first-tier and upper tribunal to speed up courts dealing with migrant appeals.It is understood 150 judges could be brought in to deal with cases. The judiciary has identified judges who could provide 5,000 additional sitting days while extra space had been prepared.But senior Tory MP Danny Kruger, co-founder of the New Conservatives, said rebels were not satisfied by Mr Sunak’s assurances that he is prepared to ignore European judges or boost the number of judges.“I’m afraid I’m not yet satisfied by what we’ve heard from the PM,” he told GB News. “We really hope that the government has listened to us and is prepared to concede and ideally adopt the amendments as its own.”Miriam Cates – co-founder of the New Conservatives group – told BBC the desperate courts move showed that the government “is expecting a large number of individual claims”.Boris Johnson encouraged MPs to try to toughen up Sunak’s bill And Mr Johnson – at odds with Mr Sunak ever since he was kicked out of No 10 – twisted the knife by offering his support to the Tory rebels. “This bill must be as legally robust as possible – and the right course is to adopt the amendments,” the former PM said on X, formerly Twitter.Former justice secretary Sir Robert Buckland – a leading One Nation moderate – said Mr Sunak should keep calm and carry on. “It would be best advised not to accept any of the amendments from my colleagues on the right.”Earlier, cabinet minister Michael Gove had said that he was “pretty sure” Mr Anderson would still be in post at the next election. “Lee is a friend … the concerns that Lee has about the bill are the concerns that the country has about migration more broadly,” the levelling up secretary told Times Radio.Labour’s campaign coordinator Pat McFadden said the resignations showed that Mr Sunak is “too weak to lead his party and too weak to lead the country”.The Liberal Democrats said Mr Sunak had “again been embarrassed by his own MPs”. Home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael said: “If the prime minister can’t even settle squabbles in his own party, how can he be expected to run the country?” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailAlan Bates has warned subpostmasters are dying while they wait for payments from the Horizon scandal compensation scheme, as he described the delays as “madness”. The campaigner, whose fight for justice sparked a public outcry after it was depicted in the ITV drama Mr Bates vs The Post Office, accused the fund of being “tied up in bureaucracy”. His call came as Fujitsu faced demands to stump up “substantial” sums after an extraordinary admission that it had a moral duty to contribute to the mammoth £1bn bill. The government has set aside the money for what Rishi Sunak described as “one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in our nation’s history”.Hundreds of subpostmasters were prosecuted for theft and false accounting because of Fujitsu’s faulty computer system. Hauled in front of MPs to explain their part in the scandal, the technology giant conceded for the first time that it should pay out. Fujitsu’s Europe director Paul Patterson also apologised for what he said were “bugs and errors” in the firm’s system and for helping the Post Office prosecute subpostmasters. It came as:Mr Bates warned that it felt like a ‘financial gun’ had been held to the head of subpostmasters Another victim, Jo Hamilton, accused the Post Office of ‘gaslighting’ her Fujitsu admitted it had known of problems with the system as early as 2008 The Post Office admitted it still does not know where money paid by subpostmasters wentGiving evidence to the Commons Business and Trade committee, Mr Bates said there was no reason why subpostmasters should not have had full financial redress by now.“It’s gone on for far too long. People are suffering, they’re dying, we’re losing numbers along the way,” he said. “And it just seems to be tied up in bureaucracy.”He was still “waiting for my first offer” more than 66 days after making his application, he added. The scandal left postmasters feeling like there was a “financial gun” to their head, he said.“When you take on a post office, you actually invest a large amount of money in that business. As happened in my case, when they fell out with me, they walked off with that amount of money. A lot of people feel there’s a financial gun held to their head if they start kicking off or start raising too many problems with the Post Office.”Another former subpostmaster, Jo Hamilton, said that Post Office lawyers convinced her the losses were her fault.“It just makes me so angry that they’d literally gaslit me for about three years and turned me into a basket case,” she said.Alan Bates said the Post Office had ‘walked off’ with the money postmasters such as him had invested in their businesses In an evidence session that was tetchy at times, Post Office chief executive Nick Read said his organisation did not know where the money subpostmasters paid went. The company had not “got to the bottom of the nub of” that, he said. Some of the money may have gone to Post Office executives, he conceded, but auditors had “struggled” to tell because of the low quality of data available.Mr Read also suggested the organisation would not carry out private prosecutions in future, following criticism of their role in the fiasco.“I’ve been very clear on my watch they won’t and I see no reason why they should continue to do so,” he told MPs.Meanwhile, the official inquiry into the Horizon scandal heard that Fujitsu executives knew of faults with the system as early as 2008.In an email presented as evidence to the inquiry, a Fujitsu executive said: “If we do not fix this problem our spreadsheets presented in court are liable to be brought into doubt.” In a 2008 email under the heading “benefits and risks”, another Fujitsu executive said: “If we cannot better identify where data integrity can or cannot be guaranteed then we are in breach of contract and may be fined heavily.”Campaigners called on Fujitsu to pay a considerable amount of money towards the final bill. Fujitsu has apologised to postmasters wrongfully convicted and admitted it had a moral duty to help with compensation Former Labour minister Kevan Jones said: “I welcome the news that Fujitsu are prepared to contribute to the scheme and I think negotiations need to start, but it is going to have to be a substantial amount.”Campaigning Tory peer Lord Arbuthnot said: “It needs to be a substantial proportion of the final overall costs, whatever they may turn out to be.”Those whose convictions are quashed are eligible for a £600,000 compensation payment, or potentially more. Rishi Sunak announced earlier this month that MPs will pass a new law to exonerate those convicted because of Horizon. There will also be a new upfront payment of £75,000 to those who were not convicted but were affected by the scandal.However, No 10 has already admitted that it expects only around a third of the postmasters forced to shell out huge sums over the debacle to accept the £75,000 payment, and that many will push for more. The Post Office has already conceded it owes compensation to thousands of subpostmasters who were not convicted but were forced to pay back incorrect shortfalls – with 2,700 people so far offered an average of around £44,000 in compensation.Lawyers have also said that hundreds more victims who were caught up in the scandal could now come forward.In response to the Fujitsu official’s comments, Mr Sunak’s spokesman said: “We agree that those who are found to be responsible must be held accountable, whether that’s legally or financially.”But the No 10 official declined to “put numbers on it” when asked how much Fujitsu may end up contributing to compensation. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailTwo Tory deputy chairmen have stepped down from their party positions after backing amendments that seek to beef up Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda Bill.Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith said that “whilst our main wish is to strengthen the legislation, this means that in order to vote for amendments we will therefore need to offer you our resignations from our rules”.In a joint letter, they said it was “important in terms of credibility that we are consistent” on arguing that safeguards must be put in place to ensure the government’s flagship asylum policy is legally watertight.It comes as MPs voted 529 to 68, majority 461, to reject Conservative Sir Bill Cash’s changes to the Bill, which aimed to ensure UK and international law cannot be used to prevent or delay a person being removed to Rwanda.Here, we take a look at their joint resignation letter in full:Dear Prime Minister,When we were elected in 2019 we promised the public that we would Get Brexit Done and Take Back Control. One of the key issues for the public was our sovereignty and making sure our Parliament and our courts would have supremacy over distant and unaccountable ones abroad. This Conservative Government has taken unprecedented steps to make sure that this is the case.Globally we see the huge impact of migration, both legal and illegal and that is why it has been so important to bring in measures to bring these numbers down. Our returns policy and working together with partners such as Albania is but one example of how this Government has taken up the challenge, alongside our work against criminal networks. The Rwanda plan represents a clear deterrent and it is noteworthy that other countries are now looking at following our lead.Lee Anderson was appointed deputy chairman of the Conservative party in February 2023 The United Kingdom is a welcoming country and we can be very proud of our record taking in refugees and those who wish to contribute to society and make it their home. indeed, many of those who have done so would be the first to recognise that this system also needs to be robust and supported by the principle of fairness. There are far too many who wish to cheat our system and we continue to witness the scourge of the evil people smuggling gangs, with yet more tragic deaths in the Channel.Whilst we have taken steps to tackle these important issues, we have done so being bound by a Blair-era legal framework and international agreements which are out of date and do not reflect the realities of the twenty first century.Prime Minister, you pledged to do whatever it takes to stop the boats. You have been clear and resolute over the Rwanda plan and you have stated that you will not let a foreign court block these flights. You have our 100 per cent support and the support of our constituents.Labour has no plan. They have voted against every single measure we have taken to prevent deaths in the Channel, to crack down on criminal gangs and to return those with no right to be here to their countries of origin. A Labour Government would be a disaster and would lead to an open-door immigration policy. They would scrap the Rwanda scheme in its entirety, bring around 100,000 extra asylum seekers as part of a deal with the European Union and, as they have already demonstrated and signed letters supporting, take foreign national offenders convicted of some of the most heinous crimes off flights back to their countries of origin. They have no interest whatsoever in tackling this issue and neither do the Liberal Democrats or the SNP. Brendan Clarke-Smith has resigned alongside Lee Anderson In the past we have signed amendments, voted for ten minute rule bills and spoken on various occasions in the media to argue that safeguards need to put in place to make sure our legislation is watertight. It is therefore important in terms of credibility that we are consistent with this.We have already had two pieces of legislation thwarted by a system that does not work in favour of the British people. It is for this reason that we have supported the amendments to the Rwanda Bill. This is not because we are against the legislation, but because like everybody else we want it to work. This task is not an easy one and we appreciate the fine balance that must be struck.As two people who have been on very different political journeys, one as a person who followed the same path many voters did for the first time at the last General Election and another who has been a lifelong Conservative Party supporter, it has been a huge honour for both of us to serve as Deputy Chairmen of the party. CCHQ has an excellent team and the Chairman is doing a tremendous job in making sure we are in good shape to campaign for a historic fifth term and to prevent the unthinkable prospect of a Labour Government, which would damage this country so much.Our support for the party and this Government remains as strong as ever and that is why we are so passionate about making this legislation work. However, we fully appreciate that with such important roles there is also the issue of being bound by collective responsibility. It is with this in mind that we fully appreciate that whilst our main wish is to strengthen the legislation, this means that in order to vote for amendments we will therefore need to offer you our resignations from our roles.We commend your work on illegal migration so far and your commitment to implementing the will of the British people. The last thing either of us wants to do is to distract from this. We both look forward to making this legislation work, to carrying out the will of the British people and to taking on Labour and winning the next General Election.Yours sincerely, Lee Anderson MP Brendan Clarke-Smith MP More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster email The leaders of Hungary and Slovakia on Tuesday said they agree on the need to rework a European Union plan to provide financial assistance to Ukraine. It’s a potential boon to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who last month derailed EU efforts to approve the funding for the war-ravaged country.Following bilateral talks in Budapest, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico said he agrees with Orbán’s position that the EU should not finance a planned 50 billion euro ($54 billion) aid package to Kyiv from the bloc’s common budget, and echoed Orbán’s assertions that the war in Ukraine cannot be resolved through military means.“We have listened very carefully to the proposals that Prime Minister (Orbán) … has already put forward in relation to the review of the budget and aid to Ukraine, and I will repeat that we consider them to be rational and sensible,” Fico said.Fico’s comments come as the EU scrambles to salvage the funding package for Ukraine that Orbán blocked in December, a move that angered many of the bloc’s leaders who were aiming to provide Kyiv with a consistent cash flow for the next four years.Unanimity is required for decisions affecting the EU budget, and Orbán was the only one of the bloc’s 27 leaders to vote against the funding.“If we want to help Ukraine, which I think we need to do … we must do so without damaging the EU budget,” Orbán said on Tuesday.EU leaders are expected to meet again on Feb. 1 to attempt a deal on the financial package, but Orbán’s veto power remains a factor.On Tuesday, Fico said he supports Orbán’s recommendation that the funding be separated into four installments that could be reassessed, and potentially blocked, each year.“I look forward to seeing you soon on Feb. 1 in Brussels, where we will watch with full understanding your legitimate fight for what you started at the last European Council,” Fico told Orbán.A populist whose party won September elections on a pro-Russian and anti-American platform, Fico is seen as a potential ally for Orbán in the latter’s longstanding disputes with the EU.The bloc has withheld billions in funding from Budapest over concerns that Orbán’s government has cracked down on judicial independence, media freedom and the rights of the LGBTQ+ community.Some of Orbán’s critics in the EU believe that he has used his veto power over assistance to Ukraine as leverage to gain access to the frozen funds. On Tuesday, Fico cited the withheld funds as a justification for Orbán’s opposition to EU funding for Ukraine.”They cannot expect a country from which funds have been withdrawn to give money to another country. That is simply not possible. It is not fair, it is not just,” Fico said.Last week, a cross-coalition group of 120 EU lawmakers signed a petition urging that Hungary be stripped of its voting rights in the bloc’s decision making, arguing Orbán had repeatedly violated EU values by subverting democratic institutions since taking office in 2010. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRishi Sunak is having a tough week – as a fresh split over the controversial Rwanda bill follows crushing polls and surveys highlighting the prime minister’s popularity, or lack thereof. Focus group research carried out by JL Partners found that members of the public now regard Mr Sunak with barely concealed contempt.According to the top pollster, the Tory party leader is seen as “spineless and false” and makes people “cringe”.Meanwhile, a poll conducted by YouGov has predicted Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer would win a 120-seat majority if the general election was held tomorrow – a repeat of Tony Blair’s landslide victory over the Tories in 1997.However, Labour will need a record swing to win a majority, as the party’s path to power has been made more difficult by big boundary changes.So what do these polls really mean? Are the results surprising? And can they even be trusted? How much attention should we be paying to these surveys and predictions as the long general election campaign gets underway?If you have a question, submit it now here, or when I join you live at 11am on Wednesday 17 January for the “Ask Me Anything” event.Register to submit your question in the comments box under this article. If you’re not already a member, click “sign up” in the comments section to leave your question. For a full guide on how to comment click here.Don’t worry if you can’t see your question – they may be hidden until I join the conversation to answer them. Then join us live on this page at 11am as I tackle as many questions as I can. More

Tory rebel Robert Jenrick ‘prepared’ to vote against Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill
Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRobert Jenrick has called for people to be deported “within days” as Rishi Sunak faces a mounting rebellion over the crunch vote on his flagship Rwanda immigration plan.The former Conservative immigration minister Mr Jenrick – who quit over the “weak” Rwanda bill and has led the rebel amendments – has also said he is prepared to vote against the government at Wednesday’s showdown vote.Almost 70 right-wing Conservative MPs have now signed the rebel amendments – which are being debated and voted on today in the House of Commons – aimed at toughening the bill and curtailing asylum seekers’ rights to appeal against deportation flights to Kigali.Former prime minister Boris Johnson has also announced his support for the uprising, while Conservative deputy chairmen Lee Anderson and Brendan Clarke-Smith vowed to join the rebellion.However, any attempt by Mr Sunak to placate the rebels would be opposed by more moderate Tories, who are keen to protect the legislation against breaches of international law.It comes as the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has concluded that the UK government’s new Rwanda bill is not compatible with international law following a legal assessment.Show latest update
1705415376Tory rebel ‘not satisfied’ by Sunak’s pleasSenior Tory MP Danny Kruger has said he is not satisfied by Rishi Sunak’s assurances that he is prepared to ignore European judges who try to block Rwanda deportations, reports political correspondent Adam Forrest.On the move to speed up court hearings, the co-founder of the New Conservatives told GB News: “I’m concerned that that suggests there are going to be lots of claims, which indeed I think they would be under this law.”Mr Kruger said: “I’m afraid I’m not yet satisfied by what we’ve heard from the PM.” He said: “We think the bill needs to go further, discussions are ongoing … We really hope that the government has listened to us and is prepared to concede and ideally adopt the amendments as its own.”He added: “I met with the chief whip last night and might see him again today I expect, and other colleagues are talking to ministers.”Adam Forrest, Political Correspondent16 January 2024 14:291705415076Eight DUP MPs to vote against Rwanda billEight DUP MPs will vote against the Rwanda bill at third reading on Wednesday, the unionist MP Sammy Wilson has told GB News.Adam Forrest, Political Correspondent16 January 2024 14:241705415007Watch: Tory rebel Robert Jenrick ‘prepared’ to vote against Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda billTory rebel Robert Jenrick ‘prepared’ to vote against Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda billTara Cobham16 January 2024 14:231705414816Sunak warned by Tory rebel: I’m not f***ing aroundA potential Tory rebel on Rwanda has warned Rishi Sunak he is not “f***ing around”, political editor Kate Devlin reports. Former minister Simon Clarke said: “I will vote against if the legislation isn’t amended. Simple as that”.He made the comment in response to claims by other Tories that the Rwanda rebels won’t vote down the Bill when it comes to a head on Wednesday.Mr Clarke replied on X, formerly Twitter: “Well this particular MP isn’t “f***ing around””.Kate Devlin 16 January 2024 14:201705414515Asylum debates have entered ‘unchartered waters’, says law professorA law professor has described the asylum debates as entering “unchartered waters”.Dr Helen O’Nions, Associate Professor at Nottingham Law School said: “We are in unchartered waters whereby parliamentary sovereignty is being used as a justification to trump the rule of law and evidence-based reasoning.“Yet it seems likely that the upper chamber, which has become the voice of reason in the recent asylum debates, will reject most of the proposals.“All opposition MPs have already rejected them and many one-nation conservatives are profoundly uncomfortable with a policy which exports our refugee protection and human rights obligations.”Tara Cobham16 January 2024 14:151705413615Watch: Fujitsu boss Paul Patterson ‘sorry’ for firm’s role in Post Office Horizon scandalFujitsu boss Paul Patterson ‘sorry’ for firm’s role in Post Office Horizon scandalTara Cobham16 January 2024 14:001705412715Post Office inquiry MP admits he’s not seen ITV dramaA Post Office inquiry MP admitted he has not watched the popular ITV drama that catapulted the Horizon scandal into the public domain.Jonathan Gullis, MP for Stoke-on-Trent North, revealed he had been made to watch Paw Patrol with his young children instead, much to the amusement of those at the official Post Office inquiry on Tuesday (16 January).Mr Gullis said: “I might be one of the only people in the country who has yet to watch the ITV drama.“With having two young children I am stuck between Paw Patrol and many other shows.”Lucy Leeson reports: More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailWatch live as David Cameron takes questions in the House of Lords on Tuesday 16 January.The foreign secretary will be questioned on a range of topics, including how a lasting ceasefire arrangement between Israel and Gaza can be secured.Lord Cameron will be speaking in parliament after Rishi Sunak warned yesterday that the government remains “prepared to back our words with actions”, as missile attacks continued in the Red Sea despite last week’s air strikes against Houthi rebels.“The threats to shipping must cease. Illegally detained vessels and crews must be released. And we remain prepared to back our words with actions,” the prime minister told the House of Commons.The UK joined the US in targeting Houthi locations in Yemen last week as part of efforts to ensure international cargo vessels can travel through the vital shipping route after assaults by the Iran-backed militants.It is the latest clash during trouble sparked by the Israel-Hamas conflict. More