Rishi Sunak has tied his fate to the Rwanda Bill – and both seem destined to fail

Editorial: Whether or not his bill ever becomes law, when the time comes for him to face the country in an election, Rishi Sunak will not be able to claim that he has ‘stopped the boats’

Rishi Sunak has himself to blame for tying his own political fortunes to his impossible pledge on immigration (PA)

The Conservative government, now surely in its final months of office, is so riven with division that it is difficult to justify its existence, let alone any notion of another term.

The party has been in a state of civil war, on and off, since the regicide of Margaret Thatcher, with periods of relative unity – mostly during David Cameron’s leadership – being more of a truce than a permanent end to hostilities. As has been all too apparent in recent months, the Conservative Party is really two parties and, with few exceptions, their respective members despise one another even more than they do their nominal political opponents.

We have, today, a situation in which the future of the nation is being decided by factional infighting within the governing party, with politicians positioning themselves for a future in opposition – which, perversely, is the only way in which most of them will be able to progress their careers. When figures of no great distinction, such as Suella Braverman, Robert Jenrick, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Nigel Farage, are jockeying for future leadership positions, the country rightly concludes that the political right has had its day. This is no way to run a party, let alone a country. It is, in truth, a kind of tragedy.

Like all civil wars, the conflict is long-lasting and ranges over many battlefields: Europe, above all; taxation; the size of the state and public borrowing; and, at the moment, immigration. The predicament of the present leader is a familiar one. It is the same one that faced John Major and Theresa May in their unhappy, unstable years in government – that of trying to lead an unleadable party.

Yet again, the Conservative Party has plainly lost sight of its raison d’etre, which served it so well in the past: to govern in the national interest. Instead, it has given up on discipline and places personal ambition and factional advantage above hanging on to power.

So it is with the Rwanda imbroglio. Mr Sunak does have himself to blame for tying his own political fortunes to the impossible pledge to “stop the boats” – and for doubling down on the Rwanda plan, which remains illegal under international conventions as well as being impractical (and so small that it cannot act as any sort of deterrent).

If that is the hill he wishes to die on – a bizarre gimmick dreamt up by Priti Patel and Mr Johnson to divert attention from their own failures – then he is a poor tactician indeed. The reality, after all, is that the divisions in his own party in the Commons, combined with widespread opposition in the House of Lords and future judicial action, will delay the implementation of the bill until the general election overtakes it. To have such a battle royale with his own party, over a policy that will never be implemented, suggests that Mr Sunak is being uncharacteristically petulant and illogical.

Yet his party is not helping him. Those on the right say that the latest attempt to resuscitate the scheme with a slightly ludicrous bill – which declares the world to be not as it is – doesn’t go far enough. They do so in the most pompous, lurid and personal manner, decrying the prime minister’s motives and abilities and appointing an absurd Toytown “star chamber” to decide on the bill’s legal status.

Ms Braverman, more and more embittered, tells her party that it faces oblivion under Mr Sunak; perhaps that is so, but she is doing her best to ensure that it happens. The same goes for Mr Jenrick, once an ally of Mr Sunak but now seemingly determined to secure himself a senior position in the shadow cabinet in opposition.

Meanwhile, those on the left of the party, more supportive but still troublesome, are taking their own advice about whether or not they’ll support the bill. Their concern is that the “disapplication” of domestic human rights law will itself violate international conventions, and it is hard to conclude otherwise.

If the right or the left, or both wings, decide to vote down the Rwanda Bill, it will be another humiliation for Mr Sunak. But far from being deterred by the thought of such a denouement, some of his most dedicated enemies seem to relish the prospect.

As the then Mr Major and Ms May discovered, the only way to survive such a crisis is to hedge your bets, fudge the options, and try to appease the factions as best you can. For most of their time in office, both led minority administrations; Mr Sunak is being bullied even with a majority of 60 or so.

That is a measure of the mess the party is in, along with the country – stasis on an issue that is of acute public concern. All Mr Sunak can do is make his case, and tell the factions on both sides not to worry about what his bill actually says, because it can be amended later on.

The whips will do their usual work in applying logic, appealing to loyalty, creating helpful ambiguity and applying necessary pressure so that the bill receives its formal second reading on Tuesday. The can has been kicked down the road, and the resolution of the insoluble problem postponed for another time.

Given the parliamentary timetable, the crunch may not come until some way into the new year. There is one thing, though, of which we may be certain: whether or not his Rwanda Bill ever becomes law, and whether or not a single refugee is ever deported under it, when the time comes for him to face the country in an election, Mr Sunak will not be able to claim that he has “stopped the boats”. He can’t even stop Suella.