Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Is there room in the House of Lords after all the extra Tory peers David Cameron sent there to pack the upper house and give the lie to his claim that reducing Commons seats was to cut the cost of parliament rather than gerrymandering?
Quite so. And you can add to that “only 37.5%” of the people voted for it, and similar such, with whatever combination of non-voters/children/babies to voters who voted for it fabricates the lowest possible ratio.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
Indeed. His article is staggering in its denial of the drivers of the referendum vote. Those seeing it as the gateway to a Singapore-style economy are a tiny minority, even more unrepresentative than the pro-Euro enthusiasts.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
And, indeed, the Brexit May has chosen for us, with her red lines and early anti-foreigner rhetoric.
Mind you, was any other Brexit ever in offer? The Singapore-on-Thames model turns out to be a flimsy and fraudulent as the garden bridge, and a Minford Brexit involves shutting up the country north of Watford.
Mr. Royale, that a posteriori thinking (conclusion then seeking evidence rather than the other way, a priori) is common to religions and comparable beliefs. I imagine political tribalists often think along those lines, in particular the Cult.
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
And, indeed, the Brexit May has chosen for us, with her red lines and early anti-foreigner rhetoric.
Mind you, was any other Brexit ever in offer? The Singapore-on-Thames model turns out to be a flimsy and fraudulent as the garden bridge, and a Minford Brexit involves shutting up the country north of Watford.
A fantastic piece from Nelson. The brexiteers and pathetic neobrexiteers who legitimised and normalised xenophobic sentiment in the cause of a wafer thin victory are reaping what they have sown.
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Has Alan Johnson started campaigning for a remain vote yet?
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Astonishing! Why on earth then would Corbyn accuse May of being to blame?
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Thanks, Mr L! I can imagine, though, not recalling a decision I’d made nearly 10 years ago, about something which, at the time probably didn’t seem that important, especially if the view expressed by the whistleblowers wasn’t reported.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
No, Roger is right. You can’t pick-n-mix xenophobia, relishing in scaring people about some foreigners then profess horror when other groups are targeted. At some point this will dawn on Leavers and they will come to appreciate the beast they have helped to create until that point, the country will continue to decline and become more divided.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
Morning PB - So I guess anybody involved in making straws is going to be pretty p*ssed off this morning yes?
Yes. The Standard (ed: G Osborne) has been campaigning for this ban. Since 90 per cent of ocean plastic comes from Asia, which is why it washes up in the Pacific, it is unlikely our ban will make the slightest difference. If we were serious, we'd use the foreign aid budget to set up recycling centres in poorer Commonwealth countries, which would also create jobs there.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
I think that the cognitive dissonance over immigration extends much deeper. Being tough on immigration has been a vote winner since the 1959 Notting Hill race riots, and even before then. Yet ordinary Britons are generally a fairly welcoming bunch to individual immigrants. Indeed, they are often the first to be up in arms when friends, neighbours or work colleagues are getting a hard time from officialdom. Britons often dislike immigrants on principle, yet like all the ones that they have been introduced to.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
All the literature I delivered during the campaign - the 5 positive reasons to vote Leave leaflet - made clear that the UK regaining the power to make its own trade deals was one of them.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
Have you read the manifesto? Page after page of strong and stable government for a smooth and orderly Brexit. It's embarrassing.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Astonishing! Why on earth then would Corbyn accuse May of being to blame?
Because the Home Office said it was done in 2010, as you know.
In a crowded field the student loan interest rate decision stands out as stunningly stupid. It locks most graduates into a higher rate of tax for most of their working lives.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
All the literature I delivered during the campaign - the 5 positive reasons to vote Leave leaflet - made clear that the UK regaining the power to make its own trade deals was one of them.
All that matters is that we leave the EU. None of that other stuff was on the ballot.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
Then there’ll be no problem.
The problem is in the Lords.
The vote last night was symbolic, not binding. It can be ignored.
The Tory manifesto promised a Brexit that would make Britain more prosperous. That is what the Tories are obliged to deliver.
Morning PB - So I guess anybody involved in making straws is going to be pretty p*ssed off this morning yes?
I fully endorse todays proposals but on 5 live this morning it was stated that 19% of plastic polution comes from car tyres. To be honest I had no idea car tyres were so environmentally toxic and it does demonstrate the extent of the problem
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
All the literature I delivered during the campaign - the 5 positive reasons to vote Leave leaflet - made clear that the UK regaining the power to make its own trade deals was one of them.
All that matters is that we leave the EU. None of that other stuff was on the ballot.
That’s not quite true. The mandate must be honoured as well as the formal decision. However, that mandate was to splurge more money on the NHS and to be unpleasant to foreigners. The customs union does not form part of it.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Its simply not possible without a significant amnesty which removes the backlog and allows the HO to process new claims where rights have not accrued.
In a crowded field the student loan interest rate decision stands out as stunningly stupid. It locks most graduates into a higher rate of tax for most of their working lives.
Another labour big lie strategy. There's no evidence they have a clue how to get houses built. Khan's pathetic record in London is a clear sign post of their incompetence.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Its simply not possible without a significant amnesty which removes the backlog and allows the HO to process new claims where rights have not accrued.
You’re probably right. So be it. Let’s be honest with each other (as a country) for a change.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
It is interesting how quickly Brexiteers have gone from being part of a brutally racist campaign to the staunchest opponents of the Windrush deportations and Labour's anti-Semitism. I think it's called cognitive dissonance. Guido and his disciples would make good case studies
It's called taking decisions based on their merits.
All the literature I delivered during the campaign - the 5 positive reasons to vote Leave leaflet - made clear that the UK regaining the power to make its own trade deals was one of them.
Having trade deals doesn't, by itself, deliver anything. What matters is what is written in them.
But we mustn't drag you from important work checking celebrities' ages; you have catching up to do...
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
Have you read the manifesto? Page after page of strong and stable government for a smooth and orderly Brexit. It's embarrassing.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Three situations where straw's are used in hospital's:
1. Terminal cancer patients who are in the final stages of life and are too weak to hold cups, glasses etc themselves.
2. People recovering from operations on the mouths (including partial glossectomy's and reconstruction's for tongue cancer)
3. Patients who are coming round from general anesthetics and require smalls sip's of water - Particular important for children who respond well to brightly coloured straws.
Will Theresa have an exception on this straw ban for our NHS?
That’s not quite true. The mandate must be honoured as well as the formal decision. However, that mandate was to splurge more money on the NHS and to be unpleasant to foreigners. The customs union does not form part of it.
I don't agree.
There is no mandate except to leave the EU. The Leave side was a coalition of lots of different sorts of Brexits. And in any case - the govt shouldn't ignore what sort of Brexit those who voted Remain want either.
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
Indeed. His article is staggering in its denial of the drivers of the referendum vote. Those seeing it as the gateway to a Singapore-style economy are a tiny minority, even more unrepresentative than the pro-Euro enthusiasts.
I suppose as we are doing Brexit in such a way as to cause maximum alienation to our soon to be former partners in Europe, we should also cheese off our partners in the Commonwealth as well. At least things are balanced that way.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
I love the way Remainers keep saying this as if they’re making some clever and witty point whereas it actually just makes them look like idiots.
Personally, I have long advocated abolishing the Lords, but it is part of our Constitutional setup. It has a longstanding role as a revising chamber, which seems to be what it is doing at present.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
She has a mandate. There are a majority of MPs in the House of Commons who support her Brexit negotiating position, which was laid out clearly at Lancaster House before the election and in the manifesto.
Have you read the manifesto? Page after page of strong and stable government for a smooth and orderly Brexit. It's embarrassing.
Yes, I read it word for word.
Did you?
Yes, which is how I came to notice the extensive repetition of the same phrases, like strong and stable government, or smooth and orderly Brexit. It is like Gordon Brown parroting "I agree with Nick" at that debate. Repetition might be a good thing but not when used 16 times in one document.
Mr. Walker, I do not subscribe to the challenging and unorthodox perspective that a vote by the electorate to leave the EU is a reaffirmation that the EU should dictate our trade policy, particularly when said perspective is directly contrary to the manifestos of both main parties at the last election.
Three situations where straw's are used in hospital's:
1. Terminal cancer patients who are in the final stages of life and are too weak to hold cups, glasses etc themselves.
2. People recovering from operations on the mouths (including partial glossectomy's and reconstruction's for tongue cancer)
3. Patients who are coming round from general anesthetics and require smalls sip's of water - Particular important for children who respond well to brightly coloured straws.
Will Theresa have an exception on this straw ban for our NHS?
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Such decisions were very unlikely to get to ministerial level, unless there had been an outcry from someone at the time (which there wasn't), although clearly the minister is still accountable for what happens in their department even if they don't know about it.
Corbyn's absolute determination to pin the scandal on Mrs May was what backfired yesterday, for two reasons:
1. Don't ask a question to which you don't know the answer - that's the obvious one, his team should have researched the history of the issue and given the LotO a question which wouldn't be so easily deflected by a PM who had obviously done her research.
2. Corbyn can't react to the answers. It's his biggest weakness at PMQs. There have been several situations where he's ignored an open goal in favour of Debbie from Lincolnshire asking about her tax credits, and others such as yesterday where he doubled down on the same line of questioning having been given a dead straight answer to the first one.
Mrs May isn't one for thinking on her feet, she prefers to take time over things, and compared to her predecessor isn't a politician suited to the format. Corbyn seems to almost help her along sometimes though, with his complete unwillingness to deviate from his own script.
Mr. Walker, I do not subscribe to the challenging and unorthodox perspective that a vote by the electorate to leave the EU is a reaffirmation that the EU should dictate our trade policy, particularly when said perspective is directly contrary to the manifestos of both main parties at the last election.
If leaving the customs union was such an integral part of Brexit, Leavers should have devoted a lot more time to arguing how vital that move was during the referendum campaign rather than major on frightening the public with xenophobic lies. Having missed their opportunity to frame their mandate, they’re stuck with the one they got.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Its simply not possible without a significant amnesty which removes the backlog and allows the HO to process new claims where rights have not accrued.
You’re probably right. So be it. Let’s be honest with each other (as a country) for a change.
I could not agree more and if the Windrush and Labour's Anti Semitic issues have demonstrated we all need to be much kinder to one another
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
Amusing, but no. We've just entered some parliamentary Ping Pong and it is not yet clear which chamber will back down first. It's normal. Also , but chambers are parliament, they cannot take back control from themselves.
It's like the vote on a meaningful vote on the final deal. If parliament voted not to have that, well, parliament had the control even if it chooses not have a meaningful vote.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Hehe! I have no friends in the House of Lords. I don’t mix in the right circles.
As for the customs union it was of course not on the ballot and so to me it’s simply a technocratic consideration.
As it happens, I’m dubious about the case for a customs union since it seems to bugger up the only possible economic case for Brexit. But perhaps it is necessary as a transitionary measure to avoid supply chain chaos and to sidestep the NI border issue.
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
Amusing, but no. We've just entered some parliamentary Ping Pong and it is not yet clear which chamber will back down first. It's normal. Also , but chambers are parliament, they cannot take back control from themselves.
It's like the vote on a meaningful vote on the final deal. If parliament voted not to have that, well, parliament had the control even if it chooses not have a meaningful vote.
The Lords will back down as they have no constituency of delegated power.
Morning PB - So I guess anybody involved in making straws is going to be pretty p*ssed off this morning yes?
Yes. The Standard (ed: G Osborne) has been campaigning for this ban. Since 90 per cent of ocean plastic comes from Asia, which is why it washes up in the Pacific, it is unlikely our ban will make the slightest difference. If we were serious, we'd use the foreign aid budget to set up recycling centres in poorer Commonwealth countries, which would also create jobs there.
The banks of the river through Bangkok are covered with plastic detritus. Far, far worse than the Thames in London.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
If this was important rather than scaring voters with lies about Turks, you should have campaigned about it. You didn’t, so you’re stuck with the limited mandate you’ve got. Tough shit.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Hehe! I have no friends in the House of Lords. I don’t mix in the right circles.
As for the customs union it was of course not on the ballot and so to me it’s simply a technocratic consideration.
As it happens, I’m dubious about the case for a customs union since it seems to bugger up the only possible economic case for Brexit. But perhaps it is necessary as a transitionary measure to avoid supply chain chaos and to sidestep the NI border issue.
As a transition arrangement; fine. But shackling us to the EU trade policy wouldn't work, as you rightly see.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Such decisions were very unlikely to get to ministerial level, unless there had been an outcry from someone at the time (which there wasn't), although clearly the minister is still accountable for what happens in their department even if they don't know about it.
Corbyn's absolute determination to pin the scandal on Mrs May was what backfired yesterday, for two reasons:
1. Don't ask a question to which you don't know the answer - that's the obvious one, his team should have researched the history of the issue and given the LotO a question which wouldn't be so easily deflected by a PM who had obviously done her research.
2. Corbyn can't react to the answers. It's his biggest weakness at PMQs. There have been several situations where he's ignored an open goal in favour of Debbie from Lincolnshire asking about her tax credits, and others such as yesterday where he doubled down on the same line of questioning having been given a dead straight answer to the first one.
Mrs May isn't one for thinking on her feet, she prefers to take time over things, and compared to her predecessor isn't a politician suited to the format. Corbyn seems to almost help her along sometimes though, with his complete unwillingness to deviate from his own script.
Seems as though, despite the additional details, Corbyn messed up by not doing research and letting may make him look silly. However, the cards are only a part of the story, the will be lots of human intereat stories, so Corbyn's lucky his own goal won't distract entirely.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
I suggested yesterday that as DExEU is wound down when we leave, a separate department for immigration - with a Cabinet level minister - might be a sensible way to go.
The Home Office is clearly overwhelmed and has never really been fit for purpose on this issue, starting again from scratch might be the best way to sort it out.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Its simply not possible without a significant amnesty which removes the backlog and allows the HO to process new claims where rights have not accrued.
You’re probably right. So be it. Let’s be honest with each other (as a country) for a change.
We effectively had free movement from Commonwealth countries until the mid 1960s. During the 15 years thereafter that was successively restricted to the situation we have today and at the same time we became far more racially tolerant as a country.
Had we not done so, net immigration would probably be running today at 2 or 3 times its current levels. I don’t see controls on EU citizens going forwards as being any different or more threatening than that.
Anyway, something to cheer up all those nutty Leavers as they stress about not being able to get England onto a new tectonic plate, the country doesn’t immediately want to rejoin the EU immediately after leaving it:
Three situations where straw's are used in hospital's:
1. Terminal cancer patients who are in the final stages of life and are too weak to hold cups, glasses etc themselves.
2. People recovering from operations on the mouths (including partial glossectomy's and reconstruction's for tongue cancer)
3. Patients who are coming round from general anesthetics and require smalls sip's of water - Particular important for children who respond well to brightly coloured straws.
Will Theresa have an exception on this straw ban for our NHS?
Or has nobody given this any thought?
Am I missing something or are paper straws not an answer to this? Its only plastic straws that are being phased out (I think). Will no one think of the poor enzymes?
Here’s what was meant to happen. Jeremy Corbyn would stride into PMQs, lambast Theresa May for the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation, and watch her dissolve before his righteous glare into a puddle of remorse. Unfortunately, however, there was a very slight hiccup. “Yesterday,” snapped Mr Corbyn, “we learnt that in 2010 the Home Office destroyed landing cards for a generation of Commonwealth citizens. Did the Prime Minister – the then home secretary – sign off that decision?”
Labour frontbenchers licked their lips. I glanced down at Mrs May. She had a strange expression on her face. And it didn’t look like guilt. “No,” replied Mrs May crisply. “The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 – under a Labour government.”
Without another word, she plumped herself back down. There was a split-second of startled silence. Then bedlam. Tories roared and pointed at Mr Corbyn, their bellows a mixture of relief, astonishment, derision and glee. Mr Corbyn stared blankly at his notes. His notes stared blankly back.
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Astonishing! Why on earth then would Corbyn accuse May of being to blame?
It was in his script that she was.
And the wider issue she might be, hence being a screw up to confuse matters over the cards.
Mr. Walker, I do not subscribe to the challenging and unorthodox perspective that a vote by the electorate to leave the EU is a reaffirmation that the EU should dictate our trade policy, particularly when said perspective is directly contrary to the manifestos of both main parties at the last election.
If leaving the customs union was such an integral part of Brexit, Leavers should have devoted a lot more time to arguing how vital that move was during the referendum campaign rather than major on frightening the public with xenophobic lies. Having missed their opportunity to frame their mandate, they’re stuck with the one they got.
Personally I would not have a problem with leaving the Customs Union as regaining sovereign, which can still be achieved by leaving the EU and reducing immigration, which can still be achieved by leaving the single market were the two key reasons most polls give for Brexit.
It would also resolve the Irish issue instantly which is still going to have to be resolved via regulatory alignment anyway even if we leave the Customs Union though for Brexiteers it would stop us agreeing our own FTAs
That -- Theresa May's triumph -- is indeed what is meant to have happened, but unfortunately it all unravelled within an hour as the details became murkier and murkier. Fortunately for the Prime Minister, a right-wing cabal at MI5 arranged a celebrity death to wipe the whole mess off the front pages while Amber Rudd set up some sort of appeals hotline.
Jacqui Smith has, IIRC, been quoted as saying she knew nothing about it (I know, I know). Has Alan Johnson said anything?
Jacqui Smith, who was Labour home secretary until replaced by Alan Johnson in June 2009, told the BBC that it was "not a policy decision she had made". Mr Johnson also said he "had absolutely no recollection at all of being involved" in the landing card decision. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
Such decisions were very unlikely to get to ministerial level, unless there had been an outcry from someone at the time (which there wasn't), although clearly the minister is still accountable for what happens in their department even if they don't know about it.
Corbyn's absolute determination to pin the scandal on Mrs May was what backfired yesterday, for two reasons:
1. Don't ask a question to which you don't know the answer - that's the obvious one, his team should have researched the history of the issue and given the LotO a question which wouldn't be so easily deflected by a PM who had obviously done her research.
2. Corbyn can't react to the answers. It's his biggest weakness at PMQs. There have been several situations where he's ignored an open goal in favour of Debbie from Lincolnshire asking about her tax credits, and others such as yesterday where he doubled down on the same line of questioning having been given a dead straight answer to the first one.
Mrs May isn't one for thinking on her feet, she prefers to take time over things, and compared to her predecessor isn't a politician suited to the format. Corbyn seems to almost help her along sometimes though, with his complete unwillingness to deviate from his own script.
You couldn't make this up - John Healey has just said that the decision in 2009 to destroy the landing cards was not at ministerial level and the ministers could not have known about the decisions. So taking that logic to its conclusion TM would have had no knowledge of the matter in October 2010, five months after taking on Home Secretary. I would suggest labour needs to look at itself on this and it seemed quite transparent that when he was asked if he wanted an enquiry into the cards he demurred and said he wants the errors corrected
If taking back control means anything surely it means getting to grips with a Home Office and migration policy which has not been fit for purpose for a generation or more.
Its simply not possible without a significant amnesty which removes the backlog and allows the HO to process new claims where rights have not accrued.
You’re probably right. So be it. Let’s be honest with each other (as a country) for a change.
I could not agree more and if the Windrush and Labour's Anti Semitic issues have demonstrated we all need to be much kinder to one another
It is also about having a system that is capable of dealing with EU citizens going forward. Of course EU citizens already here, and quite possibly those who come in the transition period, will have rights to be here. We don't know yet what the conditionality will be for those going forward but it is hard to conceive of an outcome that does not significantly increase the HO workload. I honestly believe that the right response to Windrush is to have an amnesty. It would be politically astute, it would allow the HO to get some sort of a grip and it would allow us to have a system capable of handling a post Brexit future.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
If this was important rather than scaring voters with lies about Turks, you should have campaigned about it. You didn’t, so you’re stuck with the limited mandate you’ve got. Tough shit.
Leave did:
“While we’re in the EU, the UK can’t make trade deals on our own. This means we currently have no trade deals with key allies such as Australia, New Zealand or the USA - or important growing economies like India, China or Brazil. Instead of making a deal which is best for the UK, we have to wait for 27 other countries to agree it”
Theresa May should go and see The Queen tomorrow and insist she creates 100 new Tory peers.
I am happy to volunteer.
Parliament has taken back control...
Amusing, but no. We've just entered some parliamentary Ping Pong and it is not yet clear which chamber will back down first. It's normal. Also , but chambers are parliament, they cannot take back control from themselves.
It's like the vote on a meaningful vote on the final deal. If parliament voted not to have that, well, parliament had the control even if it chooses not have a meaningful vote.
The Lords will back down as they have no constituency of delegated power.
There are times they have not backed down. Maybe this will be one, maybe they'll be another vote they don't back down on. There are ways around that, if the government wants to. They won't think to until they test the resolve of the Lords, I suspect, by sending it back. It may well be enough back down, as usually they do if the Commons insists.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
Trade policy was a significant driver of the vote to leave the EU. EU trade deals being very slow and cumbersome, entrenching protectionism rather than encouraging more trade, and they can't even complete their own single market in services, let alone negotiate one with others.
Anyway, something to cheer up all those nutty Leavers as they stress about not being able to get England onto a new tectonic plate, the country doesn’t immediately want to rejoin the EU immediately after leaving it:
Yes, I don’t sense much appetite to rejoin the EU. If we were to do so, the question would need to be reframed (ie as in Britain’s clear interest) and supported by strong political leadership.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
If this was important rather than scaring voters with lies about Turks, you should have campaigned about it. You didn’t, so you’re stuck with the limited mandate you’ve got. Tough shit.
Leave did:
“While we’re in the EU, the UK can’t make trade deals on our own. This means we currently have no trade deals with key allies such as Australia, New Zealand or the USA - or important growing economies like India, China or Brazil. Instead of making a deal which is best for the UK, we have to wait for 27 other countries to agree it”
Tough shit, to borrow a rather inelegant expression....
As I have already posted below, the public remember two things about the Leave campaign: the xenophobic lies and the lie on the bus. 1% recall new trade deals. Leave don’t have a mandate for every footnote. If leaving the customs union was important, they had to campaign for it. But they didn’t. They frightened the public into Brexit instead.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
Trade policy was a significant driver of the vote to leave the EU. EU trade deals being very slow and cumbersome, entrenching protectionism rather than encouraging more trade, and they can't even complete their own single market in services, let alone negotiate one with others.
Anyway, something to cheer up all those nutty Leavers as they stress about not being able to get England onto a new tectonic plate, the country doesn’t immediately want to rejoin the EU immediately after leaving it:
Yes, I don’t sense much appetite to rejoin the EU. If we were to do so, the question would need to be reframed (ie as in Britain’s clear interest) and supported by strong political leadership.
It’s not that revealing, except to show the depth of opposition to Brexit. I wouldn’t vote immediately to rejoin. Brexit has to be given its chance first. Immediately rejoining after leaving would not do that.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
If this was important rather than scaring voters with lies about Turks, you should have campaigned about it. You didn’t, so you’re stuck with the limited mandate you’ve got. Tough shit.
Leave did:
“While we’re in the EU, the UK can’t make trade deals on our own. This means we currently have no trade deals with key allies such as Australia, New Zealand or the USA - or important growing economies like India, China or Brazil. Instead of making a deal which is best for the UK, we have to wait for 27 other countries to agree it”
Good news from Chesterfield. Dianne Abbot replaced by Emily Thornberry on this afternoon's QT recording at the Winding Wheel.
Liz Truss still representing the Tories.
I'm sure that the habit of trailing Abbot as a guest on these shows, then replacing her with someone literate and numerate at the last minute, is just a ruse to increase the ratings among those who didn't see the change.
As an aside, those wanting us to permanently remain in the customs union will also permanently make the EU a feature of UK politics and entrench the poisonous atmosphere we have now.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
Absurd garbage.
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
Getting pretty sick of Remainers telling Leavers to own it whilst other Remainers do everything they can to keep us under EU control e.g. in the form of the Customs Union.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
Unhinged. The customs union is not the EU. If Britain ends up in it, Leavers will have no ground to argue that the referendum vote was not honoured.
Back to insults I see.
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
lia, New Zealand or the USA - or important growing economies like India, China or Brazil. Instead of making a deal which is best for the UK, we have to wait for 27 other countries to agree it”
Tough shit, to borrow a rather inelegant expression....
As I have already posted below, the public remember two things about the Leave campaign: the xenophobic lies and the lie on the bus. 1% recall new trade deals. Leave don’t have a mandate for every footnote. If leaving the customs union was important, they had to campaign for it. But they didn’t. They frightened the public into Brexit instead.
You are not helping Alistair. There were 4 leave votes in my household none were based on immigration or the bus. I can't believe we are all in a 1% minority.
Longer in office, more likely there will be clips that can be dug up that make you look bad. Research team making up for missing the 2009 detail I gueas.
Comments
The offence is not the method, it’s the result.
Last year TM asked for a mandate to crush the saboteurs, including the unelected Lords, she didnt get it, indeed the voters preferred to weaken her position.
https://twitter.com/frasernelson/status/986841764936876032?s=21
But he doesn’t make the connection to the viciously anti-immigration campaign that the referendum was won on. Far from this being the wrong Brexit, it was the Brexit voted for.
Mind you, was any other Brexit ever in offer?
The Singapore-on-Thames model turns out to be a flimsy and fraudulent as the garden bridge, and a Minford Brexit involves shutting up the country north of Watford.
Mr. Royale, that a posteriori thinking (conclusion then seeking evidence rather than the other way, a priori) is common to religions and comparable beliefs. I imagine political tribalists often think along those lines, in particular the Cult.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43806710
They should hang their heads in shame.
I can imagine, though, not recalling a decision I’d made nearly 10 years ago, about something which, at the time probably didn’t seem that important, especially if the view expressed by the whistleblowers wasn’t reported.
Leaving properly is the only way to move on.
If we remain in the customs union because the unelected Lords decide that's the way the vote of the electorate to leave should be handled, then we'll have parties proposing leaving the customs union, and others proposing joining the single market.
This number includes 6,171 foreign offenders and the procedures for dealing with prisoners on release have probably got even more vigorous since then. This is one area where the Home Office have sharpened up.
On the other hand the Home Office estimates the number of illegal immigrants at 150,000 a year. Estimates of the number of illegal immigrants vary widely. The Staggers quotes an estimate of 430,000 way back in 2001: https://www.newstatesman.com/2017/02/how-many-illegal-immigrants-are-uk
If the estimate of incomers is anything like close that figure is likely to have at least doubled by now although many illegal immigrants leave without Home Office intervention.
What we have is a system where there is a backlog of 10-20 years to be dealt with. This in itself causes problems because people do not sit around waiting in that period, they form relationships, have children, acquire Article 8 rights etc making their removal more difficult. The system is also bogged down with those who have been determined to have no right to be here but whom we cannot deport because their country is deemed dangerous either generally or because of some characteristic that they have. The number of converted Christians and gays amongst those threatened with deportation is remarkable.
So those that think that the HO officials sit there carefully adjudicating individual claims are deluding themselves. It is a system that is just totally overwhelmed and may be becoming more so. The pressure to make decisions and get through the appeals process as quickly as possible is immense. Such a system will inevitably make decisions that seem unreasonable or harsh or plain stupid. Its baked in. If the press want to run with stories of this type on the back of WIndrush there will literally be no end of them.
Labour sets outs it’s policy to build 1 million homes, including the biggest council house building programme in 30 years.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/19/britain-housing-market-broken-labour-council-houses
Meanwhile, the Tories wave through an increase on the student loans interest rate to 6.3%
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/students-hit-with-eyewatering-loan-interest-of-6-3-c8t9n7z2s
Being in the continent of Europe and sharing a land border with the EU makes it a permanent feature of U.K. politics.
The poisonous atmosphere is in part a result of the tendentious lies served up in the name of Brexit (not to mention the racism).
You won. Just own it already.
None of that other stuff was on the ballot.
The Tory manifesto promised a Brexit that would make Britain more prosperous. That is what the Tories are obliged to deliver.
Let’s be honest with each other (as a country) for a change.
Maybe tell your mates in the HoL to let us own it?
But we mustn't drag you from important work checking celebrities' ages; you have catching up to do...
Did you?
1. Terminal cancer patients who are in the final stages of life and are too weak to hold cups, glasses etc themselves.
2. People recovering from operations on the mouths (including partial glossectomy's and reconstruction's for tongue cancer)
3. Patients who are coming round from general anesthetics and require smalls sip's of water - Particular important for children who respond well to brightly coloured straws.
Will Theresa have an exception on this straw ban for our NHS?
Or has nobody given this any thought?
There is no mandate except to leave the EU. The Leave side was a coalition of lots of different sorts of Brexits. And in any case - the govt shouldn't ignore what sort of Brexit those who voted Remain want either.
We've also since had a general election.
Over to Theresa!
Corbyn's absolute determination to pin the scandal on Mrs May was what backfired yesterday, for two reasons:
1. Don't ask a question to which you don't know the answer - that's the obvious one, his team should have researched the history of the issue and given the LotO a question which wouldn't be so easily deflected by a PM who had obviously done her research.
2. Corbyn can't react to the answers. It's his biggest weakness at PMQs. There have been several situations where he's ignored an open goal in favour of Debbie from Lincolnshire asking about her tax credits, and others such as yesterday where he doubled down on the same line of questioning having been given a dead straight answer to the first one.
Mrs May isn't one for thinking on her feet, she prefers to take time over things, and compared to her predecessor isn't a politician suited to the format. Corbyn seems to almost help her along sometimes though, with his complete unwillingness to deviate from his own script.
I suppose they'll cost the NHS more though?
Lost to a bus. Quelle surprise.
The Customs union would prevent us having control of our trade policy, as it would be significantly in control of the EU.
It's like the vote on a meaningful vote on the final deal. If parliament voted not to have that, well, parliament had the control even if it chooses not have a meaningful vote.
I have no friends in the House of Lords. I don’t mix in the right circles.
As for the customs union it was of course not on the ballot and so to me it’s simply a technocratic consideration.
As it happens, I’m dubious about the case for a customs union since it seems to bugger up the only possible economic case for Brexit. But perhaps it is necessary as a transitionary measure to avoid supply chain chaos and to sidestep the NI border issue.
The Home Office is clearly overwhelmed and has never really been fit for purpose on this issue, starting again from scratch might be the best way to sort it out.
Had we not done so, net immigration would probably be running today at 2 or 3 times its current levels. I don’t see controls on EU citizens going forwards as being any different or more threatening than that.
https://twitter.com/mattsingh_/status/986864912134803456?s=21
https://twitter.com/JohnMannMP/status/986865485634564097
And the wider issue she might be, hence being a screw up to confuse matters over the cards.
Good news from Chesterfield. Dianne Abbot replaced by Emily Thornberry on this afternoon's QT recording at the Winding Wheel.
Liz Truss still representing the Tories.
It would also resolve the Irish issue instantly which is still going to have to be resolved via regulatory alignment anyway even if we leave the Customs Union though for Brexiteers it would stop us agreeing our own FTAs
Good work from Labour to dig this video up.
I honestly believe that the right response to Windrush is to have an amnesty. It would be politically astute, it would allow the HO to get some sort of a grip and it would allow us to have a system capable of handling a post Brexit future.
“While we’re in the EU, the UK can’t make trade deals on our own. This means we currently have no trade deals with key allies such as Australia, New Zealand or the USA - or important growing economies like India, China or Brazil. Instead of making a deal which is best for the UK, we have to wait for 27 other countries to agree it”
https://fullfact.org/europe/vote-leave-facts-leaflet-trade/
Tough shit, to borrow a rather inelegant expression....
System working as designed at the moment.