Cycling UK Forum

"Home Office minister Laura Farris said that Robert Jenrick has resigned as immigration minister.":
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/li ... 61a7c2b662

Jonathan

It's Brexit all over again: government tearing itself apart over a xenophobic fantasy to pretend we can solve our problems by isolating ourselves from the world around us.

This will go just as well on collision with reality

He's only been an MP for nine years!

Jonathan

The really funny thing is, even Rwanda don't support the Braverman/Jenrick position.

You couldn't make this up.

Election now!

Jdsk wrote: 6 Dec 2023, 10:23am Rozenberg's first thoughts on the new treaty with Rwanda:
https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/what-h ... ith-rwanda

And on the proposed domestic legislation:
https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/a-triu ... experience

Jonathan

least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public. - what would labour do, give them free ferry tickets?

Latest news: Braverman has a heart!

Pebble wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:30am least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public. - what would labour do, give them free ferry tickets?

She's advocating an approach that even Rwanda have said they will not support, so it's clearly not viable.

You should consider why she's advocating things which have no chance of success, what that tells you about her motives and where her heart is.

Pebble wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:30am least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public. - what would labour do, give them free ferry tickets?

No, according to the shadow immigration minister, Labour would "clear the Tory asylum backlog, end the use of emergency asylum hotels, smash the criminal smuggler gangs, and restore security to our borders"

Don't you think that seems better than the Sunak plan to spaff millions up the wall sending one morning's irregular arrivals to Rwanda in violation of various treaties, including the 1949 Treaty of London, while using it as a Trojan horse to deny human rights to all UK residents, and distracting from the errors under four or five prime ministers that allowed the refugee application backlog to grow?

Braverman is heartless and is not interested in the good of the ordinary UK worker. Just look how she voted in favour of using forced labour in essential services. That will also be much easier if she gets her way of stripping human rights from everyone in the UK.

VinceLedge wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:32am Latest news: Braverman has a heart!

I'll just mention that the woodworking shed has a basket with many offcuts in it. Some are long and might easily be sharp enough!

On the other hand, garlic is probably easier.

Pebble wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:30am least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public.
...

57% of the population thought that the Prime Minister was right to sack her:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/overview/su ... 13/8bdf8/3

And 43% of Conservative Party members!:
https://conservativehome.com/2023/12/02 ... -to-do-so/

Jonathan

Pebble wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:30am least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public. - what would labour do, give them free ferry tickets?

Labour policy:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... tion-plans

Jonathan

mjr wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 10:44am

Pebble wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 9:30am least her heart is in the right place and her wishes to stop the illegal migration aligns with the vat majority of the British public. - what would labour do, give them free ferry tickets?

Don't you think ....... ?

One feels that this question may be pointless since its a certain kind of feeling that's going on, not thinking .... albeit underpinned by potted opinion from a Toryspiv dealer in such, especially the sort well past the sell-by date and in fact gone well-over to rather stinky, like a jar of fish paste that's been open too long. (See Bojo at an enquiry for a physical emblem of this).

On the other hand, it all depends on how you define "think". I used to understand it as a process but these days it seems much more like a state, often ossified beyond any ability to be reformed, amended or otherwise changed from a big ugly lump of summick into an artfully created thing of beauty and utility, plastic with adaptability to meet changing circumstances or needs.

What we’re watching is the current, vicious round in the long, drawn-out fight for the soul of the Tory party. To me, this round seems more about who will “own” the party after the next election than anything else.

On the one side, we have an entryist clique of seriously rightwing-authoritarian ideologues, and on the other a wobbly, weak agglomeration of more traditional “one nation” Tories, business interests etc, without sufficient authority in the party to deal decisively with the former, and scratching around for competence to fill the important ministerial posts.

Of course, making a ginormous fuss about asylum seekers arriving in small boats is positive for both sides in the fight, because it plays to the proportion of the electorate that are inclined to support the authoritarian stance, and, best of all, it distracts everyone’s attention from all the other seriously important, IMO more seriously important, failings of the party in power.

Jdsk wrote: 7 Dec 2023, 8:58am

Jdsk wrote: 6 Dec 2023, 10:23am Rozenberg's first thoughts on the new treaty with Rwanda:
https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/what-h ... ith-rwanda

And on the proposed domestic legislation:
https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/a-triu ... experience

Jonathan

A couple of sentences from that that I felt relevant (personal, non-legal opinion about "relevance);

Parliament makes national law but not international law. Simply saying something is in compliance with international law does not make it so.

A junior minister, on behalf of the United Kingdom, may choose to break what the court responsible for its enforcement regards as a binding provision of international law. The minister would be acting lawfully — but His Majesty’s government would not.

(My bold).

To me it's all a complete mess. If the Conservative Party regard net immigration as too high, why the massive focus on a small proportion of the immigration numbers.

If the Conservatives are so upset about the costs to the UK for looking after those seeking asylum then one way to reduce those costs would be to speed the asylum decision process. As of Feb 2023 83% (56,883) of all small boat asylum applications since 2018, are awaiting a decision (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... ember-2022).

Or just provide a way for refugees to apply for asylum in the UK without having to get into a small dangerous rubber boat eg. an asylum application office near the French Channel coast.

Ian