Rwanda and asylum seekers

[jeremyp]

It was always a shite plan. And in one day, Braverman's letter has been proved right in that he doesn't have a Plan B, shite or otherwise.

If only the responsible minister had a plan B.

The responsible minister is the Home Secretary, who was....


.... Suella!

[SqueakyVoice]

Just image what it must be like, to be a human being, thinking 'those Tories want to take away my rights'.

[SqueakyVoice]

OFfS
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/nov/15/rwanda-deportation-policy-supreme-court-rishi-sunak-leadership-conservatives-uk-politics-latest?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with:block-6554fc3a8f0894c5322399c3#block-6554fc3a8f0894c5322399c3

Sunak says he will pass emergency law saying Rwanda is safe country

Then he'll pass law that the UK owns the moon and climate change is banned.

Brain Dead idiot.

[Nearly Sane]

'When your Majesty says, "Let a thing be done," it's as good as done — practically, it is done — because your Majesty's will is law. Your Majesty says, "A certain country is safe," and the courts will accept that it is safe. Consequently, that country is as good as safe — practically, it is safe — and if it is safe, why not say so?'

With apologies to WS Gilbert, and my hat tipped to a friend.

[Aruntraveller]

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

Fucking mad the lot of 'em.

[jeremyp]

OFfS
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/nov/15/rwanda-deportation-policy-supreme-court-rishi-sunak-leadership-conservatives-uk-politics-latest?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with:block-6554fc3a8f0894c5322399c3#block-6554fc3a8f0894c5322399c3Then he'll pass law that the UK owns the moon and climate change is banned.

Brain Dead idiot.

Oh FFS indeed. When are these morons going to realise the policy is dead?

Anyway, judging by the court decision, announcing that Rwanda is safe (and I am not qualified to say it is not safe), won't help. The court decision was that you can't send asylum seekers in danger of life or liberty back either directly or indirectly. They can't be sent to Rwanda because Rwanda might send them home.

[Nearly Sane]

Oh FFS indeed. When are these morons going to realise the policy is dead?

Anyway, judging by the curt decision, announcing that Rwanda is safe (and I am not qualified to say it is not safe), won't help. The court decision was that you can't send asylum seekers in danger of life or liberty back either directly or indirectly. They can't be sent to Rwanda because Rwanda might send them home.

Maybe they'll pass a law saying that anyone who escaped from Rwanda is actually being sent back to Nwanda.

Even trying to mock this though, i'm struggling to think that a country where in fairly recent memory, an almost unimaginably brutal wave of tribal violence, rape, and genocide took place is 'safe'.

Also, they keep wittering on that they need to do this to 'stop the boats'. It's got fuck all to do with the boats. This is a post boats policy. Implement this to Rwanda, Nwanda, or Bravermania, and there will still be boats.

[Aruntraveller]

Batshit.

If it is good enough (allegedly) for Cleverley, it's good enough for me.

[Nearly Sane]

Batshit.

If it is good enough (allegedly) for Cleverley, it's good enough for me.

Even Patel is making coherent statements on this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67436841

[SteveH]

Selective amnesia - a common complaint amongst politicians who said something embarrassing in the past.

[SqueakyVoice]

Oh FFS indeed. When are these morons going to realise the policy is dead?

Anyway, judging by the curt decision, announcing that Rwanda is safe (and I am not qualified to say it is not safe), won't help. The court decision was that you can't send asylum seekers in danger of life or liberty back either directly or indirectly. They can't be sent to Rwanda because Rwanda might send them home.

The courts are even more curt now than they were yesterday.

Lord Sumption, a former supreme court judge, has dismissed the notion that legislation like this would make any difference. He told the News at 10 last night:

"I have never heard of them trying to change the facts, by law. ... it is profoundly discreditable."

Facts of law are vv. important. if used in a tribunal, they can be accepted by an further (/higher) appeal.


For the supreme Court to have already accepted  the fact of law that Rwanda  is not safe. Leaves it as a permanent fact.
Pretending it could be used in legislation remains absolutely  "bat shit".

[Nearly Sane]

If only the responsible minister had a plan B.

The responsible minister is the Home Secretary, who was....


.... Suella!

I suspect Braverman's position would be she had a Plan B which was the night before the judgement send Big Nobby round to the judges' houses to explain in detail the concept of safety with demonstrations with pliers, soldering iron, wire wool toilet brush, and Michael McIntyre DVDs, but was told no.

[jeremyp]

The courts are even more curt now than they were yesterday.

I've fixed the spelling mistake, in case anybody is wondering what SV is on about.

Facts of law are vv. important. if used in a tribunal, they can be accepted by a further (/higher) appeal.


For the supreme Court to have already accepted  the fact of law that Rwanda  is not safe. Leaves it as a permanent fact.
Pretending it could be used in legislation remains absolutely  "bat shit".

I agree.

It's important to understand that the court is accepting that Rwanda itself is relatively safe (notwithstanding NS's comment above). What killed the deportations is that there is no guarantee that Rwanda wouldn't ship the refugees to other places that aren't safe. No law that Rishi Sunk can enact will change that.

[SqueakyVoice]

I've fixed the spelling mistake, in case anybody is wondering what SV is on about.
I agree.

Don't  worry, NS and I have both included your spelling mistake in your quotes, so it'll probably stay there forever ..

[Gordon]

This should be quite entertaining over the coming weeks/months.

On one hand you've got Sunak trying the pacify the lunatic fringe of his own party by legislating, 'notwithstanding' that some of them are swivel-eyed fact-denying xenophobes and that facts don't change due to legislation, and on the other hand there are those who will try to undermine any attempts to play fast and loose with the legal system, including non-domestic laws - and there is little more that a year before a GE must happen.

I suspect we're in 'all sound and fury' territory: get your popcorn in now!

 

[Nearly Sane]

If it wasn't for those pesky politicians, eh, Suella?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67446101

[Nearly Sane]

New immigration records but it's all about boats and Rwanda.


https://www.cityam.com/net-migration-hits-672000-as-rishi-sunak-set-for-showdown-on-rwanda-policy/

[Nearly Sane]

Another Tory Minister declares UDIbon immigration. To be fair to Jenrick these proposals would have an effect unlike the boats and Rwanda posturing. Essentially though it's just reversing govt policy, there to deal with issues in the UK workforce, and appears to have no proposals to deal with those issues.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67515674

[Nearly Sane]

The not taking back control point is a good one. The immigration figures are as a direct result of this govts policies. And good to see the SNP taking their position on more immigration being needed for Scotland.

The Labour Party's position here is as so many of their pisitions stuck on a fence trying to say as little as possible.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67516117

[jeremyp]

The not taking back control point is a good one. The immigration figures are as a direct result of this govts policies. And good to see the SNP taking their position on more immigration being needed for Scotland.

The Labour Party's position here is as so many of their pisitions stuck on a fence trying to say as little as possible.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67516117

I side with the SNP on this one.

[Gordon]

One of the things that annoys me is when Tory politicians come out with versions of 'the British people want us to reduce immigration', and I'm not sure that is true and it isn't what the SNP are saying, as has been pointed out.

I suspect that the use of 'British people' here is code for 'xenophobic Tory voters'.

[jeremyp]

I suspect that the use of 'British people' here is code for 'xenophobic Tory voters'.

Actually, they would be more concerned with xenophobic voters who might vote Labour.

[Nearly Sane]

Knee jerk policy.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67612106

[Nearly Sane]

'Robert Jenrick insists UK workers will fill labour gaps after migration crackdown'

Given that part of the reason for the figures that he wants to cut were because this didn't happen, then this looks like magical thinking at best, or more likely out and out lying.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67622998

[Nearly Sane]

Can you afford your spouse? The price of love.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67630258