Conservative party/opposition watch

[Mark]

& Steve Barclay becomes the 10th Environment Secretary since 2010, so just over a year each....
And there's approx. 1 year to the next election...., so doubt he'll be getting much done either...
Maybe that's the real plan ?

UK environment secretary took donation from funder of climate sceptic thinktank:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -thinktank

Sounds like BAU....

[UndercoverElephant]

& Steve Barclay becomes the 10th Environment Secretary since 2010, so just over a year each....
And there's approx. 1 year to the next election...., so doubt he'll be getting much done either...
Maybe that's the real plan ?

UK environment secretary took donation from funder of climate sceptic thinktank:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -thinktank

Sounds like BAU....

I can't stand Steve Barclay. He's one of those politicians who make me feel like punching the TV whenever they start talking. He has no redeeming qualities.

[Mark]

Don't they all....., did you see Jacob Rees-Mogg smarming on Question Time last week...??
But these guys consistently get elected...

[Potemkin Villager]

Yep I blame the voters myself.

[Default0ptions]

Yep I blame the voters myself.

“No matter who you vote for the government always gets in”

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=f-pT-w7qFl4

[Mark]

Yep I blame the voters myself.

With an unelected Foreign Secretary, an unelected Head of State, an unelected House of Lords and practically an unelected Prime Minister....??
Most of our 'establishment' hasn't been voted for....

[Ralphw2]

Jenrick resigns as immigration minister in opposition to Sunak's proposed new Rwanda policy which he views as inadequate. There is a risk the Bill could be voted down by Tory right wing rebels, and even talk of making it a confidence vote in the government itself. The right wing reposte was we would support a government confidence vote and immediately declare no confidence in Sunak.

[clv101]

Surely there's no the we can face another Tory leadership contest - Sunak would be better to call a snap election if it looked like he was going to be booted out.

[UndercoverElephant]

Really does look like everything is falling apart for the tories now. It's total chaos, and Sunak does not look like he is able to regain control of the situation.

Surely there's no the we can face another Tory leadership contest - Sunak would be better to call a snap election if it looked like he was going to be booted out.

Why would he do that, when the result would be almost guaranteed to wipe out the tories in parliament?

I have heard numerous people rule out the possibility of another leadership contest before the election, but I personally believe it is still possible. And Braverman may yet win it. Right now, she's the only one I believe on the topic of immigration -- like her or loathe her, she does at least say what she thinks.

[UndercoverElephant]

So.....

The proposed emergency bill over-rides the court's power to decide that the Rwandan scheme breaks international law. The Rwandan government has said it will pull out (presumably keeping £150m) if the UK breaks international law. So if the legislation passes then the scheme will collapse, and Sunak cannot blame the court.

If it doesn't pass then Sunak is politically forced into calling a general election even though he is not constitutionally required to (unless he makes it a confidence vote). Not calling a GE in those circumstances just makes him look cowardly, weak and strategically insane, because he's going to have to hold an election pretty soon anyway.

Is that right?

If so, then all possible outcomes now lead to a general election where the tories are obliterated. The only way they can avoid that outcome is if planes start heading for Rwanda beforehand, and that now looks impossible.

[Default0ptions]

So, given that the UK can’t possibly accommodate every one in the world who wants to come here - what IS the solution to the small boat problem?

[clv101]

The small boat problem isn't really a problem - except for the poor folk who actually lose their lives. The reason UK immigration is a record high is a proactive political choice by this tory government. The largest numbers of immigrants are coming from India, China (a lot from Hong Kong), Nigeria, Pakistan and Ukraine. ~None of them came on small boats. They came on official visas, the majority to work in health and social care, as students (80% return within 5 yrs) or via humanitarian routes (most of Hong Kong and Ukraine).

Small boat crossings this year are of the order of 20k - compared to net migration of 672,000 - around 3%.

Anyone who thinks our migration problem is small boats and that Rwanda is in any way a solution has been had. The government (and its media) is gaslighting us.

The reason migration is 672,000 and not more like 200k is due to decisions this government has made about who to give visas to (and god knows we need all those heath and care workers, and the foreign students are bankrolling the universities) not due to asylum seekers on small boats... while I'm here I could also mention how the asylum problem itself is largely manufactured as there is no reason we couldn't be processing claims in weeks and dealing with the results accordingly - there is no reason folk need to be stuck in hotels for years.

The whole situation is politically manufactured and it stinks.

[Ralphw2]

I will add that we have just paid Rwanda <i>another</i>100 million pounds just to not walk away from the deal. That is a quarter billion up front for a scheme just to provide the Tory party with a smoke screen and zero chance of ever happening. Yet the government is refusing to pay people compensation who are dying from contaminated blood transfusions 30 years ago.

[UndercoverElephant]

The small boat problem isn't really a problem - except for the poor folk who actually lose their lives. The reason UK immigration is a record high is a proactive political choice by this tory government.

I think that is a false dichotomy. Both are serious problems. It is true that the government would prefer to focus on the boats, even though it is both numerically the smaller problem, and legally harder to solve, because the only positive reason for wanting the boats to keep coming is humanitarian while the "legal migration" situation is directly connected to shortages of labour in the NHS, care and other sectors, and this government does not want to address those shortages in other ways (eg pay nurses more). The students are irrelevant IMO, precisely because the vast majority will not stay here.

The boats are more important strategically and long-term though, because (as we are all very much aware) it is part of a problem is only going to get bigger, globally, and there are currently huge legal-political-moral obstacles to solving it. There is no purely internal "nice" way to deal with it (like paying nurses more).

Having said all that, there is also a long-term, strategic-demographic problem regarding the NHS. Who is going to pay to look after the boomers? The NHS will eventually swallow the entire national budget unless decisions are taken to stop trying to keep so many old people alive when they have seriously degrading quality of life. Unlike the boats, that debate hasn't even started yet.

while I'm here I could also mention how the asylum problem itself is largely manufactured as there is no reason we couldn't be processing claims in weeks and dealing with the results accordingly - there is no reason folk need to be stuck in hotels for years.

The whole situation is politically manufactured and it stinks.

If that is true then it is indeed scandalous. I am not sure how to determine whether or not it is actually true though. The government has claimed that it is trying to fix this.

I am skeptical that the situation is politically manufactured. I suspect it is more a case of multiple cock-ups and hidden underlying priorities. The political will to get immigration down takes second place to trying to keep the economy growing (for example).

Also, I don't think the government actually needs to whip up hostility to people arriving in boats. It is human nature, and part of a widespread and largely unacknowledged response to overpopulation and scarcity of housing and other essential resources. There are too many people here already, and even though we're not allowed to talk about it, people instinctively understand it.

[UndercoverElephant]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67656220

The UK has given Rwanda a further £100m this year as part of its deal to relocate asylum seekers there.

The payment was made in April, the Home Office's top civil servant said in a letter to MPs, after £140m had already been sent to the African nation.

Sir Matthew Rycroft said another payment of £50m was expected next year.

Politically, this is about as damaging as it gets. It looks like we're heading for a situation where the Rwanda deal falls apart without a single asylum seeker ending up in Rwanda, and yet the government has spent £290m paying Rwanda to pretend the deal was going to happen. The UK is in the worst financial situation it has been since the 1950s and simply cannot afford to waste that sort of money on empty political stunts. That is partly why it is important that flights begin before the election. Labour couldn't have asked for a better electoral gift -- it doesn't matter where you stand on immigration itself, the level of mismanagement and money-wasting is mind-blowing and it is very hard to see what defence or excuse the tories can come up with. At the moment they are trying to blame the courts, but if the UK withdraws from international treaties and Rwanda walks away from the deal because it is illegal then the tories will have run out of other people to blame.