Why Suella Braverman’s five-point plan to save the Rwanda policy won’t be used

Suella Braverman has revealed her five-point plan to save the Rwanda deal after judges found it unlawful as part of a week of broadsides against Rishi Sunak that allies have branded a “grid of shit”.

The former home secretary unveiled her proposals in a Telegraph article that said the Prime Minister’s plans for a treaty with Rwanda and emergency legislation to meet the Supreme Court’s concerns only amounted to “tinkering”.

But would Ms Braverman’s five proposals be any better?

The Bill must address the Supreme Court’s concerns regarding Rwanda

The ex-home secretary said it was not important to strike a new treaty but that moves to make clear Rwanda is safe would be essential to address the issues identified by judges.

This could include amending the agreement to embed UK observers and independent reviewers of asylum decisions.

Controversy rating: 6/10 – the contingencies appear likely to have been worked on by Mr Sunak and Ms Braverman before she was sacked but simply passing laws declaring Rwanda is safe have already proven somewhat controversial.

The Bill must enable flights before the next election

Ms Braverman calls for legislation to “exclude all avenues of legal challenge”, disapplying “the entirety of the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights, and other relevant international obligations, or legislation, including the Refugee Convention”.

This would effectively ban all legal challenges against the Rwanda deal.

Controversy rating: 10/10 – Effectively ignoring a series of United Nations, European and UK human rights laws and treaties would trigger a major backlash among allies and moderate Conservative Cabinet ministers and MPs. But Mr Sunak is likely to face pressure from the Tory right to do just this if he cannot get a flight taking off by the next election.

‘Swift removal must be swift removal‘

Ms Braverman suggests changing the Illegal Migration Act to impose time limits on the home secretary within which they must deport Channel asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Controversy rating: 7/10 – There will be major questions over the impact on appeal rights and the ability and capacity of the Home Office to actually operationalise this.

‘Those arriving here illegally must be detained‘

Ms Braverman calls for legal challenges to detention of Channel asylum seekers to be “excluded”.

Controversy rating: 8/10 – This is also likely to mean ignoring certain laws and international treaties and will therefore prove highly contentious.

‘This must be treated as an emergency‘

Ms Braverman says emergency laws should be debated before the Christmas parliamentary recess and that MPs should be recalled to debate it and ensure its passage.

Controversy rating: 4/10 – MPs are likely to be annoyed about having their Christmas break cancelled, with a knock-on impact on already fragile Tory morale, but voters won’t care.