1. I’ve been having a look at the bill. Not going to be able to put together anything coherent tonight. It’s a terrible piece of legislation that denies refugees their rights under the Refugee Convention. But a law in the UK cannot magically invent somewhere to remove people to.
2. So we’ll likely end up with tens of thousands of people who are refugees but whose claims cannot legally be assessed and who cannot work, who have to live on minimal state support in hotels. For ever.
3. If it doesn’t actually deter all arrivals — and it won’t — then it looks completely unsustainable. The government is going to create a new, huge, ever-growing asylum backlog. Honestly, I think it’s absolutely nuts.
Clearly designed to be illegal and pass on the blame to the courts.
Yes, the whole purpose is performative cruelty so as to create outrage at "Leftie North London Lawyers". It is designed to fail.
I'm actually struggling to get wound up by it all because it is so transparently performative and designed only to create dividing lines that most people will just dismiss it.
Less than two years to go as well.
It seems that the government plan at the next election will be to promise to leave the ECHR and to ask voters to trust Suella Braverman with their human rights!
As I have been saying the last couple of days leaving the ECHR is the logical conclusion if we want to deny refugee status to those who have travelled through safe countries. I probably wouldn't be in favour (depends on what replaces it), but it could be a legitimate part of an attempt to solve the problem.
Whereas making these endless new illegal laws is just cynical theatre at the expense of refugees, our courts and our voters.
It is not the ECHR we would need to leave for this to work. It is the 1951 Convention on Refugees that we helped write. This bill, as set out today is incompatible with several parts of that. It is very probably incompatible with the 1948 UN Convention on Human Rights, Article 14 of which specifically provides for the right of a refugee to seek asylum in another country.
Of course the UN is a lot less an attractive target than the ECHR and a lot more embarrassing. Could we really hold onto our Security Council seat if we withdraw from them?
As I have said before the current rights of refugees to seek asylum are simply not sustainable and eventually we will have to address this. But I don't think being at the front of the queue for this is a great plan. Or even a vote winner.
The way I look at it is countries are like lifeboats, each has so many resources, water, food etc. At somepoint each lifeboat has to say hey we cant take anymore because if we do the chance of the lifeboat getting to a safe shore is too low. The uk already has water shortages with the population we have for example
On the subject of Charles and William, my understanding is that William is going to come out as non-binary, will henceforth be known as "they", is changing their name to Will.We.Are and will be neither King nor Queen, but Monarch.
So.
Monarch Will.We.Are I here we come.
He should have gone all the way and been queen william and king kate
I've seen the photos of Catherine, so know that there's no way she'll be "King".
Get with the modern world! It's only a matter of self ID to become king.
Not so modern, quite a few people in history have declared themselves to be king because they felt like they were one. Not so many managed to succeed in getting others to agree of course. What are modern self ID proponents but mini Henry IV's?
Hopefully this is the start of the end to the railway strikes
It does feel like the beginning of the end of the large scale industrial action.
The rail strikes don’t really seem to have had the impact expected ahead of them either.
If anything, longer it’s gone on, the more it kicks into next year, the higher Union demands should be for both years, not lower, otherwise a sign that they are losing. Firefighters settled short of par - 7% not remotely replacing what they have lost in recent years. And signing in advance 5% for April 23 to April 24 without knowing how much more of gain or a cut that might actually be.
I would also like to know, as unions made such a play it’s not all about pay, it’s about conditions, working practices and investment, especially the rail unions, so when there is a settlement just what did they settle on regarding conditions, contracts working practices and investment. Or was it really all about pay?
Has there been enough media coverage of the actual details in the offers and settlements?
No sign of talks for the junior doctors strikes next week. Incidentally the Consultants consultative ballot was heavily for striking too, if no progress on our negotiations.
May backfire many will think hey that means I wont get treated by a junior doctor so will get a senior one
Nah, let the medical students have a crack at treating them, and yes that is the plan for next week (not at my hospital as far as I know).
Hopefully this is the start of the end to the railway strikes
It does feel like the beginning of the end of the large scale industrial action.
The rail strikes don’t really seem to have had the impact expected ahead of them either.
If anything, longer it’s gone on, the more it kicks into next year, the higher Union demands should be for both years, not lower, otherwise a sign that they are losing. Firefighters settled short of par - 7% not remotely replacing what they have lost in recent years. And signing in advance 5% for April 23 to April 24 without knowing how much more of gain or a cut that might actually be.
I would also like to know, as unions made such a play it’s not all about pay, it’s about conditions, working practices and investment, especially the rail unions, so when there is a settlement just what did they settle on regarding conditions, contracts working practices and investment. Or was it really all about pay?
Has there been enough media coverage of the actual details in the offers and settlements?
No sign of talks for the junior doctors strikes next week. Incidentally the Consultants consultative ballot was heavily for striking too, if no progress on our negotiations.
May backfire many will think hey that means I wont get treated by a junior doctor so will get a senior one
Nah, let the medical students have a crack at treating them, and yes that is the plan for next week (not at my hospital as far as I know).
Hopefully this is the start of the end to the railway strikes
It does feel like the beginning of the end of the large scale industrial action.
The rail strikes don’t really seem to have had the impact expected ahead of them either.
If anything, longer it’s gone on, the more it kicks into next year, the higher Union demands should be for both years, not lower, otherwise a sign that they are losing. Firefighters settled short of par - 7% not remotely replacing what they have lost in recent years. And signing in advance 5% for April 23 to April 24 without knowing how much more of gain or a cut that might actually be.
I would also like to know, as unions made such a play it’s not all about pay, it’s about conditions, working practices and investment, especially the rail unions, so when there is a settlement just what did they settle on regarding conditions, contracts working practices and investment. Or was it really all about pay?
Has there been enough media coverage of the actual details in the offers and settlements?
No sign of talks for the junior doctors strikes next week. Incidentally the Consultants consultative ballot was heavily for striking too, if no progress on our negotiations.
May backfire many will think hey that means I wont get treated by a junior doctor so will get a senior one
Nah, let the medical students have a crack at treating them, and yes that is the plan for next week (not at my hospital as far as I know).
Hopefully this is the start of the end to the railway strikes
It does feel like the beginning of the end of the large scale industrial action.
The rail strikes don’t really seem to have had the impact expected ahead of them either.
If anything, longer it’s gone on, the more it kicks into next year, the higher Union demands should be for both years, not lower, otherwise a sign that they are losing. Firefighters settled short of par - 7% not remotely replacing what they have lost in recent years. And signing in advance 5% for April 23 to April 24 without knowing how much more of gain or a cut that might actually be.
I would also like to know, as unions made such a play it’s not all about pay, it’s about conditions, working practices and investment, especially the rail unions, so when there is a settlement just what did they settle on regarding conditions, contracts working practices and investment. Or was it really all about pay?
Has there been enough media coverage of the actual details in the offers and settlements?
No sign of talks for the junior doctors strikes next week. Incidentally the Consultants consultative ballot was heavily for striking too, if no progress on our negotiations.
May backfire many will think hey that means I wont get treated by a junior doctor so will get a senior one
Nah, let the medical students have a crack at treating them, and yes that is the plan for next week (not at my hospital as far as I know).
It's the official Scotch Nationalist First Secretary Election Stooshie.
Yousaf goes on Trans
Forbes (glances at Yousaf) does not accept mediocrity
Regan MORAL MANDATE
Trans? I mean FFS. All the issues facing the Scottish government and Yousaf thinks he should focus on trans?
He thinks that it sets him apart as being the only one willing to stand up to Westminster. He's not necessarily wrong, it's just picking entirely the wrong thing to do so. He's a few sandwiches short of a picnic on that one.
Now more of the detail is coming out about the Northern Ireland talks, it shows us more matters need to be clarified in writing and sorted out in the Joint Committee before accepting any changes to the legal position.
The EU spokesman has told MEPs according to briefings that the ECJ will have an important role and substantial amounts of EU law will apply to Northern Ireland. He also pointed out the Stormont brake would rarely be able to work. It seems the green lane would still be subject to EU checks and to possible EU interruption to the flow of goods. That is why I have asked the government to show us a list of the EU laws that will apply to Northern Ireland from day one of any new agreements. I have asked how many VAT and Excise rules will still constrain our tax policies, and want to know more about what information and form filling people will need to supply to allow green lane trade. It appears that EU plant and animal husbandry rules will apply. We also need to know in what circumstances the EU could suspend or modify green lane trade.
It is most important to get this right. The rest of the UK does not want to find it needs to align with the EU over tax and regulations, any more than Unionists in Northern Ireland wish to find their laws and taxes in part come from the EU where they have no vote or voice. The UK fully accepts the need to avoid a border between NI and the Republic, but also needs to avoid a border between GB and NI. Any new arrangement at the very least needs a unilateral exit route for the UK should the terms prove onerous. It remains to be seen if the Unionist parties find it acceptable so that they can rejoin the Stormont Assembly, one of the original aims of the talks.
The point I have bolded is, to me, the crux of the matter. The deal may not be great shakes itself, but any easing of intra-UK trade is to be welcomed - however, only if the agreement can be terminated freely by both parties. Otherwise, the Windsor Framework will have the binding status of an international treaty on the UK, but the EU will be able to suspend its commitments under the agreement whenever it wants to. That's not something any responsible Government would put its name to.
The deal is the deal and will go through though the DUP may prevaricate over Stormont
It’s okay Big G. I have taken a screen grab of you predicting this will be in place by Easter. Your get out obviously is, you didn’t mention which year.
My take, there’s obviously going to be a counter proposal - clear red lines to renegotiate - from DUP and ERG. As LuckyGuy has said, surely we need an option to terminate? What LuckyGuy and Redwood may have missed is the EU do. They can close the green lane in an instant, without any consultation or agreement, throwing the border back into the Irish Sea. We have surrendered that without having same option ourselves. It’s also true that EU can add new laws and regulations on NI the politicians there cannot block, because there is no real brake or Veto.
You may dismiss these red lines as not bothering yourself, but you must surely concede for many conservative and unionists, these are genuine fears and issues about how balanced the proposal is, and how workable overtime?
1. I’ve been having a look at the bill. Not going to be able to put together anything coherent tonight. It’s a terrible piece of legislation that denies refugees their rights under the Refugee Convention. But a law in the UK cannot magically invent somewhere to remove people to.
2. So we’ll likely end up with tens of thousands of people who are refugees but whose claims cannot legally be assessed and who cannot work, who have to live on minimal state support in hotels. For ever.
3. If it doesn’t actually deter all arrivals — and it won’t — then it looks completely unsustainable. The government is going to create a new, huge, ever-growing asylum backlog. Honestly, I think it’s absolutely nuts.
Clearly designed to be illegal and pass on the blame to the courts.
Yes, the whole purpose is performative cruelty so as to create outrage at "Leftie North London Lawyers". It is designed to fail.
I'm actually struggling to get wound up by it all because it is so transparently performative and designed only to create dividing lines that most people will just dismiss it.
Less than two years to go as well.
It seems that the government plan at the next election will be to promise to leave the ECHR and to ask voters to trust Suella Braverman with their human rights!
As I have been saying the last couple of days leaving the ECHR is the logical conclusion if we want to deny refugee status to those who have travelled through safe countries. I probably wouldn't be in favour (depends on what replaces it), but it could be a legitimate part of an attempt to solve the problem.
Whereas making these endless new illegal laws is just cynical theatre at the expense of refugees, our courts and our voters.
It is not the ECHR we would need to leave for this to work. It is the 1951 Convention on Refugees that we helped write. This bill, as set out today is incompatible with several parts of that. It is very probably incompatible with the 1948 UN Convention on Human Rights, Article 14 of which specifically provides for the right of a refugee to seek asylum in another country.
Of course the UN is a lot less an attractive target than the ECHR and a lot more embarrassing. Could we really hold onto our Security Council seat if we withdraw from them?
As I have said before the current rights of refugees to seek asylum are simply not sustainable and eventually we will have to address this. But I don't think being at the front of the queue for this is a great plan. Or even a vote winner.
The way I look at it is countries are like lifeboats, each has so many resources, water, food etc. At somepoint each lifeboat has to say hey we cant take anymore because if we do the chance of the lifeboat getting to a safe shore is too low. The uk already has water shortages with the population we have for example
To be fair, we also have 'water shortages' (better termed 'water restrictions' - there is no shortage of the ***king stuff), because the EU forbade new water infrastructure, preferring water alarmism, with the eager assent of our own agencies. The zeal of the latter has sadly not been quenched by leaving the organisation (at least to my knowledge).
It's the official Scotch Nationalist First Secretary Election Stooshie.
Yousaf goes on Trans
Forbes (glances at Yousaf) does not accept mediocrity
Regan MORAL MANDATE
Trans? I mean FFS. All the issues facing the Scottish government and Yousaf thinks he should focus on trans?
He thinks that it sets him apart as being the only one willing to stand up to Westminster. He's not necessarily wrong, it's just picking entirely the wrong thing to do so. He's a few sandwiches short of a picnic on that one.
It's the official Scotch Nationalist First Secretary Election Stooshie.
Yousaf goes on Trans
Forbes (glances at Yousaf) does not accept mediocrity
Regan MORAL MANDATE
Trans? I mean FFS. All the issues facing the Scottish government and Yousaf thinks he should focus on trans?
He thinks that it sets him apart as being the only one willing to stand up to Westminster. He's not necessarily wrong, it's just picking entirely the wrong thing to do so. He's a few sandwiches short of a picnic on that one.
Given it sailed through the parliament, I'd assume it would simply be part of a 'don't rock the boat and give in to external opponents' strategy. I know polling on the matter is different, but even so.
On the subject of Charles and William, my understanding is that William is going to come out as non-binary, will henceforth be known as "they", is changing their name to Will.We.Are and will be neither King nor Queen, but Monarch.
So.
Monarch Will.We.Are I here we come.
He should have gone all the way and been queen william and king kate
I've seen the photos of Catherine, so know that there's no way she'll be "King".
Get with the modern world! It's only a matter of self ID to become king.
Not so modern, quite a few people in history have declared themselves to be king because they felt like they were one. Not so many managed to succeed in getting others to agree of course. What are modern self ID proponents but mini Henry IV's?
I have decided to identify from now on as Lord High Grand Supreme Ruler of the Universe.
The correct pronouns are 'Mightiness/Mighty One.'
(Incidentally wouldn't Richard III be a better example?)
1. I’ve been having a look at the bill. Not going to be able to put together anything coherent tonight. It’s a terrible piece of legislation that denies refugees their rights under the Refugee Convention. But a law in the UK cannot magically invent somewhere to remove people to.
2. So we’ll likely end up with tens of thousands of people who are refugees but whose claims cannot legally be assessed and who cannot work, who have to live on minimal state support in hotels. For ever.
3. If it doesn’t actually deter all arrivals — and it won’t — then it looks completely unsustainable. The government is going to create a new, huge, ever-growing asylum backlog. Honestly, I think it’s absolutely nuts.
Clearly designed to be illegal and pass on the blame to the courts.
Yes, the whole purpose is performative cruelty so as to create outrage at "Leftie North London Lawyers". It is designed to fail.
I'm actually struggling to get wound up by it all because it is so transparently performative and designed only to create dividing lines that most people will just dismiss it.
Less than two years to go as well.
It seems that the government plan at the next election will be to promise to leave the ECHR and to ask voters to trust Suella Braverman with their human rights!
As I have been saying the last couple of days leaving the ECHR is the logical conclusion if we want to deny refugee status to those who have travelled through safe countries. I probably wouldn't be in favour (depends on what replaces it), but it could be a legitimate part of an attempt to solve the problem.
Whereas making these endless new illegal laws is just cynical theatre at the expense of refugees, our courts and our voters.
It is not the ECHR we would need to leave for this to work. It is the 1951 Convention on Refugees that we helped write. This bill, as set out today is incompatible with several parts of that. It is very probably incompatible with the 1948 UN Convention on Human Rights, Article 14 of which specifically provides for the right of a refugee to seek asylum in another country.
Of course the UN is a lot less an attractive target than the ECHR and a lot more embarrassing. Could we really hold onto our Security Council seat if we withdraw from them?
As I have said before the current rights of refugees to seek asylum are simply not sustainable and eventually we will have to address this. But I don't think being at the front of the queue for this is a great plan. Or even a vote winner.
The way I look at it is countries are like lifeboats, each has so many resources, water, food etc. At somepoint each lifeboat has to say hey we cant take anymore because if we do the chance of the lifeboat getting to a safe shore is too low. The uk already has water shortages with the population we have for example
To be fair, we also have 'water shortages' (better termed 'water restrictions' - there is no shortage of the ***king stuff), because the EU forbade new water infrastructure, preferring water alarmism, with the eager assent of our own agencies. The zeal of the latter has sadly not been quenched by leaving the organisation (at least to my knowledge).
Yes we could catch more but neither labour not tory not even the lib dems or MRLP are suggesting that
On the subject of Charles and William, my understanding is that William is going to come out as non-binary, will henceforth be known as "they", is changing their name to Will.We.Are and will be neither King nor Queen, but Monarch.
So.
Monarch Will.We.Are I here we come.
He should have gone all the way and been queen william and king kate
I've seen the photos of Catherine, so know that there's no way she'll be "King".
Get with the modern world! It's only a matter of self ID to become king.
Not so modern, quite a few people in history have declared themselves to be king because they felt like they were one. Not so many managed to succeed in getting others to agree of course. What are modern self ID proponents but mini Henry IV's?
I have decided to identify from now on as Lord High Grand Supreme Ruler of the Universe.
The correct pronouns are 'Mightiness/Mighty One.'
(Incidentally wouldn't Richard III be a better example?)
I wanted to give the child murderer a break, ragged on him a lot lately.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
The latter policy (fast track) is sensible. People from countries like Afghanistan, Syria, South Sudan, Eritrea and the like will almost inevitably succeed in their asylum claims so why clog up the system with them? Conversely, claims from the likes of Albania have very poor prospects and should again be brought to a swift conclusion with action taken on removal.
Why should they succeed, though?
Are we obliged to take in anyone from any really poor/crap country who makes it to our shores. There are hundreds of millions of such people.
On this I think the fundamentals of the question hinge.
We cannot house all our own people. Sooner or later the "We are full up" sign will have to go up.
But why can't we house everyone?
It's not lack of land and it's not lack of money to buy bricks or pay builders.
It's just that we don't want to build stuff. And that works less well as an excuse.
This.
The policy of not building houses to match population is institutionally racist, incidentally.
Everything is racist if you can find an excuse for it to be so. Its more likely to be racist against the wwc.
The main issue is probably old vs. young. Older WWC people who bought their council houses under Maggie are sitting relatively prettily.
Does the UK's racial mix look different for young and old people?
I think that the intersection of age and racial demographics are an underappreciated source of some of the political dynamics in this country. In a lot of ways the defining difference between Baby Boomers and Millenials or Gen Z is how racially diverse the latter groups are compared to the former. I think this helps to explain the lack of understanding, perhaps even lack of empathy, between the generations. It probably helps to account for the intensified political polarisation by age for one thing, as well as the politics of housing.
Since race is not a very polarising political issue in this country (unlike America) I still think its housing, not race, that's the key issue in the UK.
Thank goodness we aren't like America where everything boils down to race.
As I already posted the vast majority in the UK as in the US own property, only in inner London like inner New York City do most rent.
The difference in the UK has historically been class more than race.
Though increasingly there is more of an age difference in both
The fact that most own their property, because property was affordable when old people were young, is utterly irrelevant and not the killer point you think it is.
Most young people should be able to afford a house. They can't. That's a problem and it needs solving urgently.
YOu really are dumb, young people have always struggled to buy houses, it was mainlky social housing till Thatcher sold them off dirt cheap and caused the boom for Tory toffs to build up BTL portfolios and rip off the public purse. Just a transfer of the value of eth public housing stock to a handful of Tories.
Young people have not always struggled to buy houses, relative to today, that is factually incorrect and betrays your ignorance.
The BTL buildup that happened under Blair/Brown onwards is very problematic and needs addressing whether it be via taxation or failing that via extending Right to Buy to BTL tenants.
The BTL build up isn't the problem. It' the price of housing.
BTL is in part driving the price of housing, though, is it not?
It's more a side effect of the increasing prices. The classic is "he bought a flat in London, back in the day, she did the same". They get married, buy a house by extracting value, and rent out the flats. Because the rises in house prices make keeping property forever the best plan.
The problem isn't really people owning and renting flats. It's the prices and the constrained supply meaning that every shitbox can be rented out, no matter how bad, at a high price.
Imagine if the price of renting a house in the London suburbs was, say £250 a month for a 3 bedroom house. No one would give a shit about house prices/rents. Or who owned them.
Rent vs Ownership - it's just pushing the same pile of beans about. What we need is a lot more beans.
Again this is mainly a London problem and to a lesser extent a Home counties problem.
Go north of Watford and property prices and rents are far cheaper (though even in parts of Outer London and the Home counties like Dagenham or Bexley or East Kent or South Essex outside Brentwood and Epping Forest property prices are far cheaper)
St Albans is north of Watford.
A three bed semi towards the edge of the city in the catchment area of one of the best state secondary schools is on the market for £1,150,000.
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, will have no choice but to resign because WhatsApp messages are likely to emerge that are “utterly indefensible”, The Times has been told.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
On the subject of Charles and William, my understanding is that William is going to come out as non-binary, will henceforth be known as "they", is changing their name to Will.We.Are and will be neither King nor Queen, but Monarch.
So.
Monarch Will.We.Are I here we come.
He should have gone all the way and been queen william and king kate
I've seen the photos of Catherine, so know that there's no way she'll be "King".
Get with the modern world! It's only a matter of self ID to become king.
Not so modern, quite a few people in history have declared themselves to be king because they felt like they were one. Not so many managed to succeed in getting others to agree of course. What are modern self ID proponents but mini Henry IV's?
I have decided to identify from now on as Lord High Grand Supreme Ruler of the Universe.
The correct pronouns are 'Mightiness/Mighty One.'
(Incidentally wouldn't Richard III be a better example?)
I wanted to give the child murderer a break, ragged on him a lot lately.
Now more of the detail is coming out about the Northern Ireland talks, it shows us more matters need to be clarified in writing and sorted out in the Joint Committee before accepting any changes to the legal position.
The EU spokesman has told MEPs according to briefings that the ECJ will have an important role and substantial amounts of EU law will apply to Northern Ireland. He also pointed out the Stormont brake would rarely be able to work. It seems the green lane would still be subject to EU checks and to possible EU interruption to the flow of goods. That is why I have asked the government to show us a list of the EU laws that will apply to Northern Ireland from day one of any new agreements. I have asked how many VAT and Excise rules will still constrain our tax policies, and want to know more about what information and form filling people will need to supply to allow green lane trade. It appears that EU plant and animal husbandry rules will apply. We also need to know in what circumstances the EU could suspend or modify green lane trade.
It is most important to get this right. The rest of the UK does not want to find it needs to align with the EU over tax and regulations, any more than Unionists in Northern Ireland wish to find their laws and taxes in part come from the EU where they have no vote or voice. The UK fully accepts the need to avoid a border between NI and the Republic, but also needs to avoid a border between GB and NI. Any new arrangement at the very least needs a unilateral exit route for the UK should the terms prove onerous. It remains to be seen if the Unionist parties find it acceptable so that they can rejoin the Stormont Assembly, one of the original aims of the talks.
The point I have bolded is, to me, the crux of the matter. The deal may not be great shakes itself, but any easing of intra-UK trade is to be welcomed - however, only if the agreement can be terminated freely by both parties. Otherwise, the Windsor Framework will have the binding status of an international treaty on the UK, but the EU will be able to suspend its commitments under the agreement whenever it wants to. That's not something any responsible Government would put its name to.
The deal is the deal and will go through though the DUP may prevaricate over Stormont
It’s okay Big G. I have taken a screen grab of you predicting this will be in place by Easter. Your get out obviously is, you didn’t mention which year.
My take, there’s obviously going to be a counter proposal - clear red lines to renegotiate - from DUP and ERG. As LuckyGuy has said, surely we need an option to terminate? What LuckyGuy and Redwood may have missed is the EU do. They can close the green lane in an instant, without any consultation or agreement, throwing the border back into the Irish Sea. We have surrendered that without having same option ourselves. It’s also true that EU can add new laws and regulations on NI the politicians there cannot block, because there is no real brake or Veto.
You may dismiss these red lines as not bothering yourself, but you must surely concede for many conservative and unionists, these are genuine fears and issues about how balanced the proposal is, and how workable overtime?
Right on with your post, but I didn't miss it, I stated it.
It is an extremely unequal agreement, and shouldn't be. Rishi appears to have negotiated poorly, and has shown once again that whilst diplomacy and politeness are important assets, you also need steely determination when dealing with the EU. I find this less forgiveable than Boris's shit deal, because Boris, despite his bluster, had a weak hand. Rishi had a strong hand.
I don't see this getting support from any Unionist party. I'm interested to see what statements (if any) the Alliance party makes about it.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Now more of the detail is coming out about the Northern Ireland talks, it shows us more matters need to be clarified in writing and sorted out in the Joint Committee before accepting any changes to the legal position.
The EU spokesman has told MEPs according to briefings that the ECJ will have an important role and substantial amounts of EU law will apply to Northern Ireland. He also pointed out the Stormont brake would rarely be able to work. It seems the green lane would still be subject to EU checks and to possible EU interruption to the flow of goods. That is why I have asked the government to show us a list of the EU laws that will apply to Northern Ireland from day one of any new agreements. I have asked how many VAT and Excise rules will still constrain our tax policies, and want to know more about what information and form filling people will need to supply to allow green lane trade. It appears that EU plant and animal husbandry rules will apply. We also need to know in what circumstances the EU could suspend or modify green lane trade.
It is most important to get this right. The rest of the UK does not want to find it needs to align with the EU over tax and regulations, any more than Unionists in Northern Ireland wish to find their laws and taxes in part come from the EU where they have no vote or voice. The UK fully accepts the need to avoid a border between NI and the Republic, but also needs to avoid a border between GB and NI. Any new arrangement at the very least needs a unilateral exit route for the UK should the terms prove onerous. It remains to be seen if the Unionist parties find it acceptable so that they can rejoin the Stormont Assembly, one of the original aims of the talks.
The point I have bolded is, to me, the crux of the matter. The deal may not be great shakes itself, but any easing of intra-UK trade is to be welcomed - however, only if the agreement can be terminated freely by both parties. Otherwise, the Windsor Framework will have the binding status of an international treaty on the UK, but the EU will be able to suspend its commitments under the agreement whenever it wants to. That's not something any responsible Government would put its name to.
The deal is the deal and will go through though the DUP may prevaricate over Stormont
It’s okay Big G. I have taken a screen grab of you predicting this will be in place by Easter. Your get out obviously is, you didn’t mention which year.
My take, there’s obviously going to be a counter proposal - clear red lines to renegotiate - from DUP and ERG. As LuckyGuy has said, surely we need an option to terminate? What LuckyGuy and Redwood may have missed is the EU do. They can close the green lane in an instant, without any consultation or agreement, throwing the border back into the Irish Sea. We have surrendered that without having same option ourselves. It’s also true that EU can add new laws and regulations on NI the politicians there cannot block, because there is no real brake or Veto.
You may dismiss these red lines as not bothering yourself, but you must surely concede for many conservative and unionists, these are genuine fears and issues about how balanced the proposal is, and how workable overtime?
I expect the vote by Easter or shortly after and frankly I am very pleased not least because it has had an immeasurable improvement with to our relationship with Europe which is long overdue
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
Rishi loves posts like this.
Keep it up.
Less than 2 years to go and it shall be good riddance.
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
The situation of refugees should be improved we agree.....where we don't I suspect is where it becomes the situation of refugees should be improved if it means the living standards of uk citizens should fall to make the improvements
Ash Regan is a liar politician, caught telling another massive porkie.
Easy answer to that: "The Greens are only interested in Trans and undermining the independence movement with culture war... etc etc"
Regan has obviously joined Forbes in working out that an endorsement from the Greens is not exactly an unvarnished blessing, even in this electorate.
Humza apparently can't quite get his head round the notion that if the Greens are truly pro-indy, they'll still be pro-indy whether they're part of the Scottish government or not.
Meantime, the other two don't have to wed themselves to them quite so much for so little benefit.
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, will have no choice but to resign because WhatsApp messages are likely to emerge that are “utterly indefensible”, The Times has been told.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
The situation of refugees should be improved we agree.....where we don't I suspect is where it becomes the situation of refugees should be improved if it means the living standards of uk citizens should fall to make the improvements
If we built more homes then it would be even clearer that refugees do improve the living standards of UK citizens.
If we want to be richer, and we should, then lets prioritse housing, 21st century infrastructure, medium and long term investment rather than searching for penny rich and pound poor quick fixes.
All three pulling the SNP record apart. And now, they are getting stuck on the lack of an election with a new First Minister, despite asking for that everytime there is a new PM.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Okay my position is fairly clear, we should take migrants that benefit us, we should also be looking at resources when we take them, that includes housing, water, food supply, services. Till then we take what we can then we say sorry we are full
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
The situation of refugees should be improved we agree.....where we don't I suspect is where it becomes the situation of refugees should be improved if it means the living standards of uk citizens should fall to make the improvements
If we built more homes then it would be even clearer that refugees do improve the living standards of UK citizens.
If we want to be richer, and we should, then lets prioritse housing, 21st century infrastructure, medium and long term investment rather than searching for penny rich and pound poor quick fixes.
Houses aren't the only problem, we have other limited resources that even if we built enough houses would be stretched...that is mostly water right now but also food supplies energy supplies and services
All three pulling the SNP record apart. And now, they are getting stuck on the lack of an election with a new First Minister, despite asking for that everytime there is a new PM.
All three pulling the SNP record apart. And now, they are getting stuck on the lack of an election with a new First Minister, despite asking for that everytime there is a new PM.
And they're all lightweight as hell, let's be honest.
Yes Regan in particular fucked that question, that was a terrible answer from someone who wants to make every election a de facto independence election. "Um it's a bit hypocritical maybe but we just had a Scottish election but maybe there'll be a UK GE along soon that'd be a decent test for the FM". What?
On the plus side, we've had a good hour of politicians basically discussing independence as if it's inevitable, without qualifiers of any sort.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Okay my position is fairly clear, we should take migrants that benefit us, we should also be looking at resources when we take them, that includes housing, water, food supply, services. Till then we take what we can then we say sorry we are full
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, will have no choice but to resign because WhatsApp messages are likely to emerge that are “utterly indefensible”, The Times has been told.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
The situation of refugees should be improved we agree.....where we don't I suspect is where it becomes the situation of refugees should be improved if it means the living standards of uk citizens should fall to make the improvements
If we built more homes then it would be even clearer that refugees do improve the living standards of UK citizens.
If we want to be richer, and we should, then lets prioritse housing, 21st century infrastructure, medium and long term investment rather than searching for penny rich and pound poor quick fixes.
Get this through your head: the majority of the public do not want unlimited numbers of economic migrants masquerading as refugees (for that is what they are) coming in across the channel.
Until you accept and address this basic problem you desert the field for your political opponents.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Okay my position is fairly clear, we should take migrants that benefit us, we should also be looking at resources when we take them, that includes housing, water, food supply, services. Till then we take what we can then we say sorry we are full
Ukrainians included?
Yes sorry if that discomforts you but we are getting to the point we dont have enough to go round already. How much less do you think people will accept before they go not another one?
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
When Theresa May is the liberal, you know the tories are in the gutter.
It basically tells me this policy was written on the hoof.
It reminds me of the time management consultants were hired and their strategy boiled down to advertising
'Become victims of fraud and this bank will protect you all the way, so you'll love being a repeat victim of fraud.'
This was not made on the hoof. Rishi has been working on it for months.
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
Yes, nothing about either improving the situation for refugees or even reducing the number of them in the UK, just pure cynical partisan bullshit that damages our courts. The opposite of conservative.
The situation of refugees should be improved we agree.....where we don't I suspect is where it becomes the situation of refugees should be improved if it means the living standards of uk citizens should fall to make the improvements
If we built more homes then it would be even clearer that refugees do improve the living standards of UK citizens.
If we want to be richer, and we should, then lets prioritse housing, 21st century infrastructure, medium and long term investment rather than searching for penny rich and pound poor quick fixes.
Get this through your head: the majority of the public do not want unlimited numbers of economic migrants masquerading as refugees (for that is what they are) coming in across the channel.
Until you accept and address this basic problem you desert the field for your political opponents.
I am not in charge of or even vaguely aligned with any political party.
I understand the majority of the public dont want that, and have said what needs to happen if the govt want to act on that. It requires leaving international treaties not creating new laws. The govt is not doing that and therefore your beef should be with them, not those who simply point out this won't work.
I am not particuarly opposed to replacing the old existing framework with an international quota system, done well it could be an improvement, done badly it could be worse.
This however is a most unconservative sham policy.
And Rishi is the one who is meant to be good at numbers.
Seriously- what's he thinking here? That it's the best plan to do what it says on the tin? That it's not the best plan for that, but it will rally and annoy the right people? That it will fail on both those counts, but the right of the party really want to do it?
I'd like to think that Rishi is both sane and decent. And he probably scores better than the last two overall there. But this announcement makes it awfully hard.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Okay my position is fairly clear, we should take migrants that benefit us, we should also be looking at resources when we take them, that includes housing, water, food supply, services. Till then we take what we can then we say sorry we are full
Ukrainians included?
Yes sorry if that discomforts you but we are getting to the point we dont have enough to go round already. How much less do you think people will accept before they go not another one?
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
IDK, after Truss taking the Boris loyalty line and that he should not have resigned and made no mistakes, whilst also saying the economic direction of his government and previous governments was pants and had been from the start, and then winning handily on that basis, who knows what might work with party memberships.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Now more of the detail is coming out about the Northern Ireland talks, it shows us more matters need to be clarified in writing and sorted out in the Joint Committee before accepting any changes to the legal position.
The EU spokesman has told MEPs according to briefings that the ECJ will have an important role and substantial amounts of EU law will apply to Northern Ireland. He also pointed out the Stormont brake would rarely be able to work. It seems the green lane would still be subject to EU checks and to possible EU interruption to the flow of goods. That is why I have asked the government to show us a list of the EU laws that will apply to Northern Ireland from day one of any new agreements. I have asked how many VAT and Excise rules will still constrain our tax policies, and want to know more about what information and form filling people will need to supply to allow green lane trade. It appears that EU plant and animal husbandry rules will apply. We also need to know in what circumstances the EU could suspend or modify green lane trade.
It is most important to get this right. The rest of the UK does not want to find it needs to align with the EU over tax and regulations, any more than Unionists in Northern Ireland wish to find their laws and taxes in part come from the EU where they have no vote or voice. The UK fully accepts the need to avoid a border between NI and the Republic, but also needs to avoid a border between GB and NI. Any new arrangement at the very least needs a unilateral exit route for the UK should the terms prove onerous. It remains to be seen if the Unionist parties find it acceptable so that they can rejoin the Stormont Assembly, one of the original aims of the talks.
The point I have bolded is, to me, the crux of the matter. The deal may not be great shakes itself, but any easing of intra-UK trade is to be welcomed - however, only if the agreement can be terminated freely by both parties. Otherwise, the Windsor Framework will have the binding status of an international treaty on the UK, but the EU will be able to suspend its commitments under the agreement whenever it wants to. That's not something any responsible Government would put its name to.
The deal is the deal and will go through though the DUP may prevaricate over Stormont
It’s okay Big G. I have taken a screen grab of you predicting this will be in place by Easter. Your get out obviously is, you didn’t mention which year.
My take, there’s obviously going to be a counter proposal - clear red lines to renegotiate - from DUP and ERG. As LuckyGuy has said, surely we need an option to terminate? What LuckyGuy and Redwood may have missed is the EU do. They can close the green lane in an instant, without any consultation or agreement, throwing the border back into the Irish Sea. We have surrendered that without having same option ourselves. It’s also true that EU can add new laws and regulations on NI the politicians there cannot block, because there is no real brake or Veto.
You may dismiss these red lines as not bothering yourself, but you must surely concede for many conservative and unionists, these are genuine fears and issues about how balanced the proposal is, and how workable overtime?
I expect the vote by Easter or shortly after and frankly I am very pleased not least because it has had an immeasurable improvement with to our relationship with Europe which is long overdue
I know what you are saying. Yes I agree warm cooperation clearly there. But I think that is ACTUALLY the problem, the Achilles Heel at the heart of the agreement. The UK and EU singing from the same hymn sheet on this, at the expense of DUP and ERG over in a different camp, different hymn altogether. In fact the hymns arn’t even allowed in the same hymnals.
Sunak’s government and EU in same camp, of what’s good for them, DUP and ERG in a different camp. That’s the dividing line.
For example as I explained it the other day in Yes Minister terms, idea Stormont/DUP have a real Brake or Veto has fallen apart quite quickly under not much scrutiny, so selling point to NI is the wonders of being in the EU single market going forward instead. The reason for this is Rishi and EU can’t allow a real veto in this deal. This is where in your Jim Hacker voice you ask, why not? And Sir Humphrey roll his eyes and say, because if you give the DUP a real veto minister, they wouldn’t hesitate to use it. But we want them to use it. To block all those brand new EU laws, and rules and regulations being imposed on Northern Ireland. Don’t we? [Sir Humphrey smirks and shakes his head] But we’ve built the agreement around the fact, if the EU don’t get their way on imposing new laws and regulation, they can scrap the Green Lane without a shred of consultation, throw the border back into the Irish Sea, and we’ll all be back to square one. Without that there would be no agreement at all. We’ve agreed that? Yes Minister. In black and white, which you clearly haven’t read all over.
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, will have no choice but to resign because WhatsApp messages are likely to emerge that are “utterly indefensible”, The Times has been told.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
The case against the cabinet secretary is surely open and shut?
He's definitely in a corner.
More seriously, what does this tell us? That he's an ignorant stuck up incompetent twat? You'd have to be living under a rock not to know that. He was appointed for those reasons, FFS. Cummings was nervous about appointing anyone vaguely capable in case he couldn't control that person.
So I'm not sure why it alters the position. He should have resigned after Partygate, along with everyone else implicated (incidentally it's rather telling that only one person - Allegra Stratton - did, despite actually in many ways being the least culpable). If he didn't resign for being censured after breaking the law, why would he do so for this?
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
Sounds like the SNP are self combusting much like the conservative party
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Okay my position is fairly clear, we should take migrants that benefit us, we should also be looking at resources when we take them, that includes housing, water, food supply, services. Till then we take what we can then we say sorry we are full
Ukrainians included?
Yes sorry if that discomforts you but we are getting to the point we dont have enough to go round already. How much less do you think people will accept before they go not another one?
Depends on the sort of people.
Plenty feel like you.
To be clear, I don't care about creed, colour, sexuality here....I do believe governements first job is to take care of its citizens. If we can add people without impact then lets do it. When we can't then we must stop. Governements first job is to look after uk citizens
"Jacinda Ardern's government implemented a ludicrous policy, spawned by Chris Hipkin's Ministry of Education before he became prime minister. Science classes are to be taught that Maori 'Ways of Knowing' (Matauranga Maori) have equal standing with 'western' science. Not surprisingly, this adolescent virtue-signalling horrified New Zealand's grown-up scientists and scholars. Seven of them wrote to the Listener magazine. Three who were fellows of the NZ Royal Society were threatened with an inquisitorial investigation. Two of these, including the distinguished medical scientist Garth Cooper, himself of Maori descent, resigned (the third unfortunately died). I was delighted to meet Professor Cooper, with others of the seven. His resignation letter cited the society's failure to support science against its denigration as 'a western European invention'. He was affronted, too, by a complaint (not endorsed by the NZRS) that 'to insist on Maoiri children learning to read is an act of colonisation'"
The simplest way for Sunak to win the migrant debate is to have a highly active, "at source", refugee campaign based in eastern Turkey or Poland, picking up families in Chinooks and whisking them into free seats at Wimbledon.
Lots of insta, facebook, embed journalists (see the Royal Navy thing on iplayer - "why chucking a F35 in the sea is a good teambuilding exercise"), fresh faced fast-streamers tending to wounds, close ups of children getting fed Cornish Pasties, Dura Ace teaching one to drive in a Porsche.
THEN
But we ran out of space after 10,000,000,000 Albanians came over on the boats. So...
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Only ever been there once, after riding the Far Northern Line. Didn't see anything to especially dislike, or anything that ran in my head as remarkable.
The simplest way for Sunak to win the migrant debate is to have a highly active, "at source", refugee campaign based in eastern Turkey or Poland, picking up families in Chinooks and whisking them into free seats at Wimbledon.
Lots of insta, facebook, embed journalists (see the Royal Navy thing on iplayer - "why chucking a F35 in the sea is a good teambuilding exercise"), fresh faced fast-streamers tending to wounds, close ups of children getting fed Cornish Pasties, Dura Ace teaching one to drive in a Porsche.
THEN
But we ran out of space after 10,000,000,000 Albanians came over on the boats. So...
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
The Home Office has been useless for years and got worse since the Tories came to power . The processing of asylum claims has been atrocious and this monstrosity of a bill will do nothing to clear the backlog .
But as long as the stain on humanity Braverman and her gimp Sunak can look all tough that’s all that matters .
Meanwhile the clamor begins to pull the UK out of the ECHR by loathsome Tory MPs like Clarke and Francois .
And the elephant in the room Brexit is nowhere to be seen , amazing given this is a big part of the problem in terms of returning people to EU countries.
Simon Case, the cabinet secretary, will have no choice but to resign because WhatsApp messages are likely to emerge that are “utterly indefensible”, The Times has been told.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
The case against the cabinet secretary is surely open and shut?
He's definitely in a corner.
More seriously, what does this tell us? That he's an ignorant stuck up incompetent twat? You'd have to be living under a rock not to know that. He was appointed for those reasons, FFS. Cummings was nervous about appointing anyone vaguely capable in case he couldn't control that person.
So I'm not sure why it alters the position. He should have resigned after Partygate, along with everyone else implicated (incidentally it's rather telling that only one person - Allegra Stratton - did, despite actually in many ways being the least culpable). If he didn't resign for being censured after breaking the law, why would he do so for this?
A PM that was focused on running this country would have moved him on already. Surely he is not going to miss this chance.
So, Sturgeon was head and shoulders above her successors. But she actually did nothing - and those successors are telling Scottish voters she achieved nothing.
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
Forbes and Regan are both aiming for the substantial number of SNP members who are unhappy with the direction of the party under Sturgeon. Not all left to join Alba. The National is supporting Yousaf, so would be expected to not support Forbes.
Ash Regan is a liar politician, caught telling another massive porkie.
Easy answer to that: "The Greens are only interested in Trans and undermining the independence movement with culture war... etc etc"
Regan has obviously joined Forbes in working out that an endorsement from the Greens is not exactly an unvarnished blessing, even in this electorate.
Humza apparently can't quite get his head round the notion that if the Greens are truly pro-indy, they'll still be pro-indy whether they're part of the Scottish government or not.
Meantime, the other two don't have to wed themselves to them quite so much for so little benefit.
Enlisting the Greens was part of Sturgeon's strategy - ensuring a solid lock on ScotGov and the support of younger people for the Indy project. Junking the Greens which would be the consequence of a Forbes or Regan win and completely overturns her legacy. She'll be spitting tacks at Forbes's attacks on her Govt's record.
The Home Office has been useless for years and got worse since the Tories came to power . The processing of asylum claims has been atrocious and this monstrosity of a bill will do nothing to clear the backlog .
But as long as the stain on humanity Braverman and her gimp Sunak can look all tough that’s all that matters .
Meanwhile the clamor begins to pull the UK out of the ECHR by loathsome Tory MPs like Clarke and Francois .
And the elephant in the room Brexit is nowhere to be seen , amazing given this is a big part of the problem in terms of returning people to EU countries.
When we were in the eu we also couldn't return them, indeed we paid a lot of money to the french to stop them coming but still they came in similar numbers
So, Sturgeon was head and shoulders above her successors. But she actaully did nothing - and those successors are telling Scottish voters she achieved nothing.
Have I missed anything?
I can think of a great many politicians whose record in office would have been far better had they done nothing rather than the actual disasters they perpetrated.
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Ash Regan is a liar politician, caught telling another massive porkie.
Easy answer to that: "The Greens are only interested in Trans and undermining the independence movement with culture war... etc etc"
Regan has obviously joined Forbes in working out that an endorsement from the Greens is not exactly an unvarnished blessing, even in this electorate.
Humza apparently can't quite get his head round the notion that if the Greens are truly pro-indy, they'll still be pro-indy whether they're part of the Scottish government or not.
Meantime, the other two don't have to wed themselves to them quite so much for so little benefit.
Enlisting the Greens was part of Sturgeon's strategy - ensuring a solid lock on ScotGov and the support of younger people for the Indy project. Junking the Greens which would be the consequence of a Forbes or Regan win and completely overturns her legacy. She'll be spitting tacks at Forbes's attacks on her Govt's record.
Well, indeed, this and pretty much only this is what sets out Humza as the continuity candidate.
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
Forbes and Regan are both aiming for the substantial number of SNP members who are unhappy with the direction of the party under Sturgeon. Not all left to join Alba. The National is supporting Yousaf, so would be expected to not support Forbes.
Basically the entire SNP establishment is backing Yousaf. The fact that he's so poor is a pretty damning indictment of Sturgeon's succession planning. She really didn't think through the implications of promoting Kate Forbes when Derek Mackay imploded.
The thing is - no one trust the Tories to solve anything. The small boats thing today is another indicator of how they’ve lost their minds - pushing forward on something that looks dubious in terms of legality. Which is a shame after the common sense of the Windsor framework
From this poll.
My take is this is a rather poor poll for Labour, 6% chunk knocked off the lead since the last one.
7% only on economy doesn’t look too good for Labour either.
We have to remember, losing 6% of lead now and only 7% ahead on economy, we are still north country miles away from a general election.
We used to think of these seats as Labour heartlands, loyal to Labour even through the Thatcher landslides of the eighties? Why then are Tories doing so well there this week, against all these headwinds?
I stopped reading at 'my take'
That’s a shame as I raised some interesting points.
Why talk up a poll where the gap has closed so much since the last one?
Why, in this situation, are Labour not further ahead on economy?
Why, considering some of the worst headwinds any UK government have had to endure since the 70’s, is the Tory position clearly not worsening, in fact just recently seems to be advancing, such as in this poll?
I can tap out and not offer my “honest unspun take” if Admins don’t like them.
Well you've never done that before, predicting the Tories are advancing.
Not for a while no, I prefer seeing sequences of polls, and judge month by month before pointing to movemrnt like that, as it’s more secure movement measured from more data.
But I’m sticking to my guns, Tonight's R&W Red Wall poll is actually surprisingly better for the Conservatives for once, so your pro Labour ramping of it is a bit of an odd take.
If we want to be really deep on this, I think it’s looking like red wall voters may be a different kettle of fish from normal election swingers. This parliament terms local council elections, and to extent by-elections, has given Labour mixed results on winning them back, particularly midlands branch of red wall, less so Wales branch of red wall. As a betting tip, Labour might put on 100 seats at next election, but find a few of these Red Wall areas not coming back in the end. And it might be Red Wall hold outs deny them the majority. That’s what I take from tonight’s poll, which is obviously very different than yours.
Pro Labour ramping by me? WTF are you on about?
I've consistently written thread headers saying I don't think Labour will win a majority at the next election.
Naught but Tory Propaganda!
One seven goal win and this is what he’s like. 🙄 Manic over ramped posting, leaping between conversations, Swearing and everything.
At least the coming Liverpool results will bring him back down to normal 😈
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
I think that she burnt her bridges with Sturgeon a while ago. That is a major part of the attraction. And Useless is every bit as vulnerable on his record as she is on her religious beliefs, arguably more so.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Only ever been there once, after riding the Far Northern Line. Didn't see anything to especially dislike, or anything that ran in my head as remarkable.
Fair comment but our connections with Wick are by family and friends over generations
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Hancock comes out of this terribly and I expect the enquiry will be unforgiving on his role
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Only ever been there once, after riding the Far Northern Line. Didn't see anything to especially dislike, or anything that ran in my head as remarkable.
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Hancock comes out of this terribly and I expect the enquiry will be unforgiving on his role
He is just the first of many. Sounds like Case being lined up next. The Telegraph have a gold mine here.
FWIW I think Forbes's attack on Humza's record in Govt was a mistake. After all, this is a Govt of which she, like him. is a Cab Sec. Also amounts to an attack on Sturgeon. Even the Editor of the National, commenting just now, thought it unbalanced.
I think that she burnt her bridges with Sturgeon a while ago. That is a major part of the attraction. And Useless is every bit as vulnerable on his record as she is on her religious beliefs, arguably more so.
Mebbes. I'm no expert but I'm not sure that SNP members are quite so ready to put the boot into Nicola. Up until a few weeks ago she was the messiah.
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Hancock comes out of this terribly and I expect the enquiry will be unforgiving on his role
He is just the first of many. Sounds like Case being lined up next. The Telegraph have a gold mine here.
I feel this is just the beginning. The flames are licking at the whole sorry Government.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Only ever been there once, after riding the Far Northern Line. Didn't see anything to especially dislike, or anything that ran in my head as remarkable.
I've been to Wick and Thurso. Both were good.
Worst fish and chips I have ever had was in Thurso.
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Hancock comes out of this terribly and I expect the enquiry will be unforgiving on his role
He is just the first of many. Sounds like Case being lined up next. The Telegraph have a gold mine here.
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Ummm: if it discourages a certain proportion of people, it will have done its job.
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
Could we deport them all to scotland they are always saying they need immigrants
If its to Scotland it's not deportation.
It will be after the referendum
But even before that instead of Rwanda....lets just say all boat people are welcome but they will have to live in wick
Are you saying they get on your Wick?
Wick is a great town and my wife has family there and spent time there in the war
Only ever been there once, after riding the Far Northern Line. Didn't see anything to especially dislike, or anything that ran in my head as remarkable.
We settled on 'Stop The Boats' as a slogan for our policy, because cruel, impractical, illegal, deceitful, xenophobic gaslighting wasn't as catchy. #ToryGaslighting
It's vile.
It is.
Are HM Opposition in favour or against?
Stevie (useless) Kinnock was on PM. He's against the small boats and the crims. He wants an arrangement with Francais, and staging posts in France where they can apply for asylum, a clamp down on the crims and a legal route for genuine asylum seekers. He said stopping the boats before the legal route was putting the cart before the horse. It seemed quite reasonable to me.
The BBC had an Aussie on to back the Government line and he said it might work as it did in Aussie but you also need a legal means for asylum seekers to arrive to claim asylum.
Let's face it Cruella was on manouvres today and her ultimate aim as PM is to remove us from the Churchillian ECHR. Anyway should she become PM and she dreams of sending leftie Remainer traitors to Rwanda, I'll volunteer. It's got to be no worse than living in Rwanda than her lawless dystopian totalitarian state. At least the sun shines.
What does he think the masses declined on the legal route are going to do? Oh let me guess they are going to get on a boat. It's only a solution if you intend to take everyone that applies and that isn't going to happen even under a labour government
Yeah,. A ferry from Calais
Today we saw a Conservative Party that would have made Enoch Powell and Peter Griffiths polish their racism with pride.
Ah, the old favourite the left loves. When you run put of arguments just screaming racism. Even more laughable when we have an ethnic minority Tory PM, after Labour have yet another white male at the top.
We also have record levels of inward net migration.
Which no one bats an eyelid at.
Mind you I’ve learnt that not building houses is racist today. Every days a school day.
You have raised this a couple of times now Taz, and it’s an interesting point. The Tories are conflating two separate things into one - uncontrolled immigration via channel boats, where at least least some of the people may be genuine asylum seekers not given many other options to claim asylum here by UK government other than that dangerous crossing, conflated with immigration and feelings and issues with that par se.
For example, let’s looks at some of these Express and Mail front pages - uncontrolled immigration is one key issue which can place clear sharp difference between government and Keir Starmer.
Hence the hammering of the asylum laws and obligations to be tough on “uncontrolled immigration” Immigration under this government meanwhile
Net migration for the UK in the year ending June 2022 This was estimated to be at 504,000, an increase of 331,000 compared with the YE June 2021 (173,000). This was driven by net migration of non-EU nationals, at 509,000 in the YE June 2022, an increase of 352,000 compared with YE June 2021.
Apart from you pointing this out, I don’t think anyone else here or in media is pointing up this conflating difference.
So step 1 has worked.
We won't know the actual impact of this policy until we've seen some opinion polling, of course.
Sorry that was last Sunday’s Mail.
This is tonight’s. The first traitor unmasked and given a proper kickin like?
There’s never any wine left in the bottle to keep in the door ☺️
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
Hancock comes out of this terribly and I expect the enquiry will be unforgiving on his role
He is just the first of many. Sounds like Case being lined up next. The Telegraph have a gold mine here.
Comments
https://twitter.com/ShaunLintern/status/1631670607350837252?t=2oHgJLhRdRREki5Krqjd9LYuvugiOSQV-1zsw0Z3jvA&s=19
I once got awfully told off for saying that my pronoun was "horse". Seems that in those xenogenderphobic times I was just ahead of the game.
The govt sent 15 people back to Albania today who’d come over on boats
45,000 people came to the UK on boats last year
The current plan is weekly flights
At that rate it’d take 3,000 trips to clear backlog
Taking 57 years
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1633218846378143744
My take, there’s obviously going to be a counter proposal - clear red lines to renegotiate - from DUP and ERG. As LuckyGuy has said, surely we need an option to terminate? What LuckyGuy and Redwood may have missed is the EU do. They can close the green lane in an instant, without any consultation or agreement, throwing the border back into the Irish Sea. We have surrendered that without having same option ourselves. It’s also true that EU can add new laws and regulations on NI the politicians there cannot block, because there is no real brake or Veto.
You may dismiss these red lines as not bothering yourself, but you must surely concede for many conservative and unionists, these are genuine fears and issues about how balanced the proposal is, and how workable overtime?
This is well planned and calculated. Step one is to rally the core Tory press (job done) and provoke the Libs. Shift the dial onto his terrain.
Next is to own legislative agenda and process and force Labour to make mistakes.
They absolutely won't be able to help themselves.
The correct pronouns are 'Mightiness/Mighty One.'
(Incidentally wouldn't Richard III be a better example?)
With that said, France was no one's first point of call in Europe either, and I doubt we'd object if asylum seekers self deported from the UK to Ireland or France.
He is weighing up his future after leaked WhatsApp messages showed that he had privately criticised Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and mocked holidaymakers forced to quarantine.
However, a government source who has worked with Case said that there were far worse messages to come which were likely to emerge during the coronavirus inquiry.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/simon-case-early-resign-civil-service-coronation-king-2023-c08g93gn9
It is an extremely unequal agreement, and shouldn't be. Rishi appears to have negotiated poorly, and has shown once again that whilst diplomacy and politeness are important assets, you also need steely determination when dealing with the EU. I find this less forgiveable than Boris's shit deal, because Boris, despite his bluster, had a weak hand. Rishi had a strong hand.
I don't see this getting support from any Unionist party. I'm interested to see what statements (if any) the Alliance party makes about it.
Keep it up.
Meantime, the other two don't have to wed themselves to them quite so much for so little benefit.
If we want to be richer, and we should, then lets prioritse housing, 21st century infrastructure, medium and long term investment rather than searching for penny rich and pound poor quick fixes.
Yes Regan in particular fucked that question, that was a terrible answer from someone who wants to make every election a de facto independence election. "Um it's a bit hypocritical maybe but we just had a Scottish election but maybe there'll be a UK GE along soon that'd be a decent test for the FM". What?
On the plus side, we've had a good hour of politicians basically discussing independence as if it's inevitable, without qualifiers of any sort.
Until you accept and address this basic problem you desert the field for your political opponents.
I understand the majority of the public dont want that, and have said what needs to happen if the govt want to act on that. It requires leaving international treaties not creating new laws. The govt is not doing that and therefore your beef should be with them, not those who simply point out this won't work.
I am not particuarly opposed to replacing the old existing framework with an international quota system, done well it could be an improvement, done badly it could be worse.
This however is a most unconservative sham policy.
Seriously- what's he thinking here? That it's the best plan to do what it says on the tin? That it's not the best plan for that, but it will rally and annoy the right people? That it will fail on both those counts, but the right of the party really want to do it?
I'd like to think that Rishi is both sane and decent. And he probably scores better than the last two overall there. But this announcement makes it awfully hard.
Plenty feel like you.
Sunak’s government and EU in same camp, of what’s good for them, DUP and ERG in a different camp. That’s the dividing line.
For example as I explained it the other day in Yes Minister terms, idea Stormont/DUP have a real Brake or Veto has fallen apart quite quickly under not much scrutiny, so selling point to NI is the wonders of being in the EU single market going forward instead. The reason for this is Rishi and EU can’t allow a real veto in this deal.
This is where in your Jim Hacker voice you ask, why not?
And Sir Humphrey roll his eyes and say, because if you give the DUP a real veto minister, they wouldn’t hesitate to use it.
But we want them to use it. To block all those brand new EU laws, and rules and regulations being imposed on Northern Ireland. Don’t we?
[Sir Humphrey smirks and shakes his head] But we’ve built the agreement around the fact, if the EU don’t get their way on imposing new laws and regulation, they can scrap the Green Lane without a shred of consultation, throw the border back into the Irish Sea, and we’ll all be back to square one. Without that there would be no agreement at all.
We’ve agreed that?
Yes Minister. In black and white, which you clearly haven’t read all over.
More seriously, what does this tell us? That he's an ignorant stuck up incompetent twat? You'd have to be living under a rock not to know that. He was appointed for those reasons, FFS. Cummings was nervous about appointing anyone vaguely capable in case he couldn't control that person.
So I'm not sure why it alters the position. He should have resigned after Partygate, along with everyone else implicated (incidentally it's rather telling that only one person - Allegra Stratton - did, despite actually in many ways being the least culpable). If he didn't resign for being censured after breaking the law, why would he do so for this?
"Jacinda Ardern's government implemented a ludicrous policy, spawned by Chris Hipkin's Ministry of Education before he became prime minister. Science classes are to be taught that Maori 'Ways of Knowing' (Matauranga Maori) have equal standing with 'western' science. Not surprisingly, this adolescent virtue-signalling horrified New Zealand's grown-up scientists and scholars. Seven of them wrote to the Listener magazine. Three who were fellows of the NZ Royal Society were threatened with an inquisitorial investigation. Two of these, including the distinguished medical scientist Garth Cooper, himself of Maori descent, resigned (the third unfortunately died). I was delighted to meet Professor Cooper, with others of the seven. His resignation letter cited the society's failure to support science against its denigration as 'a western European invention'. He was affronted, too, by a complaint (not endorsed by the NZRS) that 'to insist on Maoiri children learning to read is an act of colonisation'"
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-im-sticking-up-for-science/
Lots of insta, facebook, embed journalists (see the Royal Navy thing on iplayer - "why chucking a F35 in the sea is a good teambuilding exercise"), fresh faced fast-streamers tending to wounds, close ups of children getting fed Cornish Pasties, Dura Ace teaching one to drive in a Porsche.
THEN
But we ran out of space after 10,000,000,000 Albanians came over on the boats. So...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/lockdown-files/
I had not read that Matt Hancock wanted to threaten to cancel a Centre for kids with disabilities being built in someone's constituency if they opposed lockdown. What a prick. I don't have a subscription so I don't know the name of the MP.
But as long as the stain on humanity Braverman and her gimp Sunak can look all tough that’s all that matters .
Meanwhile the clamor begins to pull the UK out of the ECHR by loathsome Tory MPs like Clarke and Francois .
And the elephant in the room Brexit is nowhere to be seen , amazing given this is a big part of the problem in terms of returning people to EU countries.
Have I missed anything?
At least the coming Liverpool results will bring him back down to normal 😈
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebenezer_Place,_Wick
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/6/taiwan-warns-chinas-military-may-make-sudden-entry-near-island
This is tonight’s. The first traitor unmasked and given a proper kickin like?
There’s never any wine left in the bottle to keep in the door ☺️