Watch and marvel as the mad old Tory circular firing squad is back on parade

Somebody pinch me, I seem to have fallen through a space-time warp and landed in 1994.

There in the chamber below was Bill Cash, a sheaf of amendments in his arms, waffling about parliamentary sovereignty. A few seats away, John Redwood nodded along, and not far off the languorous Edward Leigh inspected his fingernails closely.

So many white-haired, ancient veterans of the Maastricht Wars of 30 years ago, still there on the green benches, still in perpetual warfare with their hapless leaders.

Plus ça change, and all that. The mad old circular firing squad back on parade as another clapped-out and morally desperate Tory government hurtles towards electoral oblivion. Enjoy the spectacle, folks, secure in the knowledge that they will all go away in a few months when the electoral clock calls time.

And yet, and yet… As I watched the debate on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, a much more disturbing thought was planted in my mind: what if we were looking at, not a nostalgic echo of one Conservative bloodbath that came to define so much of the past three decades, but, rather, the gestation of the next 30 Years War on the British right?

Or, put another way, is immigration going to be the next Brexit?

Two days of debate were put aside for the Rwanda bill, a piece of legislation that declares the African state to be safe for refugees, despite some teeny awkward facts to the contrary, such as Rwandans granted refugee status here in the UK being warned by Scotland Yard that their home state has “credible plans” to murder them.

Conservative right-wingers turned up early. Mark Francois, self-styled godfather of the “Five Families”, breezed over to conspire with Cash. Exiting the chamber, he stopped and bowed so deferentially to the Speaker’s chair that he could have tied his shoelaces at the same time.

Francois is loving the Tory wars. He has the excited strut of someone who orgasmed fabulously during the regicide of 2017/2019, and anticipates repeating the experience soon.

More intriguing, the Conservative deputy chair Lee Anderson breezed in and stopped to exchange words with Cash: a Red Wall-er on Sunak’s own payroll bowing to the original euro rebel.

Seats were filling up with hardline Tories taking a rare holiday from the GB News sofa: Miriam Cates, of the New Conservatives wearing scarlet; John Hayes, chair of the ludicrously named Common Sense Group and mentor of Suella Braverman; Simon Clarke, of the Conservative Growth Group – yes, a fan club for Liz Truss’s 49-day reign of chaos.

Rumours circulated that the prime minister and home secretary would turn up, but Rishi Sunak, who was said to hate the scheme when it was Boris Johnson’s idea, and James Cleverly, who reportedly called it “bats***”, were busy.

Instead, proceedings were opened by Glasgow SNP MP Alison Thewliss, who spoke affectingly about refugees in her constituency, some victims of trafficking and modern slavery who now wondered “why the UK government treats them so poorly?” Sir Desmond Swayne complained this was out of order for being irrelevant to the safety of Rwanda, but was gently slapped down for his “discourtesy” by the deputy speaker, Dame Rosie Winterton.

Fellow Tory Sir Michael Fabricant demanded to know how many “illegal asylum seekers” resided in Scotland, which Ms Thewliss batted away effortlessly by pointing out that asylum seekers are not, by definition, illegal.

Robert Jenrick, the recently resigned immigration minister and, no doubt, soon-to-be leadership contender, took the floor. He spoke seriously and coherently about why the bill as it stands would be ineffective, with only a few of the more predictable jibes about “lefty lawyers” or the “generosity” of the Supreme Court towards migrants.

Significantly, he was listened to with respect. Not long ago, Jenrick was paunchy and unmemorable. Now he has lost weight, cut his hair Roundhead short, found his voice and, with this bill, his mojo.

“The law is our servant, not our master,” declared Jenrick, a statement that jars with the British constitution but sums up where this bandwagon may fast be heading.

Many suspect the Rwanda bill was cynically contrived as an election dividing line to wrongfoot Keir Starmer. If so, the line has shifted, and now marks two sides of the Conservative Party: those who would stay within international law, and those who see it as a hindrance to their constituents’ wishes.

Which brings us back to Maastricht, a rebellion against European federalism that eventually shaped today’s politics.

John Major defeated the Maastricht bill rebels – just as Sunak will probably win this week’s vote – but he lost the long war over Europe, which carried on throughout the Tory opposition years, triggering the formation of Ukip and then David Cameron’s ill-fated idea of a Brexit referendum and all that followed.

To judge from the mood of Conservatives in today’s debate, immigration has the potential to wreak the same chaos in years to come.

Anyone taking bets on a 2046 referendum on the UK’s legal obligations towards refugees?