not-bono-ever
meh
Pretty astounding this innit. Makes you long for halcyon days of John Major
Emergency just means it's legislation that's been rushed through rather than legislation to deal with an emergency. Tbh I think one of the reasons that the current Rwanda policy is such a dog's dinner is because it too was just rushed into. Include not learning from his mistakes to the list of Sevenbins failings.
Nah, it's a Jewish trope.Seriously?
It's very well know slang/informal for money.
Are you very young (under 30)?
The Rwandan tourist board must be doing their nut over this...and there is one I've seen the advertisingThe Right Honourable Rishi Sunak MP has just announced that his government intends to pass a law stating that Rwanda is safe?
It’s important to note that the SC doesn’t rule out that the Rwandan system could be improved, & it hasn’t found that the idea of a scheme like this is prohibited (it wasn’t asked to decide that).
But what are the prospects of that happening? The Court of Appeal previously pointed to a real need for thorough culture change in the Rwandan civil service & judiciary, & to an absence of any sort of roadmap for achieving it (in a state ofc uninterested in the rule of law).
And whilst this decision is a disaster for Patel, Braverman, Johnson & Sunak & all else who supported the policy, it’s surely a catastrophe for Rwanda, whose record has been pored over in detail in the most public way. (I’ve never understood why they didn’t predict that.)
For the same reason I can’t personally see any other state wanting to line up to replace Rwanda, whatever ££ incentives are offered (and remember we still don’t know the full extent of these in respect of Rwanda).
Any attempt to amend or replicate this policy will almost certainly be scrutinised with great care & intensity by the courts, inspired by the example of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court in this case.
The government will not get an easy ride.
on the other hand the south georgia scheme proposed on here over the last several years is both practical and feasible. the only thing currently lacking is the political will to implement it.I think people are missing the point.
The Rwanda scheme cannot work in the way the Tories say it can and they can probably not implement it.
The point is that it, and similar Tory policies are never-ending grievance generators for their base, never ending distractions from the horrific shitshow that is the UK govt response to just about everything - health, welfare, economy, climate, transport etc etc (and their corruption and theft that accompanies the shitshow)
For Tory propagandists, as for Trumpoids, defeats of whatever magnitude are just grist for the never ending grievance and conspiracy mill …
This policy is dead. It was always predicated on ignorant assumptions about Rwanda and could never pretend to act as a deterrent to the 'boats'. The rest was performative cruelty pandering to heartless cunts.
Sunak is now just trying to pacify the nasty base in a holding pattern as the overall administration disintegrates into a general election. They believe their nasty base is bigger and more influential than it now is.
he's full of fail
Got it in one, It's the ECHR they want us out off but they all refer to each other and each one builds on previous treaties. It's like playing jenga by pulling out the blocks on the bottom first. All this posturing is just red meat for the base to try and win votes.He's not going to eb able to extricate us from international treaties without serious consequences, surely? What aboot the Good Friday Agreement, or the EU trade agreement?
They knew this judgement was coming and they knew they were very likely to lose. Which means this must be thought of as a considered response made with lots of time to weigh up the options.And now Sunak wants to pass legislation to 'show' Rwanda is 'safe'.
If a bunch of ignorant twats declare a country to be safe that simply makes it so?
What sort of planet are they living on? Aren't they trying any more to make the Trumpist crap even slightly believable?
Fucking embarrassing.
He's really caught between a rock and a hard place hasn't he though? Anybody remotely left of center thinks this policy is just a non-starter, the headbangers who support it believe (largely rightly) that to implement it anytime soon requires withdrawing from international treaties and repealing a whole bunch of domestic legislation. This is a massive undertaking that Sunak has neither the time nor the will for. The Tories have been promising to repeal the Human Rights Act for 13 years now and have failed. Ultimately, nobody is left happy.
Although, if some of the submissions from the Covid Enquiry are anything to go by, it's just as possible that they're cluelessly running around like a bunch of headless chickens, reassuring each other that they're bang on the money (quite literally, in some cases...)They knew this judgement was coming and they knew they were very likely to lose. Which means this must be thought of as a considered response made with lots of time to weigh up the options.
THe ECHR doesn't even have anything to do with it as the ruling explicitly stated. Yet this is all these fools hear. THe death spiral of these dizzy psychos will take us down with itGot it in one, It's the ECHR they want us out off but they all refer to each other and each one builds on previous treaties. It's like playing jenga by pulling out the blocks on the bottom first. All this posturing is just red meat for the base to try and win votes.
And they're probably right it will win them some but nowhere near enough to replace the ones they've lost due to high interest rates, falling living standards, the fact the economy has been circling the drain since lockdown and the general air of corruption and utter incompetence that hangs around the Tory party like a stray dog outside a butcher's shop.
you stupid, stupid man. what the supreme court actually said was that it is not all about the echr, that a range of domestic laws and other international treaties are in play alongside the european convention of human rights. you really are a fuckwit.THe ECHR doesn't even have anything to do with it as the ruling explicitly stated. Yet this is all these fools hear. THe death spiral of these dizzy psychos will take us down with it
the ruling mentions the echr on pages 5-6THe ECHR doesn't even have anything to do with it as the ruling explicitly stated. Yet this is all these fools hear. THe death spiral of these dizzy psychos will take us down with it
I think in all honesty they though they would probably win, the Supreme Court has often sided with the Govt and overturned the Court of Appeal on the grounds that Judges interpret the law and Parliament makes it. The fact that they didn't this time just shows what a piece of ill thought out fuckwittery it has been from the off.They knew this judgement was coming and they knew they were very likely to lose. Which means this must be thought of as a considered response made with lots of time to weigh up the options.
Surely not? say it isn't so.Although, if some of the submissions from the Covid Enquiry are anything to go by, it's just as possible that they're cluelessly running around like a bunch of headless chickens, reassuring each other that they're bang on the money (quite literally, in some cases...)
I think it's all performative - there are almost certainly 40+ on the Tory benches who would not vote to leave the ECHR, so it's kind of moot. It's about making enough of this moonhowler noise for long enough to the next GE, where they lose and don't have to worry about walking the fine line between stirring up the base to not get deselected, and not leaving the ECHR so the world stops talking to us.
Braverman's resignation letter suggests otherwise. Writing before the judgement, she doesn't even seriously contemplate the govt winning. She more or less assumes it will lose and sets out all the reasons why it will have lost - All Sunak's fault, guv. I would have got it done.I think in all honesty they though they would probably win,
At every stage of litigation I cautioned you and your team against assuming we would win. I repeatedly urged you to take legislative measures that would better secure us against the possibility of defeat. You ignored these arguments. You opted instead for wishful thinking as a comfort blanket to avoid having to make hard choices. This irresponsibility has wasted time and left the country in an impossible position.