LONDON (AP) 鈥 U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak quelled a Conservative Party rebellion and got his stalled plan to send some asylum-seekers on a one-way trip to Rwanda through the House of Commons on Wednesday.
Lawmakers voted 320 to 276 to back a bill intended to overcome a U.K. Supreme Court block on the Rwanda plan. But the contentious immigration policy on which Sunak has staked his authority still faces political and legal hurdles. And Sunak remains at the helm of a divided and demoralized party that is lagging in the polls.
The vote came a day after some in an effort to make the legislation tougher. The dissent cost Sunak two party deputy chairmen, who quit in order to vote against the government.
But when it came to a vote on the bill as a whole, the rebellion melted away, and only 11 Conservatives voted against the legislation.
A larger rebellion Wednesday would have doomed the , and imperiled Sunak鈥檚 15-month-old government.
鈥淚t鈥檚 this bill or no bill. It鈥檚 this bill or no chance,鈥 Conservative lawmaker Bob Seely told colleagues before the vote.
The bill now goes to the unelected House of Lords, Parliament鈥檚 upper chamber, where it faces more opposition.
With polls showing the Conservatives trailing far behind the Labour opposition in opinion polls, Sunak has made the controversial 鈥 鈥 immigration policy central to his attempt to win an election this year.
He argues that deporting unauthorized asylum-seekers will deter people from making risky journeys across the English Channel and break the business model of people-smuggling gangs.
鈥淲e have a plan. It鈥檚 working,鈥 Sunak said Wednesday in the House of Commons.
He needs to convince fellow Conservatives, as well as voters, that it鈥檚 true. But the liberal and law-and-order wings of the Conservatives 鈥 always uneasy allies 鈥 are at loggerheads over the Rwanda plan.
Moderates worry the policy is too extreme, concerns underscored when the United Nations鈥 refugee agency said this week the Rwanda plan 鈥渋s not compatible with international refugee law.鈥
However, many on the party鈥檚 powerful right wing think the bill doesn鈥檛 go far enough in deterring migration to the U.K. Hard-liners鈥 attempts to toughen the bill on Wednesday failed as lawmakers rejected several amendments, including one that would have let British authorities routinely ignore emergency injunctions from the European Court of Human Rights.
Critics say that would breach international law, but Suella Braverman, a former interior minister and leading hard-liner, said the 鈥渇oreign鈥 European court was 鈥渃urrently controlling this country鈥檚 ability to stop the boats.鈥
Many rebels grudgingly voted for the bill rather than risk sinking the whole policy, but they remain unhappy.
Sunak insists the bill goes as far as the government can because Rwanda will pull out of its agreement to rehouse asylum-seekers if the U.K. breaks international law.
Labour Party leader Keir Starmer said the Conservatives are tearing themselves apart over the plan, like 鈥渉undreds of bald men scrapping over a single broken comb.鈥
The Rwanda policy is key to Sunak鈥檚 pledge to 鈥渟top the boats 鈥漛ringing to the U.K. across the English Channel from France. More than 29,000 people made the perilous journey in 2023, down from 42,000 the year before. last week while trying to launch a boat from northern France in the dark and winter cold.
London and Kigali made a deal almost two years ago under which migrants who reach Britain across the Channel would be sent to Rwanda, where they would stay permanently. Britain has paid Rwanda at least 240 million pounds ($305 million) under the agreement, but no one has yet been sent to the East African country.
Human rights groups have criticized the plan as inhumane and unworkable. After it was challenged in British courts, the U.K. Supreme Court ruled in November that the policy was illegal because Rwanda isn鈥檛 a safe country for refugees.
In response to the court ruling, Britain and Rwanda for migrants. Sunak鈥檚 government argues the treaty allows it to declaring Rwanda a safe destination.
If approved by Parliament, the law would allow the government to 鈥渄isapply鈥 sections of U.K. human rights law when it comes to Rwanda-related asylum claims and make it harder to challenge the deportations in court.
The bill is sure to face more opposition in coming weeks in the House of Lords, where Sunak鈥檚 Conservatives do not have a majority. The Lords can delay and amend legislation but ultimately can鈥檛 overrule the elected House of Commons.
Rwandan officials suggested they were growing tired of the British drama around the deal. President Paul Kagame said it was 鈥渢he U.K.鈥檚 problem, not Rwanda鈥檚 problem鈥 that no asylum-seekers have been sent to the country.
鈥淚f they don鈥檛 come, we can return the money,鈥 Kagame told the BBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
