refullment of those sent to it. that is something the courts have already accepted. it is something that it is open to this house to do, and it is something in myjudgment, which is perfectly legitimate for parliament to undertake, it would be different if it was to reverse a decision against an individual, but even if i am wrong about that, even if, as a matter of constitutional convention, it were under social for this house to reverse the effect on a question of principle, namely whether rwanda is safe for the purposes of refullment, the facts have changed. there is now a binding treaty, which is not only binding in international law, but is binding in domestic rwandan law, because rwanda has a system, my right honourable friend the memberfor stone has rightly analysed the situation of international law, in in country we have a dualistjurisdiction where treaties are self executing but in rwanda the treaty is self executing so the treaty will be binding not only as a matter of international law on the rwandan government but on a rwandan government as a matter of its own law, and that treaty contains a range of important safeguards. including as a long stop the fact that no individual removed to rwanda from this country can be removed to a third country without the consent of the united kingdom. if that long stop is in place, if it binding in rwandan law, if it is binding in rwandan law, if it is binding as it is in international law, i would suggest there is simply no credible risk, if treaties and legal rules are mean anything in the country's both in the united kingdom and in rwanda, of refullment. if the risk of refullment has been removed, then there is nothing inappropriate with this house determining as the labour government did in 2004, that this country rwanda, for the purpose of refullment is safe. so i say to the house, it is appropriate, it is a judgment that we can make as the house, to take the step that we are now doing. now let me move to the third question, because the third question to me about, i can't give way, don't have time. the third question is the most important. the exclusion of the, of access to courts. this bill carefully preserves the right of individuals to come to court, in extreme cases, of individualjustice. i would sun mitt to those who think this bill goes far enough and i listened impressed to the member for newark, we can't sacrifice the principle of access to a court. if we eliminated it entirely, not only would this bill collapse, because it will be intermibly impeded in the house of lords, it will probably lead to the rwandan government withdrawing and it is conceivable that the courts themselves may entertain for the first time a complex challenge about the right of this parliament, to do away with fundamental constitutional principles such as access to a court. this house app and its supremacy does not necessarily mean that he it does not operation within a complex system of constitutional institutions, each of which it has its own place in, as a component part in this system. no, i cannot give way, i simply do not have time. i simply do not have time. constitutional principles compete in creative tension, parliamentary sovereignty is the most important of them, but there are others that are fundamental, and one of them is access to a court in extreme cases. that is what this bill preserves, and i say to my right honourable friends, i understand the frustration, and the deep and intense dissatisfaction with the current situation, i share it. i think there are tightens we can do, particularly on rule 39, but on the preservation of it will right to go to court, in an extreme case, i say thatis to court, in an extreme case, i say that is part ofst british constitution that our fathers, and our party has supported and fought for, for generations. and it would be wrong for... i for, for generations. and it would be wrong for. . ._ for, for generations. and it would be wrong for... i am sorry to have to interrupt- _ be wrong for... i am sorry to have to interrupt. order, _ be wrong for. .. i am sorry to have to interrupt. order, i— be wrong for... i am sorry to have to interrupt. order, i am - be wrong for. .. i am sorry to have to interrupt. order, i am sorry- be wrong for... i am sorry to have to interrupt. order, i am sorry to | to interrupt. order, i am sorry to have _ to interrupt. order, i am sorry to have to _ to interrupt. order, i am sorry to have to interrupt. he is fully aware we have _ have to interrupt. he is fully aware we have to — have to interrupt. he is fully aware we have to stick to the time limit. after_ we have to stick to the time limit. after sir— we have to stick to the time limit. after sir george howarth, order. which _ after sir george howarth, order. which i _ after sir george howarth, order. which i am — after sir george howarth, order. which i am going to call next, i am afraid _ which i am going to call next, i am afraid given — which i am going to call next, i am afraid given the number of honourable members that wish to participate we will have to reduce the time — participate we will have to reduce the time limit to six minutes. thank ou mr the time limit to six minutes. thank you mr deputy _ the time limit to six minutes. thank you mr deputy speaker. _ the time limit to six minutes. thank you mr deputy speaker. the - you mr deputy speaker. the government's failure to arrive at a workable solution to the problem of simon seekers, is not —— asylum seekers is notjust how they try simon seekers, is not —— asylum seekers is not just how they try to deal with refugees as many have already demonstrated but its failure to create the capacity in our country to remain to maintain reliable services to such an extent that many british people find themselves unable to gain access to basic needs, and services, to which they are entitled. and also, about they are entitled. and also, about the stewardship of the economy. additionally, it is rooted in the government's careless conduct of our relationship with other countries, particularly in europe. it is in my view important to be clear about the principles any approach should be based on. the problem is, however, that the government too often confuses slogans with policy, and in doing so, it fails to take account of the principles on which a realistic policy should be based. it its cynical obsession with creating dividing lines is a barrier to building the sort of consensus my right honourable the member for castleford referred to. let me, for the purpose of clarity say at the outset our country's capacity to admit migrants is finite. it follows we need a much more structured method of determining how many people can be accommodated which takes into account the past capacity of public services and our economy. a later will say a few words about the space in our economy to fill the gaps we find in various industries, and sectors, but one of the principles would be to match, would be immigrants with sectors in which there are not sufficient people, to be able to plug those gaps. and many do have those skills.— do have those skills. grateful to him for giving — do have those skills. grateful to him for giving way. _ do have those skills. grateful to him for giving way. beefy - do have those skills. grateful to him for giving way. beefy would j do have those skills. grateful to i him for giving way. beefy would he agree _ him for giving way. beefy would he agree with — him for giving way. beefy would he agree with me, when we are talking about— agree with me, when we are talking about people claiming asylum it would _ about people claiming asylum it would be — about people claiming asylum it would be make imminent sense to ensure _ would be make imminent sense to ensure they would have the right to work while — ensure they would have the right to work while they are waiting for' digs, _ work while they are waiting for' digs, it— work while they are waiting for' digs, it would allow them to be integrated better into the community, but also it would reduce the cost _ community, but also it would reduce the cost to— community, but also it would reduce the cost to the taxpayer to allow those _ the cost to the taxpayer to allow those people to support themselves while they are here? | those people to support themselves while they are here? i am those people to support themselves while they are here?— while they are here? i am grateful for the while they are here? i am grateful forthe point _ while they are here? i am grateful for the point he _ while they are here? i am grateful for the point he make, _ while they are here? i am grateful for the point he make, later- while they are here? i am grateful for the point he make, later in - while they are here? i am grateful for the point he make, later in myj for the point he make, later in my speech i will address that very point, if i have enough time. the, so, perhaps i can say a word about the capacity of those service, in england the nhs waiting list for hospital treatment rose to a record of nearly 7.8 million, in september. up of nearly 7.8 million, in september. up from approximately 2.3 million over the past two years. ambulance response times have also risen with the average response to a call of going up to one hour 30 minutes in december, 2022 which compares to the target of 18 minutes, or take housing, the uk is experiencing an acute housing crisis, which house building consistently failing to keep pace with demand. the national federation of housing, national federation of housing, national federation of housing associations say that there are 8.5 million people in england, who are in housing need, 42 million of which are in need of a social rented home in england. and in england 2022, people were having to spend over eight times the annual salary to purchase a home. in terms of school capacity, in 2021, 17% of primary schools were at over capacity, and in secondary schools, the figure was 23%. mr deputy speaker, we didn't get to this position by accident. it is the result of 13 years of careless neglect and the obsessive pursuit of shrinking the state. now i will turn to the capacity of our economy, and the ongoing skills shortages we are faced with. gdp is at zero growth, and low gdp growth is forecast to continue into 2024 and possibly beyond. the office of budget responsibility�*s latest economic and fiscal out look stated that standards are forecast, living standards are forecast, living standards are forecast to be 3.5% lower by 2024/25 than at prepandemic levels. which is the largest reduction in real living standards since records began in 1950s. the skills shoresage affect our overall economic performance, they are also having a negative effect on public services such as health, housing and food supply, and the care and hospitality sectors. as i have already said, many of the refugees here already have, do have those skills, and with the constructive approach from the government, would be able to plug the gaps in those sectors, and consequently help grow the economy. before i condition couude the economy. before i condition collude mr deputy speakerly say a few words about how our poor relationship with europe and the wider world makes it more difficult for us to co—operate with other country, whether bilaterally or through collective international efforts. to deal with the deeply damaging consequences of war and conflict. part of which is the growing displacement of people from their home land which results in mass migration. bluntly, we are not trusted as a reliable and constructive partner, and our international influence is diminished to the extent other countries simply don't take us seriously. as i said at the outset, the government has tried to turn a slogan, stop the boats into a policy and consequently, failed to offer a solution to this problem. many on the benches opposite, know this is the benches opposite, know this is the case, but o splintered into factions either wanting to go further as we have already heard, or regard also of our international obligations, oraware regard also of our international obligations, or aware another more effective approach is needed. sadly, that bill and their conduct illustrates the conservative party is not a competent or coherent party fit to govern but rather one riven by warring factions. frankly, it is now time for them to make way for a national leadership and party, which will deal with our mounting problems, calmly, and competently. after a good deal of hesitation, i shall support this bill tonight. but silt a hesitation that has been real, because for me, it goes as close to the wind as one can constitutionally do. i listened with great care to the very eloquent speech by my right honourable friend the memberfor west speech by my right honourable friend the member for west devon. speech by my right honourable friend the memberfor west devon. agree with his careful analysis of the bill. say this too, it is a novel and unusual approach, we are dealing with an unusual and pressing situation, and therefore i think straining the sinews of what is acceptable can, canjust straining the sinews of what is acceptable can, can just be justified. but equally, the idea that legislation is the sole or the principle solution so this is, i think wrong. . ultimately what is required is an operational solution. and, what is surprising, is that previous, some previous occupants of the home office did not think about that rather more and i know others did and it's a pity they were not acted upon more, but ultimately it will be operational measures that make the real difference, if this can make a real difference and provided there remain the safeguards that my right honourable friend has referred to, i can, with hesitation, live with it. i am indebted to the analysis provided by the society of