Today's coverage was brought to you by Victoria Lindrea, James Harness, Sam Hancock, Jack Burgess, Adam Durbin, Chas Geiger, Richard Morris, Nathan Williams, Jasmine Taylor-Coleman and Chris Giles.

We're closing this page shortly, but before we go here's a reminder of Justice Secretary Dominic Raab's proposed British Bill of Rights.

Raab's statement:

• Raab said the ECHR's "elastic interpretation" of the Act and an expansion in the scope of its rulings have caused a variety of problems, not least a lack of democratic oversight
• Raab says the Bill will make clear the supremacy of the UK Supreme Court and its freedom to diverge from ECHR case law
• He says the Bill will strengthen the UK's "proud tradition of freedom", result in greater respect being shown for democratic institutions, and make Britain's streets safer.

Labour's response:

• Shadow justice minister Ellie Reeves said the Bill was a "con" and described it as a dark day for victims of crime, women and people in care
• She said it would take away the duty of the state to protect everyone from harm by removing the positive obligations set out in the Human Rights Act
• She said it was an "attack on women" as they would no longer be able to use the Act to force police to investigate rape cases

Image source, UK Parliament

More from the Commons now, where the MP for Dover and Deal has called for assurances that the new Bill of Rights will not allow the European Court to have as much "overreach" as she says it currently does.

It comes after the cancellation of a Home Office refugee flight to Rwanda last week, following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.

Tory MP Natalie Elphicke says the move "raised considerable concerns in my constituency that it will simply encourage the people traffickers, people who have no respect for the rights of others, including human life or the laws of our land".

Raab responds by saying the "real threat to human life is allowing - and not cracking down on - this trade in human misery". He tells Elphicke the new bill will see UK courts diverge from those in Strasbourg.

Chris Mason
Political editor

Image source, Reuters

At the root of plenty of Conservative gripes about all this is the Human Rights Act introduced by Labour in 1998.

It introduced the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

An organisation called the Council of Europe is behind the convention. It, confusingly, has nothing to do with the European Union.

Labour's rationale at the time was that being subject to the convention without a domestic Human Rights Act meant the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, France, couldn't be moderated by the UK courts.

But the government's rationale now is that the effect of the Human Rights Act has been to gold-plate the decisions of the court.

Find out more here.

Image source, UK Parliament

Former cabinet minister David Davis resigned as an MP in 2008 – to force a by-election and a wider public debate about what he saw as the erosion of civil liberties in the UK.

He says the Bill of Rights will have to pass two Conservative tests. Can the powers of the state be curbed by an independent body? And can people's fundamental freedoms be protected by an independent judiciary?

Mr Davis says this must mean that the new system will offer better protection of human rights than the current one.

Dominic Raab says fundamental freedoms are not being trashed, but safeguarded; judicial independence is being strengthened; and democratic accountability is being increased because elected MPs will have the final say on matters of public policy.

Dominic Casciani
Legal Correspondent

The most significant new proposal in the Bill of Rights - to ignore European Court of Human Rights injunctions - follows last week's row over the Home Office's abandoned flight to Rwanda.

The Strasbourg court, which is nothing to do with the European Union, issued an injunction blocking the home secretary from putting an asylum seeker on the flight, despite earlier decisions by judges in London not to intervene.

That decision triggered other appeals and ultimately the cancellation of the flight.

Under the government's proposed Bill of Rights, ministers would be able to ignore such injunctions, known as Rule 39 orders, because they are not technically part of international law.

The government's proposals, unveiled in December, have been criticised by lawyers as confusing and arguably unnecessary, because British courts can already ignore rulings from Strasbourg.

Raab described his proposals as a "very British approach, a UK-wide approach to human rights".

He told the BBC the UK Supreme Court would not be "subordinated to Strasbourg but has the last word on interpretation of law".

Read more here

Image source, UK Parliament

Barry Sheerman, British Labour and Co-operative MP, has asked Dominic Raab to share "the level of support he has got for this legislation from the people who will make it work - the lawyers, the judges".

Dominic Raab responds saying he doesn't believe there's any greater authority than Lord Sumption, former justice of the Supreme Court, or Jonathan Fisher QC.

Image source, UK Parliament

Laura Farris, Conservative MP for Newbury, quotes a letter from Raab saying the bill will prevent human rights being used to bring claims against overseas military operations.

But she says some of the gravest crimes of the Iraq war were only revealed through recourse to the Human Rights Act in domestic courts - including cases of torture of detainees.

She asks Raab if he's able to give reassurance that the new Bill of Rights will not suppress such abuses coming to light in future.

Raab says we need to have proper accountability. But he says we have the international law of armed conflict for this purpose, and an extra tier of human rights obligations on top of that has been unhelpful and created legal uncertainty and uncertainty for our armed forces.

He says the government will make sure there is accountability, but that the current situation has encouraged litigation, including spurious claims, as well as the cases she mentions.

Back to the debate on new UK Bill of Rights. The SNP's Anne McLaughlin says the Bill is the culmination of multiple pieces of human rights legislation in the last year - all about "removing human rights from human beings".

She accuses the government of targeting - in turn - refugees, those who question decisions by public bodies, voters less likely to vote Conservative in the Elections Bill, and gypsy-Roma travellers.

Image source, UK Parliament

Ms McLaughlin says the Bill will force more people to seek justice in Strasbourg, and will be opposed by the Scottish and Welsh governments "in its entirety".

Dominic Raab says no country is "more big-hearted" than the UK in helping those fleeing persecution, and cites recent schemes to take in refugees from Hong Kong, Afghanistan and Ukraine. He points out that when Boris Johnson addressed the Ukrainian parliament, Union flags were flying there.

But, he adds, the government also has to stop the "trade in human misery" across the Channel, and to stand up for victims by deporting more foreign criminals.

He says people in all UK nations should back this and what he describes as a "common sense rebalancing of the system".

Let's get a full roundup of what was said at this week's PMQs.

By-elections

• Sir Keir Starmer described the Tory candidate for tomorrow's Wakefield by-election as "plucky" for standing after losing a vote of no confidence.
• Boris Johnson claimed voters would rather a "solid Conservative government" than a Labour one

Rail strikes

• The current industrial action was less of a focus in this week's back-and-forth than many thought it would be. Nevertheless, Starmer urged the PM to "do your job" and find a solution to the action, to which Johnson claimed millions of public sector workers were in fact getting pay rises
• Johnson also made repeated calls for Labour to get off the picket line - after a number of its MPs joined protests - and accused the party of "standing with strikers"

Bankers' bonuses

• Starmer accused the PM of "rolling over" after being lobbied to lift the cap on bankers bonuses, following reports from yesterday , externalon the issue
• The government is yet to confirm or deny these claims and BBC political editor Chris Mason says the issue is a little more complicated than outlined in the Commons

Inflation

• On the back of figures showing inflation is up 9.1% in the UK, SNP Westminster leader Sir Ian Blackford accused the government of leaving the economy in the doldrums
• Johnson insisted inflation was a global problem, and said the government has the "fiscal firepower" to deal with it

Chris Mason
Political editor

What struck me today was the smorgasbord of topics that were covered - not just in the exchanges between Sir Ker Starmer and the PM but also the backbenches.

There was also less prominence given to the rail strikes than people may have expected.

And what about Sir Keir Starmer's claim that Boris Johnson was too busy holding meetings about ending the cap on bankers' bonuses to find time for a meeting to end the rail strike?

There is confusion around the legitimacy of these claims, following reports yesterday, external, and the Treasury has said it's "puzzled".

It seems this issue is a little more complicated than some of the headlines connected to it.

In case you missed Prime Minister's Questions, here's Boris Johnson and the Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer going head-to-head.

Johnson and Starmer paid tribute to the new Windrush Day monument and to the armed forces for their services to the country, then the debate quickly focused on the Wakefield by-election, rail strikes and the rising cost of living.

Image source, UK Parliament

Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom says she is "disgusted" by Ellie Reeves' comments about the government being soft on rapists.

She says it's a "shameful" thing to say and undermines the confidence of women in the judicial system.

We can be incredibly confident in the years and centuries of our UK judicial system to represent everybody in this country, she says.

She also speaks of sadness that so many on the opposition benches would "throw our sovereignty away to anyone who would have it".

Reeves says the Bill of Rights is not just an attack on victims of crime, it's an attack on women.

Woman have used the Human Rights Act to challenge the police when they have failed or refused to investigate abuse or rape cases, she says.

She says the government has "effectively decriminalised rape".

It has made pitiful progress on record low rape convictions under this government, with waits for cases to complete in court reaching three or four years, and the number of rape trials postponed in crown courts rising four-fold, she says.

This bill of rights will stop them for forcing our under-resourced police to investigate, she adds.

The government is soft on rape, soft on rapists and hard on survivors, she says - "they want to take away the final backstop available for victims to get justice".

Labour call the Tory proposals to remove the Human Rights Act "a gimmick".

Shadow justice minister Ellie Reeves calls the act, which was introduced by Labour in 1998, "a beacon of hope" for those trampled by strong men and dictators - and suggests the government's support for the beleaguered people of Ukraine is hypocritical as it "snatches rights away at home".

Shadow justice minister, Labour's Ellie Reeves says this is a dark day for victims of crime, for women, for people in care, for people who rely on the state to protect them from harm.

It's not a bill of rights it's a con, she says.

We know it will take away the duty of the state to protect everyone from harm by removing the positive obligations set out in the human rights act.

It will force victims of crime to schlep to Strasbourg, creating endless delays and face red tape, she says.

Under the Bill, Raab says, the behaviour of human rights claimants will be given greater weight by British courts - as will the public interest and the protection of the public.

He says this will mean that more foreign offenders can be deported, especially those currently claiming the right to a family life. Reform of the parole system will also be made easier, he argues.

Mr Raab says the Bill will strengthen the UK's "proud tradition of freedom", result in greater respect being shown for democratic institutions, and make Britain's streets safer.

The justice secretary says the tradition of human rights in the UK stretches back to Magna Carta, not to the 1998 Human Rights Act.

Dominic Raab says the European Court of Human Rights' "elastic interpretation" of the Act and an expansion in the scope of its rulings have caused a variety of problems, not least a lack of democratic oversight. He wants to reinforce "quintessentially UK rights" like freedom of speech and jury trial.

He says the Bill will make clear the supremacy of the UK Supreme Court and its freedom to diverge from ECHR case law. Otherwise, asks Mr Raab, what is the point of the Court? Parliament will have the "last word" on the "laws of the land", he adds.

Image source, House of Commons

Ahead of Justice Secretary Dominic Raab's statement on plans for a new UK bill of rights, Speaker of the House of Commons Sir Lindsey Hoyle has admonished the government for again announcing policy in the media.

In an uncharacteristically irate and emotional statement, Hoyle says he is once again "extremely disappointed" the plans to reform the role of European courts were sent to the press before informing MPs in the chamber.

"Why the BBC and Sky News is more important I will never know", he says.

Hoyle describes the situation as "simply unacceptable", given the requirement under the ministerial code to make important policy announcements in the Commons.

"Please, respect this house, respect members of every political party. They're elected to hear it here, not via the news," he adds before Raab gets up to speak.

Image source, UK Parliament

And with that, the PM's weekly question and answer session in the House of Commons has come to a close.

We're now hearing from Justice Secretary Dominic Raab on the British Bill of Rights. He is presenting proposals that would override the power of the European Court of Human Rights.