General British politics discussion thread

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118282070#Comment_118282070

Could you exlain what you mean by "Grants the majority of those on evidence" because the stats coming out of the eu are that of the 86,000 first time applications in France, only 19,000 were granted some form of protection, which kind of explains why people would try and by pass France and get in to the UK I guess, which has a 50/50 acceptance level.

For comparison, in the same timeframe Germany gave first instance approval to 62,000 asylum seekers, many mulitples of France

The UK is also part of the same scheme France is, to provide settled status to Afghan citizens. To date, it has resettled more than any other european country (around 25,000 since 2015) and plans on resettling another 20,000.

This isn't a pissing contest though. Both countries can and should do more.

The fact is though, many people don't want asylum in France and want to use it as a means to get to the UK. This means they risk life and llimb travelling to europe, illegally cross borders and end up living in a tent on the side of a road in France, until the local Gendarmerie come alone, tear it down and they are forced to get a new one from the local migrant relief centre. Until of curse, that tent is also removed.

How on earth you don't consider this a French problem is beyond me and probably anyone with an once of humanity.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118281640#Comment_118281640

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Parliament has put together a joint committee to come up with a proposal on making online content safer and those who publish it accountable. This will be regulated by the existing office of the communications regulator.

Somehow though, this is shifting the onus on to landlords and companies to do what the Tories tell them and if they don't, Boris will close them down. Is that what you are saying?

Joe_ Public

26 August: Downing Street rejects newspaper claims that either Boris Johnson or his wife had anything to do with the u turn to rescue the staff and pets of an animal rescue charity in Kabul. "That's not how we do things in this country," Johnson says

7 December: in jaw-dropping testimony before a committee of inquiry, an ex FCO official says that not only did Johnson intervene in the process, but that that decision put British troops in danger meant many Afghanis eligible for evacuation ended up being left behind.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-afghanistan-carrie-kabul-british-army-b952470.html

https://twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/1468010062220247043?s=20

ambro25

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118282456#Comment_118282456

“It’s not a pissing contest” and I agree with you on that, yet your arguments continually push towards making it one, painting France as that horrible place which migrants just want to evade.

The fact of the matter is, and remains, that migrants setting out to reach the UK do so, and will continue to do so, irrespective of how easy or hard or anywhere in-between France and the rest of the EU27 could make asylum claims, and irrespective of how dangerous it gets: the EU27 is geographically in the way.

That is why, for such migrants, it is ‘not a problem’ for France: it does not matter what France could or should do, they do not want to be nor stay there, they want to get to the UK, and will try to do so through any which means -including pro-actively evading structures, procedures, authorities and other vectors of registration and ‘capture’ (such as French processing centres), up to slumming it in unsanitary camps in the countryside for however long, until they do - or die trying.

“The fact is though, many people don't want asylum in France and want to use it as a means to get to the UK”: quite correct, save as to the issue that migrants don’t “use France [or Belgium] as a means to get to the UK”: they have little other choice than getting through it, if alternative pathways (air travel mostly) are not available to them.

”This means they risk life and llimb travelling to europe, illegally cross borders and end up living in a tent on the side of a road in France, until the local Gendarmerie come alone, tear it down and they are forced to get a new one from the local migrant relief centre. Until of curse, that tent is also removed.”: quite correct again, given the above, so here is an idea - let them board a ferry instead, safely and cheaply, and apply for asylum in a processing centre in Dover. Safety, sanitary and massing problems all solved.

Final Warning. Stop derailing the thread. Next time, it's a ban.

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118282625#Comment_118282625

That testimony is astonishing and well worth reading. This article also contains details of the event:

'Defence Secretary Ben Wallace had been adamant that he must prioritise “people over pets” in the increasingly fraught scramble to evacuate those trapped at Hamid Karzai International Airport after Kabul fell under Taliban control last week.

He refused to allow Farthing’s animals to board one of the RAF flights for safety reasons. On Tuesday, Nowzad supporters said a privately chartered Airbus A330, funded by donations, was on standby for the shelter rescue mission and could also airlift other Afghans cleared by the UK for passage out of Kabul.

Wallace initially resisted calls to approve the chartered plane but changed his mind in the early hours of Wednesday morning, prompting animal rights campaigner Dominic Dyer – said to be a friend of Farthing and Carrie Johnson – to claim that the PM’s wife “most certainly had something to do with the change”, reported The Times.'

pixelburp

There's a critical mass of stories coming out now, all painting Johnson as inept or negligent at worst, flailing and eccentric at best; to the extent one wonders how much are strategic leaks, all preparing the ground for a leadership push. As with a lot of these kind of controversies I presume many had known them for ages ... with the only difference now being "timing".

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118284569#Comment_118284569

Yes, one could well imagine the hidden hand of Dominic Cummings in this for two reasons - first he has a score to settle with Carrie Johnson and second he was originally Gove's protege and may well be working for him again now.

Joe_ Public

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118284380#Comment_118284380

It is astonishing for certain. Worth noting, Farthing has tweeted earlier and called Raphael Marshall, the whistleblowing ex FCO official, a liar and claimed no British forces at all were involved in getting the pets on the plane. Yet, Farthing gave numerous accounts to newspapers back in August in which British troops played a key role. So he's either not being factually correct this morning or he wasn't being factually correct in August. Both can't be true. I'm on the side of the whistleblower, personally.

Of course, the dogs are only one small part of this. Marshalls testimony definitely portrays the FO department itself in a bad light, but the ministers taking decisions bear huge responsibility. After coming back from holiday, Raab was overseeing evacuation applications but there was a hold up at one point, because he didn't like the way in which emails were formatted. Crazy stuff.

I don't know if this will be any more politically damaging than its already been, though. The public has moved on and the amount of people defending Farthing and calling him a hero because he got a few dogs out (just the dogs, mind, none of his staff) is mind boggling.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118284613#Comment_118284613

Wasn't there rumors a few months back of a planned January leadership push so they could lay the last (LOL) of the Brexit failures on johnson and try start fresh again

Lemming

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118284616#Comment_118284616

From what I recall, Farthing said that when he successfully effected entry to the airport, a British soldier drove the second truck past the final Taliban barrier inside the airport grounds as the Taliban would not allow Farthings member of staff any further. Other than that, the British forces had very little to do with him in any official capacity save a few that played with dogs on their downtime, other than the MoD liason he was assigned to periodically interact with. It was US forces that helped him load the plane with a token couple of British soldiers helping as they moved out to their own plane to leave. He was still on the ground hours after the last UK forces had left.

By and large, I am disinclined to believe anything that has come out of either the FCO or MoD on the matter considering the dirty campaign that Ben Wallace & his office, and the wider Tory party & their associated press has engaged in and continues to engage in. There is more around this particular story but to dwell on it both panders to Tory desires of spinning a narrative of "just dogs" and detracts from the overwhelming missive from the whistleblower that paints a shocking level of incompetence within the FCO & MOD up to the highest levels of political office.

I full expect the Tories to try and misdirect the press onto Farthing in an attempt to deflect as much as possible given how much flak is incoming to the party and its "illustrious" leader.

farmerval

There's no way that the parties in Nr 10 weren't known last year, yet now they're in the news, there's definitely a co-ordinated effort against Boris. The big question is who is behind it?

Which direction of travel are the architects of this move looking to go, further right, or back toward the centre.

The cabinet of useful idiots, sent out to lie through their teeth each morning is certainly not providing any comfort that a sensible government is in charge.

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118286758#Comment_118286758

The No.10 party story seems to be rapidly gaining traction this evening, especially after ITN obtained footage of Johnson's PR woman seemingly admitting last December (or not denying anyway) one had happened and that she had attended herself. Very interesting to see where this goes.

Wouldn't take much for someone to break ranks here and reveal a load of stuff about the No.10 party to the press.

Joe_ Public

One thing for certain, the Downing Street position on this whole xmas party business cannot hold. Its insulting the public's intelligence and look all the more stupid the more stuff gets dripfed out, as it surely must. The Cummings story was the one that really cut through over past couple of years, this is approaching the same territory.

A Dub in Glasgo

This story has been on the go since last Tuesday/Wednesday. The Tories have been quite brazen about brushing it off and stated all guidance was followed which is utterly ridiculous since indoor gatherings were banned. A very good recap from the BBC's Ros Atkins and tonight the ITV News at 10 was pulling punches. We might finally see the media turn on this shower

https://twitter.com/BBCRosAtkins/status/1468327638334857219

https://twitter.com/MrPeteEdwards/status/1468349213901733889

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118287801#Comment_118287801

As I mentioned just above, it wouldn't take much now for an attendee to break ranks and reveal everything that happened.

The No.10 position for the last week was downright bizarre and contradictory. 'No party took place' and 'All restrictions were followed to the letter'.

Mr.Nice Guy

This feels a bigger deal than the Paterson and Cummings scandals. If the British public turn a blind eye to this then I guess they will put up with anything. I'd like to think this is the beginning of the end for the untouchable Tories. We'll see what happens.

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288008#Comment_118288008

Seems to be moving at speed alright. It has to be remembered that Christmas was effectively cancelled in the UK last year, so you can see why there would be great anger at No.10 itself simply ignoring the restrictions.

quokula

It's incredible to think how brazen they were - surely they would have known it would not go down well if the party became public knowledge and it would have been the easiest thing in the world to just not hold one, yet they decided to go ahead and do it anyway and laugh about it.

Honestly, it's miles down the list of truly damaging things they've done while in power, but it's things like this that really cut through to the public.

Headshot

I really feels like this could be the end of BJ be it at ballet boxes or his party removing him as PM

Great seeing BJ getting his just deserts.

Larbre34

It feels as if a jocular murmuring room, just fell completely silent all at once.

Boris is in it good and proper this time.

Strazdas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288095#Comment_118288095

Indeed, how does he distance himself from it or claim he had no knowledge of it? It's literally his workplace and he is the boss and the one who gives all the orders. The idea that it could have happened behind his back seems wildly far fetched.

Joe_ Public

Love to know who leaked that video to the press and what more there might be to come. Every tory politician over next few days, maybe even beyond, is going to be bombarded with questions about this and are going to be made look even more stupid than Raab was over the weekend if they continue to simply obediently toe the line. Might be something to see them squirm anyway, I guess.

Peregrinus

Johnson has caused real anger in the parliamentary party in the past by requiring them, and sometimes even bullying them, to publicly humiliate themselves by defending the indefensible, and by pretending to believe obvious lies from Downing Street. And then, when they've done that, he turns around and abandons whatever it is they were supposed to be defending, or firing whoever it was they were supposed to be protecting, so that all that self-humiliation has been for nothing. It happened with Dominic Cummings. It happened with Owen Paterson. And now we're heading down the same road.

At some point, the parliamentary party will refuse to do this any more. Johnson had been able to command obedience by, e.g., threatening an MP that, if he won't humiliate himself in this way on demand, their constituency will be denied funding from various "levelling up" projects and their chances of re-election will be jeopardised. But that only works if you think Johnson is going to remain in office, and will be able to see that the threat is followed through. And it also only works if you think that publicly aligning yourself with an increasingly despised Johnson is not itself going to be electorally damaging.

Like any confidence trick, in fact, it works as long as everybody thinks it works. We may be reaching the limits of that strategy now.

cml387

No government minister on the interview round this morning so far.

Once senses the wolves are gathering.

pixelburp

It does seem to be going that direction @Peregrinus ; Johnson had one arrow in his quiver for getting the party to bend to his way - and there are only so many times you can throw people aside before you píss off the wrong (collection of) people.

Maybe the question should be: who might be looking at the PM job and thinking "yes please". Brexit remaining a mess beholden to the Ultras, CoVid bursting out again with every new variant and a press eager to overplay its appearance. I know I spit-balled Rishi Sunak but you'd wonder if it's just too soon for Johnson to be ousted?

Peregrinus

Anyone with ambition to lead the party generally needs to be ready to seize the moment when it presents itself. Shafting the sitting leader is never easy, and you don't get to do it at a time chosen for your own convenience. Plus, if a shaftable moment comes along and you don't seize it, some other bastard will.

In similar circumstances in the past challengers have occasionally be able to time things by making a deal with the shaftable PM - an "I'll support you for the time being, if you agree that a year before the next election you'll 'choose' to stand down and back me as your successor" kind of deal. This can work if you're already the front-runner and the incumbent can't be shafted without your support.

But nobody will make a deal with Boris Johnson because, well, you know.

VinLieger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288519#Comment_118288519

Id say Liz Truss would be looking like a very ripe sacrificial Lamb for people like Sunak and Gove

Sam Russell

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118288572#Comment_118288572

That is how Thatcher got the job. She was put up to challenge Heath to force a full scale challenge if she got enough votes. Unfortunately she did much better than expected and won outright without a need for a full scale vote with other challengers. They do not want another run like that with Truss as the stalking horse - she might win.

Itssoeasy

This Christmas party does seem to have struck a nerve unlike other things in the past that should’ve been the final straw weren’t and isn’t going away. We shall see how it goes but this may not just go away.