The amount of people cheering this bill makes me ashamed to be english...because the vast majority of the cheering seem to be english. I hope you're right about the delays but the tories won't care too much as long as the numbers crossing go down and they hail this is a huge success and get more votes.
This is the plan. They know that the Rwanda plan is quietly popular with many of the types of people who voted leave. People who quietly hold racist and anti immigrant views who don't shout loudly about them but make up a significant number of the population. And they know that Labour will almost certainly scrap it after coming into power, which will annoy a lot of these people. Illegal immigration numbers are likely to continue to rise over the next few years, it's just inevitable with the smuggling gangs getting ever more organised, well resourced and well equipped and the push pull factors that make migrants leave in the first place are only likely to get stronger. So this will form one of the Tories lines of attack over the coming years, 'you overturned our strong plan to fight back against illegal immigration and have caused immigration numbers to skyrocket as a result. This is your fault, if you'd left the Rwanda plan in place and built on it then this wouldn't have happened'. He wants to leave Labour with a big, controversial decision to make early in their parliament which they can then hold against them in opposition.
But it isn't a strong plan at all. It's a gimmick, as apparently recognised by Sunak himself when he was Chancellor, that will only deal with a relatively small number of people at substantial cost, assuming that any flights ever take off with asylum claimants on board rather than Home Secretaries. He may finally have got his bill through Parliament late last night, but I still don't see any way that he can meet his pledge for planes to be taking off within 10-12 weeks given the near inevitability of legal challenges. I also don't see any evidence to support the notion that this will act as a deterrent. If the risk of the kind of horror that has once again occurred in the Channel today isn't a deterrent, why should this be? I agree that the problem isn't going to go away any time soon and we should also be mindful of the possibility that it could become an even greater challenge because of factors such as climate change. But the problem with this government is that its apparent desire to appear tough has rendered it incapable of coming up with a serious plan and has led it to adopt blunt instrument tactics that will most likely end up doing more harm than good. The recent changes to legal migration rules, ignoring the serious and enduring need for people to come and work in key sectors, amply demonstrate that. So do the hundreds of millions spent on the Rwanda plan so far.
I don't think that's possible, the EU as a whole have their own issues and (understandably) aren't too arsed about ours now we're outside their club.
I think the current relationship is all because the Tory melodrama of 2016-2020 (and beyond really) and I do think a new government would/should somewhat reset that.
I agree, I'm hopeful that once this bunch of charlatans are out on their collective ear the new government will be looked upon more sympathetically in Brussels. But I won't hold my breath.
It's not a strong plan at all. But I think in their desperation it's the only plan they have. Force Labour to scrap it soon after being elected and then try to blame them for the inevitable rise in immigration which is going to happen anyway regardless of what anyone does. And hope the public are stupid enough to buy it.
I think this is almost certain, the Telegraph had an article about the EU already approaching Labour about a reciprocated freedom of movement deal for 18-30 year olds. Labour apparently rejected it but it wouldn't surprise me at all if that is just to avoid a load of mudslinging from the right wing press in the run up to the election.
Rayner rinsed Dowden at DPMQs today. The Tories are apparently seething because she referred to Sunak as a 'pint sized loser'.
Tbf my 8 year old would beat Dowden in a battle of wits. The bloke's a massive non entity, speaks volumes about the paucity of the parliamentary Tory party that someone of his mediocre ability has risen to the post of deputy PM.
Irony of the "Rwanda bill" is that there's a article 19 in it that says the for each person sent via flights the uk must accept refugees the other way. https://assets.publishing.service.g...glish_-_Formatted__5_Dec_23__-_UK_VERSION.pdf
the ones who actually researched the bill instead of relying on the mail to give the information would've been very aware of this reciprocal deal. There's even more than favours the rwandans over us in this deal (apart from the money of course) but the knuckle draggers dont care as long as the planes take these 'illegals' away.
Possibly, but the immigrants arriving from Rwanda won't have come via "the boats" so it doesn't count.
My current MP (Dr. Dan Poulter) has defected to Labour. Was only a few weeks ago we had some local Tories knocking on my door on his behalf. Going to be some quite upset locals. We are very deep in safe Conservative seat country and it's only becoming more rural at the next election with boundary shifts so would be a shock if it doesn't revert back. .
Any chance the boundary changes you are hinting at mean he will chance to a different constituency with part of the voting block and expect to be an mp again. What was his voting on the usual topics like human trafficking refugees to Rwanda or how awesome boris was?
Poulter voted for just about every lowlife Tory policy there's been over the last 10 years, so why he's changed now I have no idea. According to Wes Streeting on Kuenssberg yesterday morning Poulter is standing down at the next election anyway . . .
