BreakTheLaw Boris

[Tito Fuente]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

They are talking about this kind of thing. I really dont get why so many people object to trying to fix what is clearly a pretty broken system.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/133582...egal-deported/

It's naïve (at best) to think Johnson, Patel et al want to "fix" anything.

They are nothing but self-serving tosspots who will do whatever is necessary (including breaking laws) to protect themselves or further their own interests.

Sorry James but this transparent act of fixing a "broken system" doesn't sit well with people who have spent the last 4 years watching this current Tory government lower the standards of decency and humanity with every decision they make.

They couldn't give a shit about the lives and welfare of asylum seekers.

[delmbox]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

What's that got to do with single males in thier thousands leaving families to enter UK ??

If this was 29 thousand women and children I'd have a different view . ..

Never mind Buck House, charity starts at home and you have wonderful ideals which I admit most of us lack , so step up show your goodness and offer a room rather than pass the buck ( get it ) to queeny .

It's not about taxes it's about being a voice and going
over beyond and support what you belive in and offer up that spare room or find one for these unfortunate single fellas who I'm sure are in need . Even tent in you back garden would be haven for them ?

You're completely right of course, and I remember you being INCREDIBLY concerned about the treatment of the Uyghurs in China when the BLM protests were happening. What steps have you taken since to go "over beyond and support what you believe in?" in terms of that? Or were you just whatabouting again because you're a racist idiot?

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

You're completely right of course, and I remember you being INCREDIBLY concerned about the treatment of the Uyghurs in China when the BLM protests were happening. What steps have you taken since to go "over beyond and support what you believe in?" in terms of that? Or were you just whatabouting again because you're a racist idiot?

tbf he hasn't always been concerned.

https://www.ccmb.co.uk/showthread.php?444673-China-forces-birth-control-on-Uighurs-to-suppress-population&p=5092163&viewfull=1#post5092163

That said, your final question is unlikely to be the trickiest one this Board has to wrestle with today!

[Eric Cartman]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

They are talking about this kind of thing. I really dont get why so many people object to trying to fix what is clearly a pretty broken system.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/133582...egal-deported/

You are a broken record and reaching, this article has very little to do with this thread and you know that.

They object to the proposed policy because they believe it violates what this country should stand for. Additionally I haven't heard anybody explain why they think it will actually work as intended and act as a deterrent. The is the architect of the policy herself can't even explain why she thinks it will work or quantify the benefits resulting from it.

You remember the magic money tree? The common thread behind that slogan was that not all problems can be fixed easily. This is another one of those problems. Short of being barbaric, there isn't a quick fix to migration, primarily because there are so many causes.

This is 'hostile environment' 2.0 and I do not want my country to act in that way.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/16/priti-patel-home-office-mutiny-rwanda-asylum-plan

I think that this was done under Ministerial Direction, basically an instruction to civil servants to proceed despite the clear warnings of legal and economic risks is telling.

Ina past life when I drafted Ministerial submissions then there were mandatory chapters that needed to be provided on legal considerations and a cost benefit analysis. These were provided by departmental lawyers and economists. the lawyers, particularly in sensitive issues would often need to consult independent barristers to have an assessment that it was legal and robust enough to successfully withstand court challenge and Judicial Review.

I would have thought that a Permanent Secretary would not seek cover under Ministerial Direction on value for money grounds only (if the Treasury says the money will be found its not a ditch to die in). It is more likely that the legal assessment was so troublesome that he wanted basically an order to proceed.

If so it would be priti ironic if the best way for a government minister to distract from breaking the law is to break the law!

[Dorcus]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

tbf he hasn't always been concerned.

https://www.ccmb.co.uk/showthread.php?444673-China-forces-birth-control-on-Uighurs-to-suppress-population&p=5092163&viewfull=1#post5092163

That said, your final question is unlikely to be the trickiest one this Board has to wrestle with today!

Ha ha, I LURV your final paragraph 👍

[life on mars]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

Some whatterboutry

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/apr/22/immigrationandpublicservices.thinktanks

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

Some whatterboutry

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ces.thinktanks

Ok, I'll play. Whatabout posting this in the whatabouttery thread you started called Would Labour Risk Reversing The Rwandan Solution where you said David Blunkett proposed the same idea 20 years agoinvolving a third party off shore immigration solution and Eric Cartman said he didn't. You asked him to google it to prove you right.

He said it didn't presumably because the Blunkett thing involved trying to get a pan-EU position where asylum seekers were processed in safety and those accepted allowed to go to the country of their choice rather than the Patel/Get Johnson out of jail card which involves deporting people from the UK and getting them to seek asylum in Rwanda.

Still what's that about?

[jon1959]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

They are talking about this kind of thing. I really dont get why so many people object to trying to fix what is clearly a pretty broken system.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/133582...egal-deported/

https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/the-truth-about-our-human-rights-laws-by-the-secret-barrister

[JamesWales]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

https://www.counselmagazine.co.uk/ar...cret-barrister

I do enjoy the Secret Barrister, although he does generally approach things from one angle. I totally agree that the media are complicit in things, although this goes for nearly every topic going unfortunately

[the other bob wilson]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

That dangerous lefty the Archbishop of Canterbury has his say on the Government’s Rwanda proposals.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/16/rwanda-plan-is-against-the-judgment-of-god-says-archbishop

[ninian opinian]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

Pinched from Twitter. This sums this Tory’s policy on refugees up perfectly.

The Rwanda plan is NOT offshore processing of claims.

It IS human trafficking.

Our Govt effectively trading in vulnerable people. It is selling asylum seekers to Rwanda for them to work there.

[JamesWales]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

Pinched from Twitter. This sums this Tory’s policy on refugees up perfectly.

The Rwanda plan is NOT offshore processing of claims.

It IS human trafficking.

Our Govt effectively trading in vulnerable people. It is selling asylum seekers to Rwanda for them to work there.

Except if people are seeking genuine asylum from tyranny they need not worry. If they are seeking immigration there are legal ways to do it and we will be paying the Rwandan government not criminal people smugglers. Apart from that, it's identical.

[JamesWales]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

That dangerous lefty the Archbishop of Canterbury has his say on the Government’s Rwanda proposals.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ays-archbishop

He can part the English Channel and then feed each boat with five loaves and two fish.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: BreakTheLaw Boris

Does the fact that there was not one mention of Johnson’s statement to the Commons yesterday on here mean people are no longer interested in Partygate any more or that they have made up their minds on the subject and nothing the PM does or says will make a difference?

Thought Rees-Mogg comparing Johnson’s fine to the DRS system in cricket was equally funny and desperate.