Robert Jenrick resigns as immigration minister
Rajeev Syal
The immigration minister, Robert Jenrick, has quit, just hours after the prime minister tabled a bill to save the Rwanda deportation policy.
He stood down after the legislation did not allow ministers to override international laws which have stopped the government from sending asylum seekers to central Africa.
Jenrick’s resignation will be seen as a move to position himself as the head of a growing rightwing rebellion aimed at ensuring that the UK can act unilaterally and send flights to Kigali.
Key events
-
Jenrick discloses ‘strong disagreements’ with government’s immigration policy
-
Home secretary confirms Robert Jenrick’s resignation as immigration minister
-
Robert Jenrick resigns as immigration minister
-
Robert Jenrick ‘has resigned’ as immigration minister
-
Cleverly refuses to confirm whether Robert Jenrick is still immigration minister
-
Rwanda would have abandoned deportation deal if new UK bill defied ECHR, its foreign minister suggests
-
Sunak tells Tory MPs they must ‘unite or die’ as publication of Rwanda bill exposes divisions
-
Rwanda bill ‘fatally flawed’, says source close to former home secretary Suella Braverman
-
Johnson booed as he leaves Covid inquiry
-
Sunak says new Rwanda bill will disapply Human Rights Act for small boat deportations
-
Government publishes its new Rwanda bill intended to allow deportations to go ahead
-
Johnson says it is ‘nonsense’ to claim he kept Hancock in post so he could be ‘sacrifice for inquiry’
-
Johnson says he has called Helen MacNamara to apologise for c-word expletive about her in No 10 WhatsApp exchange
-
Johnson says he sometimes spoke bluntly in meetings ‘to give people cover to do the same’
-
Johnson says culture at No 10 was ‘occasionally argumentative’, but says that was ‘no bad thing’
-
Johnson says he regrets saying long Covid was ‘bollocks’ and ‘Gulf War syndrome stuff’
-
Johnson says with hindsight he thinks he should have spent more time during Covid working with devolved administrations
-
Johnson says government may have pushed too hard in encouraging people back into office after lockdown
-
Johnson claims he can’t remember why he met Evgeny Lebedev at No 10 days before lockdown
-
Johnson rejects claims he could not make up his mind about lockdown
-
Johnson says he does not recall Hancock calling for immediate lockdown on 13 March, as he claims he did
-
Johnson claims he had not been told to avoid shaking hands when he did so on hospital visit
-
Johnson says he did not consider ignoring advice from scientists that locking down too soon would be mistake
-
Party leaders row over Rwanda agreement at PMQs
-
Johnson says he does not recall being told Cobra conclusion from 26 February 2020 mass deaths increasingly likely
-
Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer clash over Margaret Thatcher at prime minister’s questions
-
Johnson says by late February he ‘should have twigged’ about seriousness of Covid
-
Johnson says ‘fallacious, inductive logic’ led to government not taking seriously early estimate of possible Covid death toll
-
Johnson suggests government did not fully believe forecasts about potential Covid deaths in early 2020
-
Johnson defends not chairing early Cobra meetings on Covid himself
-
Johnson dismisses Simon Case’s highly critical WhatsApp messages, claiming Thatcher’s team feuded in private too
-
Johnson claims he cannot recall being told talented people refusing to work at No 10 due to toxic culture
-
Johnson rejects claims toxic culture at No 10 was problematic, saying ‘challenge’ helpful and all governments similar
-
Johnson tells inquiry he only read minutes of Sage meetings ‘once or twice’
-
Johnson claims cabinet ‘more reluctant’ to impose lockdown-type measures than he was
-
Johnson says he is ‘not sure’ if government decisions led to Covid deaths being higher than necessary
-
Johnson cannot explain why some WhatsApp messages missing from old phone, but says he did not remove them
-
Johnson says he is ‘deeply sorry’ for pain and suffering experienced during pandemic
-
Protest in Covid inquiry as Boris Johnson begins giving evidence
-
Inquiry chair Lady Hallett issues reprimand over advance reports about what Johnson likely to say
-
What Johnson is expected to tell Covid inquiry, according to newspaper reports published in advance
-
For Johnson to claim he saved thousands of lives would be ‘distortion of truth’, bereaved families claim
-
Boris Johnson arrives early at Covid inquiry and is expected to say he got ‘most of the big calls right’
Jenrick, who was appointed in October 2022, also said the emergency legislation introduced to revive the Rwanda policy had “moved towards my position” but the Bill was “a triumph of hope over experience”.
He said: “In our discussions on the proposed emergency legislation you have moved towards my position, for which I am grateful.
“Nevertheless. I am unable to take the currently proposed legislation through the Commons as I do not believe it provides us with the best possible chance of success.
“A Bill of the kind you are proposing is a triumph of hope over experience. The stakes for the country are too high for us not to pursue the stronger protections required to end the merry-go-round of legal challenges which risk paralysing the scheme and negating its intended deterrent.”
In the letter to Rishi Sunak, Jenrick said the small boats crisis was doing “untold damage” to the country and the government needed to place “national interests highly contested interpretations of international law”.
He added: “As you know, I have been pushing for the strongest possible piece of emergency legislation to ensure that under the Rwanda policy we remove as many small boat arrivals, as swiftly as possible to generate the greatest deterrent effect.
“This stems from my firmly held position that the small boats crisis is a national emergency that is doing untold damage to our country, and the only way we will be able to stop the boats completely is by urgently introducing a major new deterrent.
“I have therefore consistently advocated for a clear piece of legislation that severely limits the opportunities for domestic and foreign courts to block or undermine the effectiveness of the policy.”
Jenrick discloses ‘strong disagreements’ with government’s immigration policy
Robert Jenrick has officially announced his resignation on X, saying “I cannot continue in my position when I have such strong disagreements with the direction of the Government’s policy on immigration.”
That brings the Commons’ reaction to the home seecretary’s Rwanda statement to an end.
The Guardian’s Pippa Crerar on Robert Jenrick’s resignation.
Cleverly, asked how the Bill can comply with international law when its front page states the Home Secretary cannot say it is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, told the Commons: “Because what the statement says on the front of the Bill is clear, the words are unambiguous.
“But also I am absolutely certain that we are in accordance with international law, the two are not interchangeable.”
Conservative former immigration minister Kevin Foster asked if Ministry of Defence aircraft could be used to transfer people to Rwanda, with Mr Cleverly replying: “I don’t want at this point to go into too much detail of all the operational procedures, but I can reassure him we’re thinking about the logistics of that.”
Conservative former minister Mark Francois said the Home Secretary had “pointedly ducked” questions about individual appeals.
He asked: “As every person we would seek to send to Rwanda is an individual, if under this legislation those people could continue to appeal and appeal in order to delay being put on a flight, what’s the point of the Bill?”
Cleverly, in his reply, said: “An appeal process is an important part of a new legal process, it will not preclude people from being sent to Rwanda on this scheme.”
The provision of individual appeals is not related to the safety of Rwanda, the home secretary said.
James Cleverly’s comments were in response to a question from Conservative former minister Dr Caroline Johnson, who said: “There is a provision as he said for individual claims, can he tell what circumstances such an individual could expect to be successful? And how long that and the appeals process will be expected to take?”
Cleverly said: “The provision of individual claims is not to do with the safety of Rwanda, that’s an important distinction that needs to be made.
“Of course there does need to be provisions for appeals, that’s a normal part of any judicial or legal process.”
Home secretary confirms Robert Jenrick’s resignation as immigration minister
Cleverly has now confirmed that Robert Jenrick has resigned as immigration minister.
“That has been confirmed,” Cleverly said after repeated questioning.
Robert Jenrick resigns as immigration minister
Rajeev Syal
The immigration minister, Robert Jenrick, has quit, just hours after the prime minister tabled a bill to save the Rwanda deportation policy.
He stood down after the legislation did not allow ministers to override international laws which have stopped the government from sending asylum seekers to central Africa.
Jenrick’s resignation will be seen as a move to position himself as the head of a growing rightwing rebellion aimed at ensuring that the UK can act unilaterally and send flights to Kigali.
James Cleverly will be judged for “decades” on the impact of the Government’s new Rwanda treaty and emergency bill, a senior Conservative backbencher has claimed.
Tory former minister Sir John Hayes, a close ally of ex-home secretary Suella Braverman, told the Commons: “The new Home Secretary will of course be aware and welcome the fact that he will be… judged by the effectiveness of this legislation for weeks and months and years, perhaps decades even.
“So will he confirm that the provisions in this Bill are sufficient to resist individual challenges from those who might be sent to Rwanda, and the interest groups and the dodgy lawyers who support them? And in particular would he speak specifically about the disapplication of Rule 39?”
Rule 39 orders from European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg have been used to suspend attempts to deport migrants in the past.
Cleverly replied: “The right is for ministers to decide on our response to a Rule 39 application, that is in the Bill. He is right that this sets important precedents.
The European court of human rights would benefit from “evolution” and “updating”, Cleverly told the Commons.
The Conservative former home secretary Priti Patel asked for details of any assessments made “as to whether the disapplication of the Human Rights Act and other laws are robust and will stand up to the legal challenges and ensure ultimately the delivery and the implementation of this policy”.
Cleverly said: “The UK takes its international obligations incredibly seriously. The Human Rights Act is in part being disapplied through this legislation”
He said the UK was one of the founding members of the European court of human rights, adding: “We regard it as an important institution, but like many postwar institutions it would benefit from evolution, it would benefit from updating.”
The home secretary added: “We have a robust legal system, we have a robust parliamentary system here in the UK. We should have some more self-confidence in those systems and use our experience to help capacity-building in partner countries like Rwanda.”