Q&A: Why Rwanda failed – and were the Tories serious about migration?

2026-01-30

Download

To submit your urgent questions to Michael and Maddie, visit spectator.com/quiteright.In this week’s Q&A: Michael and Maddie tackle Labour’s uneasy majority and ask why a government with a 174-seat majority already looks so skittish. Are backbench rebellions a sign of weakness – or a rational response from MPs who expect to be out in one term? Does Keir Starmer lack the political instincts needed to hold such a sprawling parliamentary party together?Also this week: could the Rwanda scheme ever have saved the C...

To submit your urgent questions to Michael and Maddie, visit spectator.com/quiteright.

In this week’s Q&A: Michael and Maddie tackle Labour’s uneasy majority and ask why a government with a 174-seat majority already looks so skittish. Are backbench rebellions a sign of weakness – or a rational response from MPs who expect to be out in one term? Does Keir Starmer lack the political instincts needed to hold such a sprawling parliamentary party together?

Also this week: could the Rwanda scheme ever have saved the Conservatives? Michael lifts the lid on why the plan stalled – from internal resistance within the state to the limits of last-minute delivery – and explains why even a symbolic flight would not have reversed Tory defeat.

And as faith in multilateral institutions frays, they ask whether the UN still serves a meaningful purpose, or whether international law has acquired an undeserved air of moral infallibility.

Produced by Oscar Edmondson

Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.

For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Comments (3)