Best Of

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

But "asylum" as a concept has been broken, courtesy of the organised boatloads of queue-bargers. Queue-barging is inimical to the British way of doing things. We have alway been a generous nation to those in genuine need. That has been tested - and quite possibly broken - by those who have no case other than they want to to make more money than they can at home..

It's a powerful image, for sure. British people don't like queue jumpers. But there isn't actually an asylum queue to jump, is there?

There are many places to apply for asylum in the trek across Africa/Asia --> Europe. Why pay snakeheads £10k to get to Britain? Because we all know they don't have a valid asylum claim.

99% of the worlds asylum seekers do go somewhere else.

Response, Part 2.

4. The above has been effectively covered here, in much more detail and much better written than I could manage, by Ian Dunt - https://iandunt.substack.com/p/the-trans-rights-stitch-up-2ca?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=7aibo&triedRedirect=true

5. Dunt has also published much more recently on the current mess at the EHRC, the TL;DR of which is that proper procedures (including risk assessments etc) were not followed by the EHRC, and the government's lawyers have likely taken one look at the guidance and said "this contravenes several human rights laws" - indeed, the European commissioner for human rights has read the interim guidance (notably, since rescinded, after numerous flaws and contradictions have been pointed out, and said, not on your nelly mate -https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/oct/14/trans-people-risk-exclusion-many-uk-public-spaces-rights-expert-says - Dunt's full article on how the EHRC became "a culture war campaign group" is here and I would suggest is essential reading to anyone wishing to hear "the other side" of the debate - https://iandunt.substack.com/p/judgement-day-for-the-ehrc-c99

On a personal note, I respect Cyclefree a great deal and she provides a clear female voice on a forum generally dominated by men. That is to be cherished, and valued. However, she is a talented writer who has the ability to present *opinion* dressed up in the language of fact. As I say the links I have provided above will provide you with much more detailed takes on the EHRC which take the same source material, and present them in a very different way.

On the subject of trans people attacking gender critical conferences and the like, I will simply say that this is a tiny minority of very pissed off radicals, and does not reflect the views of any of trans people I know. It's akin to one Muslim being a jihadi and now every other Muslim has to put up with being called a terrorist. Cyclefree would like to paint a picture of all trans people being radical terrorists. My experience of them is that the vast majority don't care about politics - they just want to transition and "pass" so they can live their lives in peace without being hurled abuse at on the street.

I have said my piece, presented links that provide readers with further detail and alternative viewpoints, and will not be engaging further with this post.

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

But "asylum" as a concept has been broken, courtesy of the organised boatloads of queue-bargers. Queue-barging is inimical to the British way of doing things. We have alway been a generous nation to those in genuine need. That has been tested - and quite possibly broken - by those who have no case other than they want to to make more money than they can at home..

My Grandmother had some trouble escaping Vienna to make it to Britain after the Anschluss, and I do not think that the general experience of Jewish refugees seeking to make their way to Britain would accord with the judgement that Britain has, "always been a generous nation to those in genuine need," for all that we laud those individuals who made an effort in the face of hostility and official obstructionism to do so.

My wife has a script ready for filming about the KIndertransport in 1938/9. The programme was supported, publicised, and encouraged by the British government, which waived the visa immigration requirements that were not within the ability of the British Jewish community to fulfil. Certainly there was examples of official obstruction, often down to personal antisemitism. But as a people, we have been there to help out those in need.

My understanding is that we were quite even-handed with POWs over the ages, who we might have had cause to despise. But once they were no longer a threat, they were treated with respect by most folks.

Was having a conversation with a local whose parents had a farm. She was a baby during the war and the farm had Italian POW's helping out. One day she was put in a pram in the garden and when her mother returned she was nowhere to be seen. The mother's panic was short lived when she heard laughter nearby. The Italians, all missing their own children, had picked the baby up and were feeding spaghetti to her.

How is this related to the thread? Perhaps it's because we are all human and treating people decently is a natural trait.

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

But "asylum" as a concept has been broken, courtesy of the organised boatloads of queue-bargers. Queue-barging is inimical to the British way of doing things. We have alway been a generous nation to those in genuine need. That has been tested - and quite possibly broken - by those who have no case other than they want to to make more money than they can at home..

The problem is that lunatics are overseeing asylum.

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

But "asylum" as a concept has been broken, courtesy of the organised boatloads of queue-bargers. Queue-barging is inimical to the British way of doing things. We have alway been a generous nation to those in genuine need. That has been tested - and quite possibly broken - by those who have no case other than they want to to make more money than they can at home..

My Grandmother had some trouble escaping Vienna to make it to Britain after the Anschluss, and I do not think that the general experience of Jewish refugees seeking to make their way to Britain would accord with the judgement that Britain has, "always been a generous nation to those in genuine need," for all that we laud those individuals who made an effort in the face of hostility and official obstructionism to do so.

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

People currently in France do not require asylum.

Morning all

I'll gladly join others and congratulate @Cyclefree on yet another excellent contribution.

There are many very serious and severe problems in this country - I quoted child poverty yesterday and this is another one - but we seem obsessed currently on small boats which, and I'll stand by for the flak, is essentially trivial in the grand scheme of things.

The small boats are a symbolic thing. They are symbolic of people breaking the rules and getting away with it. Impunity is becoming a theme of our times and, for that reason, it is important that the small boats are dealt with.

And, somehow, a government has to manage to address the more severe problems and the symbolic ones, at the same time. One of the weaknesses of British politics in this era of weak Cabinets and all-powerful Prime Ministers, is that it is harder for a government to effectively multi-task. The emasculation of local authorities in favour of Whitehall centralisation has a similar enervating effect.

The government of a country of nigh on 70 million is too big a job for one person.

It isn't illegal to seek asylum, nor to enter the country on a small boat to do so.

But "asylum" as a concept has been broken, courtesy of the organised boatloads of queue-bargers. Queue-barging is inimical to the British way of doing things. We have alway been a generous nation to those in genuine need. That has been tested - and quite possibly broken - by those who have no case other than they want to to make more money than they can at home..