Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

General British politics discussion thread

Options
1…349350352354355…499

Comments

  • Options
    #10532
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,729 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121376583#Comment_121376583

    I think he has backed himself into a corner now.

    He has always been in a corner. He took the leadership of a sinking ship knowing that they'd be rightfully pummeled in the next elction. However, he's been scraping the bottom of the barrle in terms of poilicies in the hope that some elements of his party's followers still support them.

    He needs to fly those planes or its game over for him and his credibility. (with tory voters - its long gone outside of that group)

    There will be no flights this side of the election. There are just too many legal obstalces.

    But I don't believe that they really want the flights. They just want to be able to say that they're trying to get the flights but petty human rights laws are impeding them.

    As for his credibility - what credibility? He was previously rejected as leader by his party's membership and only chosen this time as the least worst option (which doesn't mean he has credibility). He has done nothing of note that I can offhand think of. Evindenced by Braverman's antics before he took his time in sacking her, he can't even keep his cabinet in check.

    This is possibly his last shot at regaining trust within the Brexiteer factions.

    Those factions have shown themselves to be self-serving and quite often ignorant of facts. They can change their minds on a whim if it suits them. Pandering to that type of group isn't a firm basis for leadership!


    Edit: even Jeremy Hunt won't confirm that there'll be flights...

    https://news.sky.com/story/no-guarantee-flights-to-rwanda-will-take-off-next-year-jeremy-hunt-says-13009626


    Post edited by Seth Brundle on


  • Options
    #10533
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,370 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121373566#Comment_121373566

    Presumably in Britain a general election wouldn't be seen as trivial.



  • Options
    #10534
    Strazdas
    Registered Users Posts: 18,637 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121377816#Comment_121377816

    The general election is presumably in around a year's time - the war and the killings are happening right now. Fair play to those 56 Labour MPs and the SNP for making a stand.



  • Options
    #10535
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,370 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121377833#Comment_121377833

    Nobody is going to remember this vote next month never mind next year. That's the reality of politics.

    Labour will want to change the lives of British citizens in Britain. The needs as bad as they are, of the people in Gaza, comes after their own interests.



  • Options
    #10536
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,511 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121376583#Comment_121376583

    I think you fundamentally misunderstand the objective of the Rwanda policy.

    It's not "stopping the boats" or "regaining control of our borders". We know this because (a) even if implemented, the policy is clearly not going to achieve either of those things, and (b) there are other policies that would advance these objectives which Sunak chooses not to implement.

    So, if that is not the object of the policy, what is the object of the policy?

    In most democracies, most of the time, most voters are mostly concerned with things like prosperity; good government; access to healthcare, education and other public services; quality of life; etc. The Tories have failed miserably on all of these issues and have no credibility on any of them. The object of the Rwanda obsession is to serve as a distraction from these things. The Tories can’t deliver competence or honesty but they can deliver performative cruelty.

    It’s a “dead cat” tactic - it delights the (hopefully small) base of voters that values or admires cruelty, and it distracts the public discourse from issues like competence, honesty, good policy, good administration, etc. Even people who loathe the Rwanda policy are talking about the Rwanda policy and not about those other issues. For the Tories, that's a win.

    For the Rwanda policy to achieve this objective, it doesn't have to be implemented. In fact, it's probably better for the Tories if it isn't. As long as they can position themselves as trying to implement it, and being frustrated by woke leftie transgender elite judges, the public conversation is where they want to be. If the policy is ever actually implemented, it will be as unsuccessful as all their other policies rooted in malice and delusion have been, and it will become one more subject they need to avoid if possible.

    Hence, when Sunak says he has a cunning plan to get the Rwanda policy implemented in early course, you should view that with great scepticism. It's not in his interests to get the Rwanda policy implemented in early course, so why would he plan to do that? He just wants to cosplay someone who wants to do that.

    Post edited by Peregrinus on


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10537
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,481 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Something that I wasn't aware of , but Rwanda currently only have the ability to take a maximum of 200 people under this plan with the potential to ramp up to 1000.

    Setting aside all the other reasons why it's an utterly awful hateful plan, from a purely logistical point of view how is it a "solution" to the issue when 27 thousand crossed the channel last year???

    It an act of performative hate and nothing more.



  • Options
    #10538
    HalloweenJack
    Registered Users Posts: 7,222 ✭✭✭HalloweenJack


    Suella has quadrupled down on her stance:

    "To do this, the Bill must exclude all avenues of legal challenge. The entirety of the Human Rights Act and European Convention on Human Rights, and other relevant international obligations, or legislation, including the Refugee Convention, must be disapplied by way of clear “notwithstanding” clauses."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/11/16/tinkering-boats-suella-braverman-illegal-migrants-rwanda-uk/

    I know she's no longer in Government but there is a significant cohort of the Tories who support her and her 'do whatever you like' approach. This is just an increasingly extreme version of the mentality that brought about Brexit.

    I know the heightened individualism in the UK and the States is something that is praised when done well but I think the problems we are seeing in both countries politically is down to the negative aspects of that individualistic streak.



  • Options
    #10539
    BlueSkyDreams
    Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121378402#Comment_121378402

    I understand your point about distraction techniques to the electorate (especially the hard line tory/brexiteer voters), but if he doesnt enable the planes to fly in the spring, he will still have failed to keep his promise and that will be thrown back in his face.

    So although I agree that talk of Rwanda serves as a distraction from the reality of cost of living crisis etc in the UK, Labour wont be slow to remind the electorate that Rishi "didnt fly the planes to Rwanda like he said he would"

    GB News and Farage will echo the same point, so to will the hard line tories.

    It will absolutley kick Rishi in the face if he doesnt get the planes flying and he has committed to it.

    This is the policy he has chosen to live or die by, politically. (again, from his hardline support perspective)

    Gesturing without intent will not serve him well come election time. He knows this.

    I agree with you that flying the planes to Rwanda wont stop the boats from coming in, but his argument then would be that once the refugees see they will be deported to a safe third country, they will stop coming.

    They wont stop coming, but thats what he will say to his electorate.

    But getting those planes flying to Rwanda is the objective here. Its the political optics for his core hardline support that those first pictures of planes flying out would bring.

    Thats political gold dust to his hard line support. I can see the photos on the front page of the Daily Mail now!

    Just on the legalities of his proposal and the SC decision, I read an interview with a lawyer on the matter and they were saying the key blocker for the SC was that Rwandan management of the Asylum facilities couldnt be trusted, not that Rwanda itself wasnt a safe country.

    So the challenge from the SC wasn't insumountable for the tories.



  • Options
    #10540
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,729 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    You appear to consistently misunderstand the objective. The tories don't particularly want the plan to go ahead. They want some left-wing judge to push it back down and they can then say that they're trying but the loony left are blocking their work. You'll have most of the printed media standing behind them giving out about the left and how everything would be better if the left weren't allowed have a voice. The tories are going to lose a hell of a lot of votes for vcarious reasons - the economy, the environment, the parties while others weren't allowed visit dying relatives. They can however hold onto a few from racist bigots who fawn over their xenophobic crap about immigrants.



  • Options
    #10541
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,713 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379057#Comment_121379057

    It isn't. As many posters have said at this point, the objective of the whole exercise is virtue-signalling. They have a commanding majority in the House of Commons. They can pass whatever legislation is needed to make the thing work tomorrow. They want this to be a stick to beat Labour with because God forbid they come up with actual solutions to the problems facing this country.

    Nobody cares about Rwanda. They care about the NHS, unemployment and the cost of living. Culture war tactics are only useful when a critical mass of the electorate is materially secure which they're not.

    He's decided that his base is to be England's racists. Recent history has shown again and again that moving to the centre wins elections. Well, specifically, the perception of moving to the centre but the point still stands. Sunak himself knows this well but he's now encumbered with a party where anyone with any semblance of sense and principle has either left, retired or been kicked out by Boris Johnson.

    You can claim that Rwanda is the crucial issue all you want but the data shows the opposite:

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/11/14/30390/2


    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10542
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I'm not entirely convinced it matters what the objective is when it comes to analysing whether flights will take off. Whether they truly want them to happen or not, the legal obstacles remain the same and are not easily removed. It would take a very competent government focusing on the problem to achieve the treaties and legislation necessary to enable the flights in the next 6 months and if the current government has demonstrated anything it is that beyond all else they are not very competent.



  • Options
    #10543
    breezy1985
    Registered Users Posts: 25,995 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379191#Comment_121379191

    It's like last year when the massive majority government who are in power for 11 years tried to blame everything on Labour. There has been consistent comments in the media and this thread that it's all Labours fault for not being good enough opposition.

    I heard Sunak's "government of change" speech again a few days ago and it must be one of the most pathetic I have ever heard from a PM. Kept blaming government of the past 20 years in a sad attempt to make it sound like labours fault and trying to erase the fact he was chancellor to one of the worst PMs in those 20 years.



  • Options
    #10544
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,713 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379242#Comment_121379242

    Agree on both points.

    I've no idea why Sunak doesn't just quite and go work for Elon like he so dearly wants to.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #10545
    BlueSkyDreams
    Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379191#Comment_121379191

    I didnt say it was the highest priority issue for the Tories.

    We werent discussing Tory priorities.

    The subject was specifically whether or not Rishi would be able to get past the Supreme Court decision to block the asylum applicants being sent to Rwanda.

    Sunak has made Rwanda a crucial issue for his premiership and credibility, by promising to get the planes in the air, following the judgement of the Supreme Court.



  • Options
    #10546
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,713 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379496#Comment_121379496

    He hasn't. He's cynically exploiting desperate human beings to try and shore up the weak position he manoeuvered himself into. That's all this is.

    The Supreme Court is a non-argument. All it does is enforce the law. That's it. With his majority, Sunak could remove all legal obstacles in weeks if he so chose. No Tory would vote against it and Labour are still weak from the 2019 result.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #10547
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379570#Comment_121379570

    This is not entirely true as it would require a formal treaty with Rwanda as opposed to ab MoU. But one would not think that would be an insurmountable object.

    He would struggle massively in the Lords also.



  • Options
    #10548
    CelticRambler
    Registered Users Posts: 6,827 ✭✭✭CelticRambler


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121378744#Comment_121378744

    If you weren't aware of that 200-person ceiling, you probably also weren't aware that the agreement provides for Rwanda to send an equal or greater number of migrants they don't want to the UK.



  • Options
    #10549
    BlueSkyDreams
    Registered Users Posts: 3,453 ✭✭✭BlueSkyDreams


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379570#Comment_121379570

    So do you think he will legislate to get around the SC and will he fly those planes?



  • Options
    #10550
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,713 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Good news:

    https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1725457435232514231
    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379748#Comment_121379748

    No. He needs to the small boats to stay on the Mail and Express front pages.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Options
    #10551
    Ahwell
    Registered Users Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121379748#Comment_121379748

    It’s irrelevant. Even if there was time to ram the legislation through the House of Lords, which is very doubtful - there would be legal challenges. Which will tie this up well beyond the next election.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10552
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,729 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    In relation to the Tory plan for Rwanda, this is the kind of person they're targetting...

    https://twitter.com/bmay/status/1725260525565514144

    "The drownings are terrible but..."


    On a more light hearted note, I'm reminded of the Brexiteer suggestion of a technological solution which would help monitor the border between ROI & NI...

    https://twitter.com/implausibleblog/status/1725262353711685670


  • Options
    #10553
    breezy1985
    Registered Users Posts: 25,995 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121380596#Comment_121380596

    So are the French gonna "shoot down" every inflatable boat with drones ?

    What about all the kids playing at the beach. Are they gonna be stopped as potential refugees to the UK 🤣



  • Options
    #10554
    kirk.
    Registered Users Posts: 4,957 ✭✭✭kirk.


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121378402#Comment_121378402

    Are you sure the Rwanda policy wouldn't work

    If they started flying migrants en masse to Rwanda and left them stranded there

    I was thinking it would act as a deterrent

    Although they will simply find another way into the country



  • Options
    #10555
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,474 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121380596#Comment_121380596

    And that target has value: she's older looking, ergo, she is more likely to vote. Yes it's ageist on my part and I accept that. I think it's fair to say the vast majority are appalled by the Tories and cheered the scuttling of the Rwanda flights ... but that clip highlighted that the actions would have supporters & they're the ones voting.



  • Options
    #10556
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,481 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121380701#Comment_121380701

    Rwanda have only agreed to take 200 people.

    So , after about a week the "deterrent" bit kinda stops.

    It's pointless performance art.



  • Options
    #10557
    Ahwell
    Registered Users Posts: 1,808 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121380701#Comment_121380701

    There was never going to be a mass of people being sent to Rwanda. The agreement was for around 200 a year, with asylum seekers from Rwanda also being sent to UK. I really doubt that someone prepared to risk crossing the channel in a small boat, would be put off by the odds of 225/1 of being one of the ones sent to Rwanda.



  • Options
    #10558
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,729 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    According to this tweet, Braverman is proposing that anyone due to be shipped to Rwanda (or anyone on their behalf) would not be able to mount a legal challenge. Apparently these are the five tests she has written in her Telegraph piece today.

    image.png

    Were it to come into effect, I can easily see this being used as a tool to remove "troublesome" political opponents



  • Options
    #10559
    Podge_irl
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 26,886 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Politicians don't just get to decide what can and cannot be challenged in court.



  • Options
    #10560
    breezy1985
    Registered Users Posts: 25,995 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121381536#Comment_121381536

    She seems to have just decided fuk it and gone full Trump.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #10561
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 38,713 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121381576#Comment_121381576

    I'd say it's nothing more than good old fashioned treachery. Thatcher was much the same post-defenestration.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



Advertisement