Legislation to go back to Commons due to peers standing up for rights of Afghans and scrutiny of refugees’ treatment

The parliamentary battle over Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda deportation bill will spill into next week after the Lords refused to budge over the rights of Afghans and scrutiny of the treatment of refugees in east Africa.

The move prompted an immediate backlash from the home secretary, James Cleverly, who blamed Labour for blocking the bill and being “terrified” that the Rwanda plan will stop asylum seekers from travelling to the UK in small boats.

Lords also press ministers to allow independent Rwanda monitoring as deportation bill returns to Commons

• UK politics – latest updates

Rishi Sunak’s government is considering concessions on the Rwanda deportation bill to allow exemptions for Afghans who served alongside UK forces, parliamentary sources say.

Ministers are also being pressed to give ground to an amendment to the legislation so that the east African country could be ruled unsafe by a monitoring committee.

Peers pass four amendments inserting safeguards into bill, including exempting migrants who helped British troops

Good morning. It is now more than five months since Rishi Sunak promised “emergency” legislation to address the supreme court judgment saying the government’s Rwanda deportation policy was unlawful. It has not proceeded at the pace of normal emergency legislation, but the safety of Rwanda (asylum and immigration) bill is now expected to clear parliament within the next 24/36 hours, and it should become law by the end of the week. (It does not became law until the king grants royal assent, and it can take a few hours to get Charles to sign the relevant bit of paper.)

But before parliamentary officials can send the bill to the Palace, the Commons and the Lords have to agree, and there are still four outstanding issues unresolved. Last night peers passed four amendments inserting safeguards into the bill. They would:

The problem is, we have no evidence that Rwanda is safe. All the evidence that is put before us demonstrates that at the moment it is not. The supreme court said in November it wasn’t safe. We signed a treaty with Rwanda which was supposed to remedy the defects, and this Act will come into force when the treaty comes into force. But even the treaty itself accepts that signing the treaty doesn’t make Rwanda safe.

All this amendment would say is that, instead of us in parliament in London being expected to assert in legislation that Rwanda is safe, when the evidence is including, from the government itself last night, that it isn’t currently safe, it’s a work in progress – instead of having to sign up to that untruth, the government would invite the monitoring committee to certify that Rwanda is safe and when it is safe, the flights can begin.

And should by any chance Rwanda ever cease to be a safe country, well the monitoring committee should say that as well.

Legislation to return to the Commons with changes that would ensure conformity with UK and other law and protect claimants

The Rwanda deportation bill has been delayed for at least one more day after the House of Lords voted for amendments that would ensure that it adheres to international and key domestic laws.

The plan to spend £541m to send 300 people seeking asylum to east Africa was sent back to the House of Commons after peers voted several times to add protections for claimants to the bill.

PM’s plan to prevent those under 16 ever being able to buy tobacco should pass due to Labour support, but many of his own MPs could abstain or vote against

In another interview this morning, Laura Farris , minister for victims, told GB News that she thought Liz Truss, the former PM, was wrong to call for the supreme court to be abolished . Asked about the proposal (one of many provocative things Truss has been saying in interviews to promote her new book), Farris said:

I’ve got to say, I don’t agree actually. I think that we have a healthy democracy, a pluralistic democracy.

And I think that institutions like the supreme court are vital, actually. And it’s always been the case that … our judiciary is admired the world over.

I think this is a very, very sensible policy and I’m not particularly interested in arguments about freedom on this one.

It took me years and years and years to quit. It’s one of my biggest regrets, actually.

Standing firm on our amendments would mean the Commons backs down or loses its legislation. It’s the only option left

So far this year, the House of Lords has debated the safety of Rwanda bill for more than 40 hours. Immediately before Easter, the Lords passed a second set of seven amendments and returned the bill to the Commons (which had earlier rejected the first set of 10 amendments). The Commons will consider those amendments when parliament returns from its Easter recess tomorrow.

The debate in the Lords has highlighted the fundamental flaws of the legislation, legally and constitutionally. But the government believes that “ stopping the boats ” is important enough to override the UK’s traditional respect for human rights; it argues that the scheme will have such a powerful deterrent effect that potential asylum seekers won’t cross the Channel.

Exclusive: Grandson of Winston Churchill says UK must send message to Israel after aid workers killed in Gaza

• UK politics – latest updates

The Conservative peer Sir Nicholas Soames has joined calls for the UK to stop arming Israel after an airstrike killed seven aid workers in Gaza.

Soames, the grandson of Winston Churchill, said the UK should send a “message” about Israel’s actions in Gaza.

Christopher Geidt asked to write apology letter after joining an MoD meeting on behalf of a US satellite firm that was paying him

A crossbench peer and former ethics adviser to Boris Johnson has been found to have broken House of Lords rules by joining a meeting with Ministry of Defence officials on behalf of a US satellite company that was paying him.

Christopher Geidt, a former royal aide to the Queen, was asked by the House of Lords conduct committee to write a letter of apology after the standards commissioner found he “provided a parliamentary service in return for payment or other reward”.

House of Lords Appointment Commission head says new forms for potential peers to be published

Rishi Sunak ad Keir Starmer will be asked to supply more due diligence about the peers they are proposing for the House of Lords, the appointments commission chief has said.

Ruth Deech, the head of the House of Lords Appointment Commission (Holac), said party leaders currently only provide “sketchy” information about the potential lords and ladies they put forward to her watchdog for vetting.