Peers vote down controversial measures, marking a major setback for the government’s asylum and nationality proposals.

Central elements of Priti Patel’s contentious Nationality and Borders Bill have been rejected in the House of Lords, a move celebrated by campaigners as a “victory for compassion.” The government has been urged to reconsider its approach after peers voted against provisions that penalise refugees based on their arrival method (Clause 11) and allow citizenship removal without notice (Clause 9).

Clause 11 proposed treating asylum seekers differently based on their route into the UK, denying full refugee rights to those arriving via unauthorised means, such as small boats or trucks. Refugees in this category would only receive temporary status without benefits or family reunion rights. Critics, including the UNHCR, warned this breaches the 1951 Refugee Convention.

During a Lords debate, ministers defended the clause, arguing it would still protect refugees but distinguish between those who claimed asylum directly and without delay. However, senior Conservatives, including David Davis and Dominic Grieve, criticised the policy as “dangerous” and in violation of international obligations. Peers voted to remove Clause 11 by 204 to 126.

Clause 9, allowing the home secretary to revoke British citizenship without notice for reasons like national security or public interest, was also rejected. Critics argued this power disproportionately affects ethnic minorities and risks Windrush-style injustices. Maya Foa of Reprieve highlighted the Lords’ stand against what she termed a “power grab.” Peers voted 209 to 193 to remove this clause.

Campaigners welcomed the decisions. Sonya Sceats of Freedom from Torture called the votes a “clear message to abandon cruel and inhumane policies.” Enver Solomon of the Refugee Council praised the rejection of Clause 11 as “a victory for humanity and refugee rights,” urging the government to respect the Lords’ stance.

The bill, now significantly altered, will return to the House of Commons for further votes in the coming weeks. Critics hope MPs will heed the Lords’ objections and strike down these contentious provisions for good.