BreakTheLaw Boris

[JamesWales]

The words of Johnson and Patel give the game away when they talk of taking on a “formidable army of politically motivated lawyers” who are “fleecing the British taxpayer”.

A solution/trial whatever deliberately designed to encourage legal challenges so an embattled Prime Minister and ministers can position themselves as defenders of the faith in the culture war stuff that will lead up to the May elections.

Whether this flies or not doesn't really matter to them. The budget for this is a closely guarded secret. What matters is the noise it generates. My guess is that it would suit the architects if it is declared illegal as it will trigger an assault on the legislation like the Human Rights Act. Far better a noble failure than perhaps living with the consequences of its implementation causing headlines around general election time.

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/

[cyril evans awaydays]

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/

So you don't like the current laws of the land. What bits of law would you change to give you the solution you are seeking?

[ninian opinian]

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/

Deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda is consistent with Governments plan to become only the third country to ditch the principles of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights.

The others are:
Greece, after a military coup and
Russia, after invading Ukraine

Truly world beating.

[Eric Cartman]

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]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...da-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!

[jon1959]

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/ar...cret-barrister

[JamesWales]

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