POLLING expert Professor John Curtice has given his verdict on how Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda bill may impact the timing of the next General Election.
The Prime Minister is facing a new year showdown over his immigration policy after right-wing Tory MPs said they could vote it down if it is not tightened.
Sunak won a crunch vote on Tuesday on the Safety of Rwanda Bill after spending the day in talks with potential rebels to avoid a defeat on his flagship “stop the boats” pledge.
During an interview with the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland, Curtice was asked where the bill “needs to go” for Sunak to choose when the next Westminster election might be.
READ MORE: Watch as MP perfectly sums up Tories' 'poisonous' record on immigration
He said: “The honest truth is that given the Government is still nearly 20 points behind in the opinion polls, I think even if this bill were to be defeated or to be significantly amended, this Government is not in the position to deploy the threat of going to the country.
“Going to the country at the moment would probably look like a suicide mission.”
MPs approved the bill at second reading by 313 votes to 269, giving the UK Government a winning majority of 44.
Although dozens abstained, no Tory MP voted against the bill. Following the result, Rishi Sunak tweeted: “The British people should decide who gets to come to this country – not criminal gangs or foreign courts.
“That’s what this bill delivers. We will now work to make it law so that we can get flights going to Rwanda and stop the boats.”
READ MORE: Rwanda could walk away with millions without accepting any asylum seekers, MPs told
Elsewhere on the BBC show, Curtice said the vote was a “safer win than some of the speculation anticipated”.
He added the “problem” right-wing Tory MPs had was whether or not they would be able to put anything forward that “both they and the opposition parties will be willing to vote for”.
Curtice also said where the Government had to worry was if opposition parties or the House of Lords started to craft amendments that appealed to “more centrist Conservative MPs”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel