Search results

So the net impact on immigration figures of the scheme which will definitely, definitely end all these boat crossings according to the Government is...+6?

And who called the referendum in the first place?

The main thing in his favour is there is no obvious alternative with enough backing to topple him. Boris is gone. Braverman only has a handful of backers. Farage is hiding in the Aussie outback. The only credible alternative leader is probably Mourdant, and she’s seemingly vanished into the...

Quick reminder when you hear any number of Tory MPs come out and claim the public want this / that / the other

Worth remembering that the UK government can introduce all the laws it wants, it cannot simply say “oh and international law doesn’t apply on this one”. Anymore than I can say “I am sovereign in my own bank account, therefore I have passed a rule that I am not liable to pay my mortgage”.

Sunak is basically betting the house to do something the next Labour government will simply reverse almost straight away

The Supreme Court ruling also explicitly stated that it would make absolutely no difference to the plan being unlawful.

Probably get the world cup soon given their predilection for a bung or two

It allows the Tories to keep the boats coming, creating an electoral “wedge issue” which they can then performatively try and stop through ever more draconian methods (barges, Rwanda) knowing they ultimately won’t work but can then blame their failure on “lefty judges”, the ECHR, the Labour...

I’m intrigued how you can claim something is happening but can’t provide the evidence to back your statement up. Still I’m not surprised someone who thinks they know how the international movement of people works better than the UN does can be so confident in their bluster and BS. As others...

The French have made repeated offers for a processing centre in France for potential arrivals, it’s the UK Government which has said No. Presumably on the basis of creating an electoral advantage.

I’m assuming you can evidence that statement.

Not necessarily. They might only speak English, they might be fleeing persecution by people with links to other countries, there can be a million reasons why. Your eulogising from your ivory tower ignores the reality of the world.

Answering a question with another question is not an answer.

Why “should” they?