A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The only way the west can even try and solve this is working together. Until recently the big numbers were from Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan. Places we helped break where no legal route exists. Now it is Albanians. Next month another group.
The west is very attractive to all the poorer more violent places that are not the west. So what are we all going to do about it? Work together? Co-operate? How about make the poor violent places less so?
What is genuinely funny is this Britannia unchained nonsense. That we don't need to co-operate we just need to tell other countries what to do. That the small number we allow in is a much larger burden than the vast numbers in poorer countries like Poland. Until we accept reality we have no hope of resolving this or even starting on the journey to do so.
I actually agree with you, but you persist in trying to shoehorn in an intemperature Brexit angle on it.
I don't think anyone doubts intergovernmental cooperation is necessary to fix this - unless you are prepared to repel intruders inside your sea borders with brute force, regardless of the consequences - and Brexit has complicated intergovernmental cooperation in this area - particularly with France - but the Dublin convention itself is a canard and would only have dealt with a tiny percentage of the numbers.
Let's not pretend we wouldn't have had this problem had we remained nor that it wouldn't have been equally challenging to solve.
Brexit isn't the *cause* of this mentality, it was a *symptom* which has amplified the genuine anger from the people who get upset by all this. As I keep pointing out in other responses we don't have the resources for any solution - brute force, immediate deportation, quick processing then deportation etc etc.
None of the people who foam on about boats are prepared to spend the money on it. Apparently France should pay for it. Which is the Brexit mentality is it not - why won't these foreign people living abroad do what we say?
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
On your first paragraph, the trouble is that people might eventually plump for the police state.
Your final paragraph highlights the issue: the only solution the Libs have is to throw the borders open.
They will have no cause for complaint if their level of braindead fuckwittery eventually results in a fascist government taking power here.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The real solution to the problem comes from another direction: the right deciding that it isn't a wedge issue any more and starting to educate their base about the realities of immigration. And I'm afraid that is unlikely to happen.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The only way the west can even try and solve this is working together. Until recently the big numbers were from Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan. Places we helped break where no legal route exists. Now it is Albanians. Next month another group.
The west is very attractive to all the poorer more violent places that are not the west. So what are we all going to do about it? Work together? Co-operate? How about make the poor violent places less so?
What is genuinely funny is this Britannia unchained nonsense. That we don't need to co-operate we just need to tell other countries what to do. That the small number we allow in is a much larger burden than the vast numbers in poorer countries like Poland. Until we accept reality we have no hope of resolving this or even starting on the journey to do so.
I actually agree with you, but you persist in trying to shoehorn in an intemperature Brexit angle on it.
I don't think anyone doubts intergovernmental cooperation is necessary to fix this - unless you are prepared to repel intruders inside your sea borders with brute force, regardless of the consequences - and Brexit has complicated intergovernmental cooperation in this area - particularly with France - but the Dublin convention itself is a canard and would only have dealt with a tiny percentage of the numbers.
Let's not pretend we wouldn't have had this problem had we remained nor that it wouldn't have been equally challenging to solve.
Brexit isn't the *cause* of this mentality, it was a *symptom* which has amplified the genuine anger from the people who get upset by all this. As I keep pointing out in other responses we don't have the resources for any solution - brute force, immediate deportation, quick processing then deportation etc etc.
None of the people who foam on about boats are prepared to spend the money on it. Apparently France should pay for it. Which is the Brexit mentality is it not - why won't these foreign people living abroad do what we say?
And in probability that won't work anyway, regardless of who pays for it.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
Alternatively we can accept people will come here and set up processing centres in France to process their applications. Give passage to those approved and those who,don’t, if they come over by other means, just return them.
We have legal routes of migration. If they don't qualify then it's hard no. We need to end the pull factor and make the trip completely uneconomic. A huge crackdown on illegal work, a deal with France to end the boat crossings and ensuring legitimate migrants are given access to legal routes of migration. The default approach should be deportation for all illegal immigrants with no right of appeal and barring that person from ever being able to legally migrate to the UK. Make the cost of illegal immigration extremely high.
Punishments being made stronger don't work if people don't think they'll be caught.
So disabuse them of that notion. Have the crackdown, shut down all of the carwashes and deport them all, shutdown all of the restaurants hiring illegal workers and deport them all, huge fines for all of the firms with dodgy site labourers being paid cash. Have a series of no warning inspections and don't give the businesses doing the dirt a way out with paying fines, just shut them down, no right of appeal, directors barred from opening a business for 20 years.
Suella Braverman has admitted that she sent official governments from her government email account to her personal email address six times from her appointment as home secretary on 6 September to 19 September, when she resigned from Liz Truss’s government. She made the disclosure in a letter she has sent this morning to Dame Diana Johnson, the Labour MP who chairs the Commons home affairs committee.
What needs to be asked is did she forward any of these papers to anyone else from her personal email account. By using her personal email noone would know who she had sent them to.
Anyone with a bet on Suella to be the next cabinet minister to be out must be rubbing their hands.
There is a full scale political crisis for the home secretary Suella Braverman and new PM Rishi Sunak in the failure to prevent the Manston migrant processing centre being totally overwhelmed by asylum seekers. Here are the important facts. 1/20 https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1587022185633284096
As there is a very specific and acute Albanian element to this debacle, has the Home Office even reached out to the Albanian government? We could announce a hard line "if you are Albanian we deport you straight back to Tirana" and worry about the legalities later. To do that, the Albanian authorities need to agree to receive their people back.
Have we asked? Or is co-operating with the forrin beneath our newly sovrin Brexity status?
If you spent less time ranting about "forriners" you might know that we have:
Plans to fast-track the removal of Albanian nationals entering the UK via small boat crossings have moved closer after Priti Patel met Albanian police.
Monday’s meeting was part of two days of talks on the sharing of forensics and biometrics to clamp down on anyone entering who has a criminal record in Albania, the Home Office said.
Patel and the Albanian minister for interior affairs, Bledi Çuçi, signed an agreement to tackle criminal gangs trafficking people from the Balkan country across Europe to Calais.
Patel is Home Secretary? Has HMG reached an agreement with Albania yes or no?
Have to chuckle at the large numbers of people on twitter now saying we must move to Mastodon because Elon, he richest man in the world control this platform, etc etc etc...as if twitter wasn't controlled by very rich people before (and all the other social media platforms are or the Chinese government). Only a few months ago the very same people would claim that Mastodon is a just home for weirdo and conspiracy nuts banned from twitter.
I strongly doubt you've found "large numbers" of people who talked about Mastodon a few months ago and who are now saying they should move to Mastodon.
The possibility of users abandoning the platform isn't a non-issue for Musk, though, and $44bn isn't small change even for him.
If he messes too much with the platform and it becomes a dumpster fire, then those who both find, and make it useful will look for an alternative. It's not impossible that (for example) Reddit might come up with a better interface than they have now, which serves the same purpose.
Indeed, I'm not doubting the strength of feeling that will put some users off Musk. I just generally object to obvious fictions where people pretend they've seen large numbers of people saying X and then later saying Y. Very often when they mean is they've seen some people saying X and some people saying Y, and they may or may not be the same people.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The only way the west can even try and solve this is working together. Until recently the big numbers were from Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan. Places we helped break where no legal route exists. Now it is Albanians. Next month another group.
The west is very attractive to all the poorer more violent places that are not the west. So what are we all going to do about it? Work together? Co-operate? How about make the poor violent places less so?
What is genuinely funny is this Britannia unchained nonsense. That we don't need to co-operate we just need to tell other countries what to do. That the small number we allow in is a much larger burden than the vast numbers in poorer countries like Poland. Until we accept reality we have no hope of resolving this or even starting on the journey to do so.
I actually agree with you, but you persist in trying to shoehorn in an intemperature Brexit angle on it.
I don't think anyone doubts intergovernmental cooperation is necessary to fix this - unless you are prepared to repel intruders inside your sea borders with brute force, regardless of the consequences - and Brexit has complicated intergovernmental cooperation in this area - particularly with France - but the Dublin convention itself is a canard and would only have dealt with a tiny percentage of the numbers.
Let's not pretend we wouldn't have had this problem had we remained nor that it wouldn't have been equally challenging to solve.
Brexit isn't the *cause* of this mentality, it was a *symptom* which has amplified the genuine anger from the people who get upset by all this. As I keep pointing out in other responses we don't have the resources for any solution - brute force, immediate deportation, quick processing then deportation etc etc.
None of the people who foam on about boats are prepared to spend the money on it. Apparently France should pay for it. Which is the Brexit mentality is it not - why won't these foreign people living abroad do what we say?
I think people would be perfectly happy to spend money on it to fix it.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
Alternatively we can accept people will come here and set up processing centres in France to process their applications. Give passage to those approved and those who,don’t, if they come over by other means, just return them.
We have legal routes of migration. If they don't qualify then it's hard no. We need to end the pull factor and make the trip completely uneconomic. A huge crackdown on illegal work, a deal with France to end the boat crossings and ensuring legitimate migrants are given access to legal routes of migration. The default approach should be deportation for all illegal immigrants with no right of appeal and barring that person from ever being able to legally migrate to the UK. Make the cost of illegal immigration extremely high.
Punishments being made stronger don't work if people don't think they'll be caught.
So disabuse them of that notion. Have the crackdown, shut down all of the carwashes and deport them all, shutdown all of the restaurants hiring illegal workers and deport them all, huge fines for all of the firms with dodgy site labourers being paid cash. Have a series of no warning inspections and don't give the businesses doing the dirt a way out with paying fines, just shut them down, no right of appeal, directors barred from opening a business for 20 years.
Absobloodylutely. Have I not made this point repeatedly? Kill the black economy and you remove the pull - the ability to disappear and work cash in hand.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The only way the west can even try and solve this is working together. Until recently the big numbers were from Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan. Places we helped break where no legal route exists. Now it is Albanians. Next month another group.
The west is very attractive to all the poorer more violent places that are not the west. So what are we all going to do about it? Work together? Co-operate? How about make the poor violent places less so?
What is genuinely funny is this Britannia unchained nonsense. That we don't need to co-operate we just need to tell other countries what to do. That the small number we allow in is a much larger burden than the vast numbers in poorer countries like Poland. Until we accept reality we have no hope of resolving this or even starting on the journey to do so.
I actually agree with you, but you persist in trying to shoehorn in an intemperature Brexit angle on it.
I don't think anyone doubts intergovernmental cooperation is necessary to fix this - unless you are prepared to repel intruders inside your sea borders with brute force, regardless of the consequences - and Brexit has complicated intergovernmental cooperation in this area - particularly with France - but the Dublin convention itself is a canard and would only have dealt with a tiny percentage of the numbers.
Let's not pretend we wouldn't have had this problem had we remained nor that it wouldn't have been equally challenging to solve.
Brexit isn't the *cause* of this mentality, it was a *symptom* which has amplified the genuine anger from the people who get upset by all this. As I keep pointing out in other responses we don't have the resources for any solution - brute force, immediate deportation, quick processing then deportation etc etc.
None of the people who foam on about boats are prepared to spend the money on it. Apparently France should pay for it. Which is the Brexit mentality is it not - why won't these foreign people living abroad do what we say?
I think people would be perfectly happy to spend money on it to fix it.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
It's really sad, given that most people will never even meet someone who has travelled across the channel in a boat, or have their life affected by them in any meaningful way.
Some of us have met them directly. Many have met them without realising it in our lives, at car washes, or in takeaway vans, barbers or cheaper restaurants, for example.
You could feel a basic level of human sympathy with many of the billions who don't lead as fulfilling lives as we do, or who are far poorer, and also admire their entrepreneurial spirit in getting here and at the same time recognise that we must have border control and restrictions on numbers, which will involve making some choices, or we simply be overwhelmed with all sorts of unpredictable political outcomes.
I agree with much of that - the only part I don't agree with is about being overwhelmed. We're still an island, and will never see the kind of numbers that a country in the East of Europe can face.
Plenty of the "problems" could be solved by simply stopping treating the whole thing as a disaster that needs draconian solutions. Instead of spending the money on anti-woke PR games like Rwanda, spend that money speeding up the asylum system.
Yeah she's got to go. Rishi has kept his word too by giving her the job, that she fucked up is on her. Not sure who would replace her, what other immigration hard liners are there other than Priti Patel?
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
Alternatively we can accept people will come here and set up processing centres in France to process their applications. Give passage to those approved and those who,don’t, if they come over by other means, just return them.
The handwringers will never accept "just returning" anyone, though...
Again with the comedy gold. Deporting illegals is fine. Deporting failed asylum seekers is fine. Removing dangerous criminals who slipped in is fine. Etc. Problem remains that to do so you need to properly resource the Home Office and the Border Agency and the Police and the Courts and people like your good self don't support any of that.
A bit like what rcs1000 was saying about silver bullets earlier in a different context. A solution can help without being a complete answer.
So spending more to process asylum seekers more quickly is worth doing, as is cooperating more with France, as is getting tougher with black market employers. They will lead to fewer people coming in who shouldn't.
Whereas the Fortress Britain model, which might work if we made the walls high enough, isn't working. And, although I can't prove it, probably can't work with a wall height that the people of the UK would be prepared to accept.
We could try Fortress Britain. Except that to do so we would need 24 hour patrols in the channel, border guards on Kent and Sussex beaches etc. And the people most against the boat people won't pay for any of that. Just as Trump morons said Mexico should pay for the wall, our morons think France should pay for the tow backs, camps etc.
Have to chuckle at the large numbers of people on twitter now saying we must move to Mastodon because Elon, he richest man in the world control this platform, etc etc etc...as if twitter wasn't controlled by very rich people before (and all the other social media platforms are or the Chinese government). Only a few months ago the very same people would claim that Mastodon is a just home for weirdo and conspiracy nuts banned from twitter.
I strongly doubt you've found "large numbers" of people who talked about Mastodon a few months ago and who are now saying they should move to Mastodon.
The possibility of users abandoning the platform isn't a non-issue for Musk, though, and $44bn isn't small change even for him.
If he messes too much with the platform and it becomes a dumpster fire, then those who both find, and make it useful will look for an alternative. It's not impossible that (for example) Reddit might come up with a better interface than they have now, which serves the same purpose.
The problem with the search for an alternative is that no alternative is big enough to be worth moving to - people who need/want to be on something like Twitter have to be on Twitter because lots of people are on Twitter. I can't see why a left-wing split would be more successful than any of the right-wing splits that were tried.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
Time to reform that law, it was always open to abuse and people pointed it out the moment it was published.
Other apps have gone to something like this e.g. Tinder, and I believe their revenue has gone through the roof the past 5 years.
Different market, different incentives, though.
I think the root problem is that Twitter's business model, while occupying a fairly unique and useful niche, isn't worth anywhere near $44bn. And trying to turn it into something that is will quite possibly destroy the existing model.
Trump's reported idea of creating something along the lines of one of the Chinese web services might not be stupid - but trying to do using Twitter as a launchpad seems fundamentally misconceived to me, FWIW.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
Alternatively we can accept people will come here and set up processing centres in France to process their applications. Give passage to those approved and those who,don’t, if they come over by other means, just return them.
The handwringers will never accept "just returning" anyone, though...
Again with the comedy gold. Deporting illegals is fine. Deporting failed asylum seekers is fine. Removing dangerous criminals who slipped in is fine. Etc. Problem remains that to do so you need to properly resource the Home Office and the Border Agency and the Police and the Courts and people like your good self don't support any of that.
You also don’t want to start from here where there is a 12-18 month backlog of cases
These cases need to be processed in days including all appeals
A backlog not just of asylum cases. A general backlog due to the huge cuts in our justice system.
Yep but that isn’t the issue here - immigration is almost self contained with it’s own tribunals - but the problem is a backlog was built up and we aren’t looking at fixing it.
Even though the cost of not fixing it is £150 per migrant per day
Suella Braverman has admitted that she sent official governments from her government email account to her personal email address six times from her appointment as home secretary on 6 September to 19 September, when she resigned from Liz Truss’s government. She made the disclosure in a letter she has sent this morning to Dame Diana Johnson, the Labour MP who chairs the Commons home affairs committee.
What needs to be asked is did she forward any of these papers to anyone else from her personal email account. By using her personal email noone would know who she had sent them to.
Anyone with a bet on Suella to be the next cabinet minister to be out must be rubbing their hands.
19 October. A rate of one breach per week. Impressive.
"By using her personal email noone would know" Not quite true. Google knows. Plus any party who has access to Google data and who chooses to check. Anything you sent to or from Gmail is stored and indexed by them.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
Other apps have gone to something like this e.g. Tinder, and I believe their revenue has gone through the roof the past 5 years.
Different market, different incentives, though.
I think the root problem is that Twitter's business model, while occupying a fairly unique and useful niche, isn't worth anywhere near $44bn. And trying to turn it into something that is will quite possibly destroy the existing model.
Trump's reported idea of creating something along the lines of one of the Chinese web services might not be stupid - but trying to do using Twitter as a launchpad seems fundamentally misconceived to me, FWIW.
Actually the root cause of twitter's problems has always been they don't know (enough about) their users. If you don't know your users, its very difficult to monetise them. Facebook knows everything about everybody, so can charge a premium for targeted ads while Google / Apple control the online ad pipelines.
Paying for your blue checkmark, $20 per month perhaps not, but I can see people paying an amount. Its absolutely crucial to a lot of people jobs, businesses, etc, to be verified blue check-marked. A corporate entity would pay a lot more than $20 per month to ensure they had theirs, just as they pay out all sorts per month as the cost of doing business.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
The issue of charities and assorted lawyers trying to undermine the implementation of any immigration policy is probably the real contemporary equivalent to the undemocratic power of the unions before Thatcher.
Other apps have gone to something like this e.g. Tinder, and I believe their revenue has gone through the roof the past 5 years.
Different market, different incentives, though.
I think the root problem is that Twitter's business model, while occupying a fairly unique and useful niche, isn't worth anywhere near $44bn. And trying to turn it into something that is will quite possibly destroy the existing model.
Trump's reported idea of creating something along the lines of one of the Chinese web services might not be stupid - but trying to do using Twitter as a launchpad seems fundamentally misconceived to me, FWIW.
Around the time when Twitter's price was set Match Group was probably worth around the same value when including any premium for a buy out.
British Volt. A bit murky. Hundreds of people promised work. None materialised. Levelling up?
The loss of free access to the European market killed the case for the big players (China; the US; South Korea) to build new plants here. Brexit sunk our hope of being a significant part of the re-engineering of the European car industry, without massive government intervention.
The time for committing to any such intervention was several years back.
Control of the Senate rests on a knife’s edge, according to new polls by The New York Times and Siena College, with Republican challengers in Nevada and Georgia neck-and-neck with Democratic incumbents, and the Democratic candidate in Pennsylvania clinging to what appears to be a tenuous advantage.
The bright spot for Democrats in the four key states polled was in Arizona, where Senator Mark Kelly is holding a small but steady lead over his Republican challenger, Blake Masters.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
Should any innocent people be tagged at all? Seems a bit draconian to systematically put defendants (not offenders) under intrusive surveillance.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
The issue of charities and assorted lawyers trying to undermine the implementation of any immigration policy is probably the real contemporary equivalent to the undemocratic power of the unions before Thatcher.
So what - enforcing rights is not a democracy. Lucky for the Tories or else they would have been hung drawn and quartered two weeks ago.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
GPS tagging is psychological torture? There's a lot of people Google will have to pay compensation to, then...
Other apps have gone to something like this e.g. Tinder, and I believe their revenue has gone through the roof the past 5 years.
Different market, different incentives, though.
I think the root problem is that Twitter's business model, while occupying a fairly unique and useful niche, isn't worth anywhere near $44bn. And trying to turn it into something that is will quite possibly destroy the existing model.
Trump's reported idea of creating something along the lines of one of the Chinese web services might not be stupid - but trying to do using Twitter as a launchpad seems fundamentally misconceived to me, FWIW.
Around the time when Twitter's price was set Match Group was probably worth around the same value when including any premium for a buy out.
Once again, leveraged financing is about to send another business into the garbage compactor.
Without all this new debt on the books (and with the previous direction of travel on hate speech) it was about to become self-sustaining. But no. We need some idiot and his "clever" financing to come in and trash it.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
The article suggests that GPS tagging, which monitors every movement, is the problem and that this has only been introduced this year.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
The issue of charities and assorted lawyers trying to undermine the implementation of any immigration policy is probably the real contemporary equivalent to the undemocratic power of the unions before Thatcher.
And, consequently, a very clear route to electoral success for anyone who cracks it.
Either the Tories do or Rachel Reeves goes to China and does it herself.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Yeah she's got to go. Rishi has kept his word too by giving her the job, that she fucked up is on her. Not sure who would replace her, what other immigration hard liners are there other than Priti Patel?
These so-called 'hard-liners' seem to be universally shite at actually managing immigration.
Perhaps it's time for someone vaguely competent in possession of more than two brain cells instead?*
(*I realise such individuals are a rarity in the PCP)
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
Until we offer a safe and legal route - people will continue to come the illegal way. Only when we have a suitable safe and legal method of applying for residency will the problem be solved.
Heck the fact a lot of the migrants happen to be Albanians who end up working on county lines and similar illegal schemes tells you that no approach is going to 100% work as many peoples desire is to disappear as soon as they arrive in the country. Not even fining employers £x0,000 will solve that side of the issue
There are potentially billions of people who'd like a safe and legal route to come here.
Would you admit them all?
No but that isn’t the issue here - your question was how do you stop people crossing the channel and to do that you need to stop them traveling to the channel
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
GPS tagging is psychological torture? There's a lot of people Google will have to pay compensation to, then...
[Yes, I know, it is technically optional]
Not just optional, but also subject to government oversight through privacy legislation (right to be forgotten). State surveillance is a different category for this one reason alone: there is no guarantee of appeal to a higher authority like there is with companies.
Yeah she's got to go. Rishi has kept his word too by giving her the job, that she fucked up is on her. Not sure who would replace her, what other immigration hard liners are there other than Priti Patel?
These so-called 'hard-liners' seem to be universally shite at actually managing immigration.
Perhaps it's time for someone vaguely competent in possession of more than two brain cells instead?*
(*I realise such individuals are a rarity in the PCP)
Anyone would think that this might be because the approach favoured by the hard liners a) doesn't bloody work and b) they are afraid to implement the policies they purport to favour, because they know the backlash would be enormous (c.f. this morning)
IMPORTANT: Bolsonaro’s most powerful ally in congress, equivalent to House Speaker in US, says “the will of the majority expressed at the ballot box should never be contested.” Clear message to Bolsonaro and a plea for a smooth transition to Lula https://twitter.com/BrazilBrian/status/1586865535043735552
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
No 10 suggests that when Rishi Sunak said at PMQs that Suella Braverman “raised the matter and accepted her mistake” the PM meant when they discussed getting her old job back, rather than when she resigned. Stretches credulity.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
You weren't 'slightly off', you were completely wrong, predicting the outcome opposite to the actual outcome. Which would have been fine (it happens to us all) except that you predicted it with the certainty of someone forecasting the sun will rise tomorrow.
He shagged one sheep, give him a break
One? I shag one before breakfast, Malcolm, by evening i've desecrated the flock
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Border Force staff would refuse to do the tow backs.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
The issue of charities and assorted lawyers trying to undermine the implementation of any immigration policy is probably the real contemporary equivalent to the undemocratic power of the unions before Thatcher.
And, consequently, a very clear route to electoral success for anyone who cracks it.
Either the Tories do or Rachel Reeves goes to China and does it herself.
Pot of gold at the end of a rainbow, though.
Labour have got a better chance of reducing the problem, because they aren't quite as dependant on voters who want something visible more than they want something effective.
No 10 suggests that when Rishi Sunak said at PMQs that Suella Braverman “raised the matter and accepted her mistake” the PM meant when they discussed getting her old job back, rather than when she resigned. Stretches credulity.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
Will a military or judicial coup save your position? Or this is this it, a Wooliedamus? 😟
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
Until we offer a safe and legal route - people will continue to come the illegal way. Only when we have a suitable safe and legal method of applying for residency will the problem be solved.
Heck the fact a lot of the migrants happen to be Albanians who end up working on county lines and similar illegal schemes tells you that no approach is going to 100% work as many peoples desire is to disappear as soon as they arrive in the country. Not even fining employers £x0,000 will solve that side of the issue
There are potentially billions of people who'd like a safe and legal route to come here.
Would you admit them all?
No but that isn’t the issue here - your question was how do you stop people crossing the channel and to do that you need to stop them traveling to the channel
Your solution to stopping boats across the channel is to throw open the gates at the ports and airports.
That isn't a solution, except to say the solution to stopping myself being embarassed by my wife's adultery is to say to everyone else we're in an open relationship.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
To be fair to you - Bolsonaro got very close to getting re-elected.
The irony is that Lula is pretty squeaky clean by the abysmal standards of Brazilian graft.
Still attacking your opponent's strength worked against Kerry.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
You weren't 'slightly off', you were completely wrong, predicting the outcome opposite to the actual outcome. Which would have been fine (it happens to us all) except that you predicted it with the certainty of someone forecasting the sun will rise tomorrow.
He shagged one sheep, give him a break
One? I shag one before breakfast, Malcolm, by evening i've desecrated the flock
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Yup. They will be receiving excellent (and free) legal advice from left-wing immigration lawyers as soon as they land about this.
The issue of charities and assorted lawyers trying to undermine the implementation of any immigration policy is probably the real contemporary equivalent to the undemocratic power of the unions before Thatcher.
And, consequently, a very clear route to electoral success for anyone who cracks it.
Either the Tories do or Rachel Reeves goes to China and does it herself.
It would require a very strategic approach so that the government doesn't end up two steps behind the activists.
We also need a major rethink about the nature of "soft power" so that it isn't confused with being a soft touch.
Yeah she's got to go. Rishi has kept his word too by giving her the job, that she fucked up is on her. Not sure who would replace her, what other immigration hard liners are there other than Priti Patel?
These so-called 'hard-liners' seem to be universally shite at actually managing immigration.
Perhaps it's time for someone vaguely competent in possession of more than two brain cells instead?*
(*I realise such individuals are a rarity in the PCP)
Anyone would think that this might be because the approach favoured by the hard liners a) doesn't bloody work and b) they are afraid to implement the policies they purport to favour, because they know the backlash would be enormous (c.f. this morning)
Control of the Senate rests on a knife’s edge, according to new polls by The New York Times and Siena College, with Republican challengers in Nevada and Georgia neck-and-neck with Democratic incumbents, and the Democratic candidate in Pennsylvania clinging to what appears to be a tenuous advantage.
The bright spot for Democrats in the four key states polled was in Arizona, where Senator Mark Kelly is holding a small but steady lead over his Republican challenger, Blake Masters.
To me, the most interesting dimension of the poll: Dems running an avg of 8 points ahead of Senate control preference (R+4 on average). Illustrates key dynamic of the race -- a favorable environment for Rs v. bad candidates -- and helps square with the national picture
No 10 suggests that when Rishi Sunak said at PMQs that Suella Braverman “raised the matter and accepted her mistake” the PM meant when they discussed getting her old job back, rather than when she resigned. Stretches credulity.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
Until we offer a safe and legal route - people will continue to come the illegal way. Only when we have a suitable safe and legal method of applying for residency will the problem be solved.
Heck the fact a lot of the migrants happen to be Albanians who end up working on county lines and similar illegal schemes tells you that no approach is going to 100% work as many peoples desire is to disappear as soon as they arrive in the country. Not even fining employers £x0,000 will solve that side of the issue
There are potentially billions of people who'd like a safe and legal route to come here.
Would you admit them all?
No but that isn’t the issue here - your question was how do you stop people crossing the channel and to do that you need to stop them traveling to the channel
This is ridiculous. It's like saying a way to stop teenagers dying crossing railway tracks is to make all trains travel at 10mph. Obviously the solution space has other constraints. The idea that you reduce deaths by letting in more people was fundamentally proven drivel by Merkel. Her "open legal routes" approach just massively ramped up demand and more people traveled and more people died.
Also the "international community" is a misnomer. Other than Ukraine, where we are doing plenty, the vast majority of refugees come from the Middle East. And Middle Eastern wealthy countries are taking next to no refugees.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Border Force staff would refuse to do the tow backs.
Because no-one wishes to put people into jeopardy which is what you are doing if you tow a boat and leave it outside land
The point is that there are zero easy options here as you demonstrated with your attack on my comment regarding setting up application centers closer to the places where valid immigrants are coming from
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
The article suggests that GPS tagging, which monitors every movement, is the problem and that this has only been introduced this year.
Electronic tagging has been going on for years. In fact, it was under the previous Labour administration.
Are you suggesting that if the migrants were ankle-tagged (without GPS) then suddenly these organisations would be OK with it?
No 10 suggests that when Rishi Sunak said at PMQs that Suella Braverman “raised the matter and accepted her mistake” the PM meant when they discussed getting her old job back, rather than when she resigned. Stretches credulity.
On the day Braverman was sacked as Home Secretary, lobby colleagues - myself included - were briefed by No 10 that she had leaked market sensitive information. It was widely reported as fact. Yet Downing Street denying that today. 🧐
Is…. is it over? Can we say Bolsonaro lost? Might there still be a rain forest?
Yes yes and yes.
Someone on here posted yesterday that the world really ought to step in and support Brazil financially to save the Amazon. It really does matter and yes we should. We could probably do so in conjunction with a carefully managed eco-tourism. Think of the Amazon as a giant Eden Project or Serengeti and you get the idea.
p.s. Good morning!
It's an interesting idea, but there are massive problems with it: *) There is a good chance that any monetary aid given disappears down a black hole, and the rainforest continues to be destroyed. How do you ensure it does not? *) It is a massive area. The cost to police any operations would be truly massive. *) As well as the size of the area, the transport network is very poor, hindering policing. This means more local police, who are easily bribed or cowed. Or increasing transport links, which then makes access for bad people easier... *) There is not the political will to do it in Brazil. Occasional good words about it, but too many in Brazil see it as a resource to be plundered.
Just adding another, more general point: IMV mass tourism is *not* a good way to preserve pristine wildernesses. Mass tourism is inherently resource-hungry and polluting. You can have 'carefully managed' small-volume tourism (e.g. the Antarctic), but the finds raised from that would be absolutely trifling compared to the policing costs.
Yeah well obviously not. I mean, really, this is to state the bleedin' obvious. That's why I put 'carefully managed.'
The idea that we can leave this places alone is I'm afraid out with the fairies. The world just ain't that way anymore. If you don't intervene they get obliterated. Yes it's very very sad. But the fact now remains that we have to hold our noses and accept a degree of compromise in terms of visitor numbers for the greater good.
That's why, despite my liking your earlier thoughtful comments, my idea is a better one. We need to step in globally to support Brazil in protecting the Amazon. Yes yes money abroad sometimes goes astray but that doesn't mean it shouldn't happen and there are ways of mitigating against it.
And if you don't educate the planet through interaction you don't educate.
Of course, much of this, as with most things, comes down to the fact that this planet cannot support 10 billion people.
How lucky there are only 8 billion humans then, with population forecast (which I don’t believe) to top out at 10.4 billion in 2100.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Border Force staff would refuse to do the tow backs.
And the Navy have been very clear that they are not equipped to do such a thing.
Absobloodylutely. Have I not made this point repeatedly? Kill the black economy and you remove the pull - the ability to disappear and work cash in hand.
Whenever anyone proposes such a thing we nearly always get pushback due to it infringing civil liberties. No party wants ID cards, or more KYC regulations, or police raids, or more intrusive HMRC, or local government keeping track of home occupation. Which are the sort of things you would have to do at a minimum to get a hold on things.
A commentator on Guido said that the Albanians are not claiming political asylum but that they are victims of slavery. There is no provision in law for them to be removed once they are in the UK.
Slavery is just about plausible. There are lots of Albanian gangsters based here already so it would be no great surprise if they provide off-the-books work outside the law.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
Will a military or judicial coup save your position? Or this is this it, a Wooliedamus? 😟
Nah, to be fair I went in two footed with a cheeky 'against the head' that i did think might just about happen but it was gash, rash and flash and im paying due penance
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
Until we offer a safe and legal route - people will continue to come the illegal way. Only when we have a suitable safe and legal method of applying for residency will the problem be solved.
Heck the fact a lot of the migrants happen to be Albanians who end up working on county lines and similar illegal schemes tells you that no approach is going to 100% work as many peoples desire is to disappear as soon as they arrive in the country. Not even fining employers £x0,000 will solve that side of the issue
There are potentially billions of people who'd like a safe and legal route to come here.
Would you admit them all?
No but that isn’t the issue here - your question was how do you stop people crossing the channel and to do that you need to stop them traveling to the channel
Your solution to stopping boats across the channel is to throw open the gates at the ports and airports.
That isn't a solution, except to say the solution to stopping myself being embarassed by my wife's adultery is to say to everyone else we're in an open relationship.
No it isn’t my solution is - want to come to the UK from Syria start the process in turkey
Want to come from Afghanistan start your application in Pakistan or a safe nearby country
The last thing you want to do is to allow people to arrive in the UK and start the process - you tell them to go somewhere safe and start it there
One week in, and the 'new' government appears to have descended into the same level of abject chaos and incompetence as the Bozo and Truss regimes.
Ultimately unsurprising. Rishi doesn't have the flaws of Johnson or Truss, but he's not the Messiah. And his Cabinet is drawn from the same dismal pool as his predecessors.
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Border Force staff would refuse to do the tow backs.
Can't tow someone who won't take and secure the tow line. grappling hooks contra indicated for rubber boats. Overloaded ribs are a bugger to tow anyway.
So easy rule of thumb, refuse a tow unless the offering boat says RNLI in letters a yard high
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
Alternatively we can accept people will come here and set up processing centres in France to process their applications. Give passage to those approved and those who,don’t, if they come over by other means, just return them.
We have legal routes of migration. If they don't qualify then it's hard no. We need to end the pull factor and make the trip completely uneconomic. A huge crackdown on illegal work, a deal with France to end the boat crossings and ensuring legitimate migrants are given access to legal routes of migration. The default approach should be deportation for all illegal immigrants with no right of appeal and barring that person from ever being able to legally migrate to the UK. Make the cost of illegal immigration extremely high.
Punishments being made stronger don't work if people don't think they'll be caught.
So disabuse them of that notion. Have the crackdown, shut down all of the carwashes and deport them all, shutdown all of the restaurants hiring illegal workers and deport them all, huge fines for all of the firms with dodgy site labourers being paid cash. Have a series of no warning inspections and don't give the businesses doing the dirt a way out with paying fines, just shut them down, no right of appeal, directors barred from opening a business for 20 years.
Very good ideas.
Then post a policeman at the dwelling of everyone on any dangerous watchlist (terrorism, domestic abuse, you name it) and have that policeman accompany that person everywhere they go.
Then put a policeman in every supermarket in the country to deter shoplifters and, should shoplifting occur, the culprit should be given five years imprisonment.
A few more measures like that should make a serious indent into our crime stats.
But wait. It's not going to happen. None of it. Including your measures to deter/prevent illegal immigration.
So why don't we instead think about what is workable and doable. Not what might be workable but is as we have seen, transparently obviously not doable.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
Will a military or judicial coup save your position? Or this is this it, a Wooliedamus? 😟
You don't inherit that title by getting a close-ish call wrong.
It needs to be something utterly absurd - like (perhaps ?) saying that Truss would surprise on the upside...
IMPORTANT: Bolsonaro’s most powerful ally in congress, equivalent to House Speaker in US, says “the will of the majority expressed at the ballot box should never be contested.” Clear message to Bolsonaro and a plea for a smooth transition to Lula https://twitter.com/BrazilBrian/status/1586865535043735552
We were talking about twitter this morning and a possible revenue model.
I love it when people put "IMPORTANT" at the beginning of a tweet. Says who the fuck. Perhaps an extra fiver for having the temerity to do that.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
I honestly think this is an unsolvable problem, much like illegal migration to the US through the Mexican border. We can't make coming to the UK unattractive or the journey sufficiently dangerous in order to deter people. Nobody is going to want the sort of police state that would catch enough illegal migrants, and nobody is going to start sinking boats making the crossing.
So we will have tens of thousands of illegal migrants crossing the channel every year. I've not heard of any solution that sounds like it could work. The only thing that would stop illegal crossings is simply throwing the doors wide open for unlimited immigration.
The real solution to the problem comes from another direction: the right deciding that it isn't a wedge issue any more and starting to educate their base about the realities of immigration. And I'm afraid that is unlikely to happen.
What would you have them educate their base on?
The notion that it's the job of politicians to "educate" the voters belongs to a different era.
The Channel crisis has now become an emergency. If Home Secretary Suella Braverman wants to keep her job, she needs to come out of hiding — and quickly.
Awful figures for Labour when they have a 25 point lead in the polls.
Agreed. Punters are clearly sceptical about Starmer.
I'm not a Labour supporter but, if I were, I'd note that the mismatch between polling and betting indicates that, while punters may be sceptical about Starmer, voters aren't. And I'd rather it was that way around.
More realistically, it indicates that punters (probably correctly) believe Sunak is a more credible opponent to Starmer than Truss was, and the 25% lead (more than half of which opened up rather quickly in recent weeks due to consistently appalling news for the Conservatives) is likely to narrow. That isn't a judgment on Starmer as such.
Actually voters are. Votes in local by elections taken in the round do not support the 25 point lead poll respondees give
How is your certain call from last night that Bolsonaro will be re-elected looking?
#theoracleofnorfolk
I was slightly off, he didnt. My failed prediction fortunately has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the facts that data provide however
Oh Wooly! What did I miss? Why are they teasing you so cruelly - philosophically asking “if someone shags just the one sheep, does it really make them a sheepshagger?”
You predicted victory for Tropical Trump? now the legend of The Wooliedamus has been born? 😕
It was a definite politicalbetting event I missed as how close it got. Apparently the Balrog stole the show?
Instead of saying Whose The Daddy, will we go around saying Whose The Balrog? I’m Balrogging this book! They’ve only gone and Balroggered it!
I went for Bolsonaro for the win, Rabbit. I muckered it upper me arse. I begged him to put the fix in and save me but no, he couldnt even do that
To be fair to you - Bolsonaro got very close to getting re-elected.
The irony is that Lula is pretty squeaky clean by the abysmal standards of Brazilian graft.
Still attacking your opponent's strength worked against Kerry.
Not close enough! Nah, I tried to semi bluff a hail mary. I did think he might pull it off but i was wrong. End of. I did clarify to Double Carpet it wasnt a betting tip, i would feel really bad if people thought it was, hence i'd always preface that with 'BETTING TIP'. In hindsight evening exuberance caused me to post it in a daft way that earned its mickery mockery
We seem to have Priti Patel briefing that she was "softer" and more accommodating of people claiming asylum in the UK than the present Home Secretary. There really must be some easily foreseeable and avoidable trouble ahead for the Home Office. https://twitter.com/fatshez/status/1587065802288775168
British Volt. A bit murky. Hundreds of people promised work. None materialised. Levelling up?
The loss of free access to the European market killed the case for the big players (China; the US; South Korea) to build new plants here. Brexit sunk our hope of being a significant part of the re-engineering of the European car industry, without massive government intervention.
The time for committing to any such intervention was several years back.
Who was British Volt supposed to be building batteries for? The current post-Brexit settlement makes the UK a pain in the arse to manufacture complex things like cars with JIT sourcing of components from across Europe.
One week in, and the 'new' government appears to have descended into the same level of abject chaos and incompetence as the Bozo and Truss regimes.
It all stems from the fact Sunak does not have courage of his own convictions, like the lion in Wizard of Oz - he wants the right in the party and in the media, to regard him as their friend. He’s trying to be accommodating but as days ticks by accommodating hits reality there is only so much accommodating he can do, if others won’t play ball. Examples? Did Boris have to put it out there he was going to COP to hang out with his fellow VIPs? Did he have to make Leaky Sue HomeSec despite her back history of supporting only her beliefs not those of collective government?
In short, what’s shredding this latest Prime Minister is he is such a scaredy-cat.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
The article suggests that GPS tagging, which monitors every movement, is the problem and that this has only been introduced this year.
Electronic tagging has been going on for years. In fact, it was under the previous Labour administration.
Are you suggesting that if the migrants were ankle-tagged (without GPS) then suddenly these organisations would be OK with it?
I'm pointing out that the article was specifically about GPS tagging. Saying that it's been done for years is factually incorrect.
It's also a pilot scheme, so these organisations wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't provide feedback.
Asking me to guess whether they would be angry about something different, is not the best way to say "oh yes- I didn't actually read the article".
The solution is what the Greeks do, tow them back to French water. Fuck the international sensibilities, do it enough and they give up just as the Turkey to Greece route is now non functional for people trafficking. If the charity taxi boats don't like it they can lump it. Pay the French whatever it takes to make this happen. Within weeks it would stop being an issue because people won't spend €2000 just to end up back in France.
That's the deal that needs to be struck.
I don't think there is any amount of money that would make that politically acceptable to France - which is not a backwards shithole like Rwanda that can be bought off.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
Border Force staff would refuse to do the tow backs.
What's the point of a border force that doesn't defend the borders of the country? That's literally their job.
I think the boats are the number one political issue for the conservative base right now, because if not fixed it will splinter to Reform and even Rachel Reeves may outflank.
If I were Rishi Sunak I'd almost be inclined to ask Macron to name his price for stopping them. All of them.
Its not all Macron. We could start by honouring our international obligations and reopen legal routes for people to apply for asylum from all the countries where we have removed it. Resource up the system properly. Rejoin the international community in collectively managing refugees.
In short, the right could grow up. Don't hold your breath.
Oh God, why do we always come back here.
You will never get a hearing for "safe and legal routes" - ever - until you get control of the border. Because otherwise all people will hear is: I want to make it even easier to come here for anyone who wants to come.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
Until we offer a safe and legal route - people will continue to come the illegal way. Only when we have a suitable safe and legal method of applying for residency will the problem be solved.
Heck the fact a lot of the migrants happen to be Albanians who end up working on county lines and similar illegal schemes tells you that no approach is going to 100% work as many peoples desire is to disappear as soon as they arrive in the country. Not even fining employers £x0,000 will solve that side of the issue
There are potentially billions of people who'd like a safe and legal route to come here.
Would you admit them all?
No but that isn’t the issue here - your question was how do you stop people crossing the channel and to do that you need to stop them traveling to the channel
Your solution to stopping boats across the channel is to throw open the gates at the ports and airports.
That isn't a solution, except to say the solution to stopping myself being embarassed by my wife's adultery is to say to everyone else we're in an open relationship.
This isn't a scenario where the only options are "let everyone in" or "sink the boats". There are a myriad of solutions in the middle. We just refuse to consider them as a country because the government are afraid of the minority of voters who don't understand reality.
Comments
None of the people who foam on about boats are prepared to spend the money on it. Apparently France should pay for it. Which is the Brexit mentality is it not - why won't these foreign people living abroad do what we say?
Your final paragraph highlights the issue: the only solution the Libs have is to throw the borders open.
They will have no cause for complaint if their level of braindead fuckwittery eventually results in a fascist government taking power here.
A bit murky.
Hundreds of people promised work. None materialised.
Levelling up?
What needs to be asked is did she forward any of these papers to anyone else from her personal email account. By using her personal email noone would know who she had sent them to.
Anyone with a bet on Suella to be the next cabinet minister to be out must be rubbing their hands.
We both know the answer is no. So why haven't we?
I just generally object to obvious fictions where people pretend they've seen large numbers of people saying X and then later saying Y.
Very often when they mean is they've seen some people saying X and some people saying Y, and they may or may not be the same people.
Last think I saw a week or so ago was they needed a further cash injection of 200 million.
Today it’s administration time.
Plenty of the "problems" could be solved by simply stopping treating the whole thing as a disaster that needs draconian solutions. Instead of spending the money on anti-woke PR games like Rwanda, spend that money speeding up the asylum system.
https://news.sky.com/story/pay-compensation-for-calais-chaos-harman-10350717
Harriet Harman has written to David Cameron demanding he ask the French for compensation for Britons affected by the chaos at Calais.
Labour's interim leader says the PM should be doing more to recoup the cost of the crisis to haulage firms.
They are estimated to be losing £700,000 a day as a result of delays.
Some lorries are reported to be waiting for days to cross the channel as a result of migrant activity and strikes by French dock workers.
Reddit isn't really the same thing at all.
I think the root problem is that Twitter's business model, while occupying a fairly unique and useful niche, isn't worth anywhere near $44bn.
And trying to turn it into something that is will quite possibly destroy the existing model.
Trump's reported idea of creating something along the lines of one of the Chinese web services might not be stupid - but trying to do using Twitter as a launchpad seems fundamentally misconceived to me, FWIW.
Even though the cost of not fixing it is £150 per migrant per day
"By using her personal email noone would know"
Not quite true. Google knows. Plus any party who has access to Google data and who chooses to check. Anything you sent to or from Gmail is stored and indexed by them.
We've been tagging British offenders on bail for years and I don't remember this campaign-a-mob arguing vociferously that that was psychological torture.
Paying for your blue checkmark, $20 per month perhaps not, but I can see people paying an amount. Its absolutely crucial to a lot of people jobs, businesses, etc, to be verified blue check-marked. A corporate entity would pay a lot more than $20 per month to ensure they had theirs, just as they pay out all sorts per month as the cost of doing business.
Brexit sunk our hope of being a significant part of the re-engineering of the European car industry, without massive government intervention.
The time for committing to any such intervention was several years back.
The bright spot for Democrats in the four key states polled was in Arizona, where Senator Mark Kelly is holding a small but steady lead over his Republican challenger, Blake Masters.
NY Times
Without all this new debt on the books (and with the previous direction of travel on hate speech) it was about to become self-sustaining. But no. We need some idiot and his "clever" financing to come in and trash it.
Either the Tories do or Rachel Reeves goes to China and does it herself.
So the price would have to be a political prize greather than just large amounts of money. Fucked if I know what that is.
Tow backs that did not breach French territorual waters but without French consent would 100% work as a deterrent but tories lack the resolve to do it.
https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1587037962801451013
Perhaps it's time for someone vaguely competent in possession of more than two brain cells instead?*
(*I realise such individuals are a rarity in the PCP)
That he is burning through political capital to keep her (and lied to the House) suggests he wants or needs her in place.
Which is bad...
Non-trivial solutions to complex problems are beyond them
https://twitter.com/BrazilBrian/status/1586865535043735552
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1587060139777052672
Home Secretary @SuellaBraverman on asylum processing centres
Labour have got a better chance of reducing the problem, because they aren't quite as dependant on voters who want something visible more than they want something effective.
That isn't a solution, except to say the solution to stopping myself being embarassed by my wife's adultery is to say to everyone else we're in an open relationship.
The irony is that Lula is pretty squeaky clean by the abysmal standards of Brazilian graft.
Still attacking your opponent's strength worked against Kerry.
We also need a major rethink about the nature of "soft power" so that it isn't confused with being a soft touch.
Hmmmm, treating the public like idiots doesn't (always) work
Also the "international community" is a misnomer. Other than Ukraine, where we are doing plenty, the vast majority of refugees come from the Middle East. And Middle Eastern wealthy countries are taking next to no refugees.
The point is that there are zero easy options here as you demonstrated with your attack on my comment regarding setting up application centers closer to the places where valid immigrants are coming from
Are you suggesting that if the migrants were ankle-tagged (without GPS) then suddenly these organisations would be OK with it?
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1587064295048859649
Feed the Nine!
https://roberthutton.co.uk/portfolio/political-scandals-a-primer/ https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1587064028031074308/photo/1
Want to come from Afghanistan start your application in Pakistan or a safe nearby country
The last thing you want to do is to allow people to arrive in the UK and start the process - you tell them to go somewhere safe and start it there
So easy rule of thumb, refuse a tow unless the offering boat says RNLI in letters a yard high
Then post a policeman at the dwelling of everyone on any dangerous watchlist (terrorism, domestic abuse, you name it) and have that policeman accompany that person everywhere they go.
Then put a policeman in every supermarket in the country to deter shoplifters and, should shoplifting occur, the culprit should be given five years imprisonment.
A few more measures like that should make a serious indent into our crime stats.
But wait. It's not going to happen. None of it. Including your measures to deter/prevent illegal immigration.
So why don't we instead think about what is workable and doable. Not what might be workable but is as we have seen, transparently obviously not doable.
It needs to be something utterly absurd - like (perhaps ?) saying that Truss would surprise on the upside...
Definitely should: 36%
Probably should: 25%
Probably should not: 11%
Definitely should not: 9%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1587046726921224192
I love it when people put "IMPORTANT" at the beginning of a tweet. Says who the fuck. Perhaps an extra fiver for having the temerity to do that.
https://twitter.com/jessphillips/status/1587065290784923653
https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1587063166768496640
The Channel crisis has now become an emergency.
If Home Secretary Suella Braverman wants to keep her job, she needs to come out of hiding — and quickly.
11:13 AM · Oct 31, 2022"
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1587040174231486464
I did clarify to Double Carpet it wasnt a betting tip, i would feel really bad if people thought it was, hence i'd always preface that with 'BETTING TIP'. In hindsight evening exuberance caused me to post it in a daft way that earned its mickery mockery
SIX TIMES...
https://twitter.com/fatshez/status/1587065802288775168
The Metro has utterly misreported him in the headline. I’m surprised you fell for it
In short, what’s shredding this latest Prime Minister is he is such a scaredy-cat.
It's also a pilot scheme, so these organisations wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't provide feedback.
Asking me to guess whether they would be angry about something different, is not the best way to say "oh yes- I didn't actually read the article".