Matt Hancock suspended as Tory MP for joining I'm a Celeb cast
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-63471923
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Nov 22 at 13:05
|
I can't make sense of it any more. Hancock has had the whip suspended as a result. He's a sitting MP who should be looking after his constituents. He must be having a breakdown.
Yesterday Braverman, after 12 years of Conservative government, said in so many words that the asylum system is broken and immigration is out of control. There are allegedly ministers who believe that Sunak had to appease the ERG with her appointment but chose her because he knows she will self-destruct.
Are they falling apart?
Last edited by: Manatee on Tue 1 Nov 22 at 13:44
|
...given Mad Nad's similar suspension for the same, and her subsequent return to Government as a Minister, Hancock probably sees it as a way back to power...
It's Government Jim, but not as we know it!
|
I don't think so, I think that this government looks potentially stronger than it has for some time. They appear to be facing up to and being open about the current situation.
Hancock has just been stupid, but that's not a first for him.
Braverman - I still don't know if it's a hanging issue but I suppose I thought Partygate was, so maybe this is equally serious. I doubt any conspiracy theory such as you suggest though.
|
>> Braverman - I still don't know if it's a hanging issue but I suppose I
>> thought Partygate was, so maybe this is equally serious.
>>
..Ant & Dec presenting "I'm a celebrity, take me to Tyburn" - Even I might watch that... ;-)
|
>>I doubt any conspiracy theory such as you suggest though.
I doubt it too, but I can believe some Conservatives think it. The trouble is that if Sunak really thinks appointing someone who resigned 6 days earlier from the same job is OK then that isn't really credible either, especially when she's repeatedly demonstrated her incompetence and mendacity. And continues to do so. She repeated yesterday that she had not blocked the booking of hotel rooms for asylum seekers at Manston. Yet we know she refused to sign off on some bookings that were in "Tory areas".
The non-conspiracy explanation is that Sunak was so panicked about Johnson coming back (aided by Chris Mason broadcasting as news the false claim that Johnson had 100 nominations) that the ERG took advantage and stitched him up with a promise to appoint her. which would have been a very bad decision, but Mason's gaffe clearly had an effect with a number of Conservatives then coming out in support of Johnson, when it looked as if that would put them on the winning side.
Sir Roger Gale (a Conservative MP in whose constituency the Manston site is located) pointed out that Manston was working working perfectly well until 5 weeks ago. Grant Shapps in his 6 day career as Home Secretary did authorise some bookings, without which things would presumably be worse.
Just remember we have arrived at this point after 12 years of Conservative rule. 12 years.
|
|
.......12 years, and the UK has clearly taken back control of its borders.
Last edited by: R.P. on Tue 1 Nov 22 at 16:16
|
|
It really is an intractable problem though. Does anyone have a solution? Do we have an open border and let i whoever want to risk the journey or what? I have no idea how this problem can be solved.
|
|
We could build a wall and make the French pay for it?
|
None of those coming 9ver on boats from France qualify as asylum seekers, so being illegal immigrants and therefore committing an offence, have no right to be here or considered for settlement. They should be shipped back to country of origin.
No idea how you do that tho
|
|
If there were any truth in your statement, then they would all be repatriated as soon as they landed.
|
|
What is untruthful about my statement? By the definition of asylum, none of them qualify. Hence the term illegal immigrant.
|
>> What is untruthful about my statement? By the definition of asylum, none of them qualify.
>> Hence the term illegal immigrant.
We've done this before but you're wrong.
Why do none of them qualify?
|
|
I think that it would be fair to say most of them would not qualify as asylum seekers. The majority of those arriving this week are young men from Albania. As far as I am aware Albanians have no need, other than economic, to flee their country.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Tue 1 Nov 22 at 18:56
|
>> >> What is untruthful about my statement? By the definition of asylum, none of them
>> qualify.
>> >> Hence the term illegal immigrant.
>>
>> We've done this before but you're wrong.
>>
>> Why do none of them qualify?
Because you have to apply for asylum as soon as you reach a country of safety, Which is all of the EU. To want to make the UK and cross most of the EU to get there is merely for economic reasons. Which is why they are illegal immigrants.
|
>> Because you have to apply for asylum as soon as you reach a country of
>> safety
Where, in International treaties etc., is that set out?
|
>> No idea how you do that tho
>>
And that’s the problem isn’t it? Nobody has an effective solution. Lots of criticism of the government but no one has any idea how to proceed.
|
There is no effective policy on how to deal with asylum seekers. Public opinion is polarised - we should show compassion etc vs they are a drain on finances, education, housing etc.
Politicians don't want to alienate voters irrespective of general political allegiance. The end result is that both sides sit on the fence mouthing platitudes and carefully crafted statements of sufficient ambiguity to to avoid actually saying of consequence.
No wonder the outcome is a shambles.
I have to question why migrants, having travelled across a generally stable, safe France, Belgium, Germany, Spain, Italy etc would risk a channel trip in a small boat to the UK.
Some positive that could be done to improve things irrespective of whether views are aligned to compassion or threat:
- time limit of 3 months for a decision on asylum - reduces costs and uncertainty
- if unsuccessful - repatriation or Rwanda - tough but only those with a decent case will come
- asylum claim office in Calais - if unsuccessful, immediate deportation on arrival in UK
Personal view - borders need to be controlled. Those with genuine reasons for seeking asylum should be welcomed if they have real ties with the UK - eg: family, language, community etc.
I also believe that those who have shown the resolve, courage etc to make a very difficult journey are very much more likely to be a benefit to UK society, not a drain/drag.
Suella - a purely unsubstantiated view - appointed as Home Secretary to keep the right wing happy and reduce internal divisions. Sunak has been less than energetic in his support for her. I suspect he would express insincere disappointment if the media force her out, but would not want to be seen as the architect of her downfall.
Last edited by: Terry on Tue 1 Nov 22 at 22:30
|
>> I have to question why migrants, having travelled across a generally stable, safe France, Belgium,
>> Germany, Spain, Italy etc would risk a channel trip in a small boat to the
>> UK.
The actual number coming here, compared to Displaced Persons around the world, is small. Most are folks with relatives here or settled communities they can join. Others are from places with historic UK influence English as a main or second language etc.
Whether Spain - see issues around its N African enclaves - or France are wholly safe is moot.
The Albania issue needs some work. Albania is reportedly, for the most part stable. It's a candidate for EU membership. There may be problems for particular ethnic groups though. If the figures Braverman et al are quoting for Albanians are right then we should be looking at their cases quickly and returning them. France and Germany are already doing this.
>> - time limit of 3 months for a decision on asylum - reduces costs and
>> uncertainty
>> - if unsuccessful - repatriation or Rwanda - tough but only those with a decent
>> case will come
>> - asylum claim office in Calais - if unsuccessful, immediate deportation on arrival in UK
Much quicker processing would be a massive help. However training a caseworker or decision maker to the point they're productive takes the best part of a year. Unsuccessful applicants though still need a right of appeal. There's a danger with trying to up the output of Home Office where the quality of decisions falls. Last time that pressure was applied, 20 or so years ago, Decision Makers were refusing difficult cases and letting the Tribunals sort them out. We see this with DWP Decision Makers too.
The effect is to move the problem downstream to the Courts and Tribunals service. MoJ then get arxy about funding that and expect the Home Office (or DWP) to provide significant subvention on a 'polluter pays' principle.
An office in Calais, or more legal routes generally, would be another answer. People, including MPs, who know or should know the system talk about the boat migrants as queue jumpers. They're not; there's no place to form a queue.
It's also worth pointing out that boats are a symptom of the ferries and tunnel being closed up tighter than a duck's backside closing that, largely invisible, route. Small boats landing on the beaches and stacked up around Dover are highly visible and thus newsworthy.
|
>>
>> Yesterday Braverman, after 12 years of Conservative government, said in so many words that the
>> asylum system is broken and immigration is out of control.
They are hoping that voters will blame labour, even though the Tories have been in power for 12 years and have had no success, even after Brexit which was supposed to be the panacea for all this faff.
|
Attitudes towards immigration seem to cross normal political boundaries.
Politicians on both sides know that if they communicate a clear policy it will cost votes. They want to sound commanding without being inconvenienced by actually doing anything.
The end result is ineffectual and ill directed.
Braverman at least seems to have a clear policy - although I think it shallow, don't like the way she expresses it, nor do I trust her.
Labour don't seem to have a policy, criticise any action to score political brownie points, and are happy sitting on the fence.
Tories will take the blame for whatever shambles persists at the next election - unless Braverman prevails, probably alienating as many as she wins over.
|
>> Braverman at least seems to have a clear policy - although I think it shallow,
>> don't like the way she expresses it, nor do I trust her.
Is it any different from that of Priti Patel?
I think the Rwanda thing is inhuman; apart from anything else we've given Rwandans asylum.
In any event it's totally impractical. How is Rwanda going to take 40k+ people? And how will they get there? Airlines like TUI and Titan who have previously done repatriation flights are now pulling out. Air Tanker who operate the RAF's A330 airlifters won't either. The company who waited a Brize for the batch supposed to go in June, Spanish airline Prividge Style wont do it now, neither I think will Wamos.
Is any company prepared to take the reputational hit?
That's what did for Privilidge Style who's money-spinner is moving top flight football teams.
|
Air Tanker who operate the RAF's A330 airlifters won't either.
>>
They are all on the military register, it doesn't really matter what AT think. There are other practical, as opposed to moral, reasons though.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Wed 2 Nov 22 at 11:11
|
You have to accept that the majority of native born Britt's are basically xenophobic or outright racist, and expressing tough, (even immoral) statements about immigration is a massive vote winner.
So they do it.
Even past immigrants (specially from the Indian sub continent) hate immigrants.
|
"You have to accept that the majority of native born Britt's are basically xenophobic"
Aren't all societies to a degree? Aren't most people inherently wary of strangers. I would even say it in our genetic makeup. In a primitive society it makes complete sense to be wary or even fearful of those you dont know. Obviously it can be overcome by culture but it's there, deep down, in all of us.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Wed 2 Nov 22 at 12:29
|
Is it being watered down during the generations?
My daughter seems to be of the opinion that we have an open door policy to anyone and everyone.
She doesn't seem to grasp that there are limits, there are not unlimited services, housing and support which are funded by the taxpayer.
Shes just commenced a Human Rights Law Masters so I suppose I know nowt. :/
|
|
She is merely developing her future target market, she should be doing a business degree
|
Breaking news from "I'm a Celebrity". Boy George has been attacked by a lizard.
The producers have apologised, and admitted they should have found a calmer chameleon.
|
|
After the first sentence, I thought you were referring to Hancock.
|
I'm a Tory MP, get me out of Parliament - Manatee
