Rwanda plan flaws are not separate from moral argument against it

Receive free UK Government updates

We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest UK Government news every morning.

Good morning. Another day, another reverse for the government’s Rwanda policy, this time in the appeal court.

Because the Labour party doesn’t want to get into a moral argument about immigration, its MPs and frontbenchers are urged to focus on the pragmatic shortcomings of the policy.

But the reality is that the pragmatic shortcomings of the policy can’t be separated from the moral ones. Indeed, they are caused by them. Some thoughts on why below.

It’s A-Pauling

The British government’s Rwanda policy continues to be a great piece of statecraft: by Paul Kagame, that is. He has essentially bought the government’s Africa policy with £120mn of the UK’s own money — paid by the British government to the Rwandan one — before a single deportation flight has left the UK for the African nation. He can look forward to much more money if — though it is a very big “if” — the UK government ever manages to implement the policy. It will seek permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s ruling at the Supreme Court.

Last week the US and the EU called on Rwanda to cease its alleged support for M23, the militia that re-emerged in 2021 to wage an offensive in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. The US, EU and the DRC all say the group is backed by Kagame’s government. (The FT’s East and Central Africa bureau chief Andres Schipani reports from Nairobi on all that here.) But, because of the deal struck with Kigali, the UK has said nothing at all.

The scheme to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is working rather less well for Rishi Sunak. The number of people coming to the UK via small boats isn’t being eased, and now the Court of Appeal has ruled that the scheme is unlawful, on the grounds that Rwanda is not a safe third country.

How could it be otherwise? How can a country that is accused of waging a proxy war via a militia, of arresting opposition politicians on false pretexts, and of assassinating its opponents on foreign soil be anything other than unsafe?

Now, it’s true to say that the reason why the Court of Appeal has ruled this way is to do with Rwanda’s asylum system, not with the many things that Kagame’s government is accused of. (Do add Rwanda to your myFT function here, or borrow or buy Michela Wrong’s excellent book Do Not Disturb for much more on all that.)

The central block to the Rwanda policy is article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the right to freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.

But as Janan Ganesh writes in an excellent column about Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, the competence of a government and the freedom of its citizens are not independent variables. It is the right to complain, to dissent, to vote against the government that is the best guarantee that your government can do the basics. It is not a perfect guarantee, but it is a whole lot better than the alternatives.

The same thing that means that I can complain freely about my local Labour council’s lamentable procurement decisions on my housing estate or the shortcomings of the Conservative government nationally is what makes both those institutions have to improve and to tackle their problems.

It’s not that the UK government’s Rwanda policy is uncertain to work and there any number of question marks over Kagame’s government. The Rwanda policy is uncertain to work because of the question marks around Kagame’s government. You can’t have an effective border regime if your citizens are frightened about what will happen if they complain about it. Almost by definition, a government that people cannot freely oppose is going to be a poor guarantor of anyone’s article 3 rights.

Now try this

It’s my in-laws’ ruby wedding anniversary party this weekend, so I am off to rural Staffordshire. I have been scouring the FT Books’ summer recommendations for books to take on the train journey. (You can read my pick here).

However you spend it, have a wonderful weekend.

Top stories today

• Long-awaited NHS plan revealed | A plan to provide about twice the current number of training places for doctors and nurses in England by 2031 has been unveiled by the NHS. Jeremy Hunt said it would end the country’s reliance on expensive agency staff. This would potentially save about £10bn between 2030 and 2037, according to the NHS. 

• Farage claims ‘political persecution’ | Nigel Farage, former Brexit party leader, has claimed he is being driven out of the UK by a pro-Remain banking establishment that will not let him open an account.

• Courts ‘crying out’ for reform | Problems with a £1.3bn government programme to modernise the courts in England and Wales have placed an “unacceptable” burden on the justice system, MPs have warned, as figures show a record number of serious criminal cases are taking more than two years to conclude.

• Priti bad rap | Several of Boris Johnson’s closest political allies have been censured for “contempts of parliament” and disparaging MPs investigating the partygate scandal, in a report by the House of Commons privileges committee published yesterday.

• House prices tick up | UK house prices edged up unexpectedly in June, showing resilience in the face of surging mortgage rates, according to the lender Nationwide.