Forum menu
Crucially though, the ones it is relevant to (wealthy homeowners) are more likely to vote Tory.
as with appointing Cameron
they are focusing on the blue wall Surrey voters
Interesting how household utility costs are used within the inflation calculator – unlike say groceries they don’t actually look at what we spend, and how much it’s gone up/down etc but use a theoretical number based on the Price Cap.
They Are Lying To You About UK Inflation – YouTube
That vids really interesting..and not very good news on the impending mortgage crisis.
Still when that problem arises he’ll be long gone to sunny cal.
as with appointing anointing Cameron 🙂
TBH Brexit has really accelerated the reality dysfunction, in my wildest dreams as he sauntered off stage right humming to board the gravy boat of the after dinner speaking circuit I didn’t think we’d be hearing from him again.
If there is a continued switch in support away from tories to reform it’s entirely possible that the LibDems will form the opposition; quite a thought.
Dream on. The saying that a Donkey with a blue rosette could win many seats is partially true, any idiot with the blue rosette will get in, in roughly 170 seats. The Lib-dems will be lucky to get 50 seats, even with a Tory collapse. It is the middle ground, as usual, which Labour have to win, the 250 or so seats where the vote could go either way. It’s looking like 100 of those seats are already going Labours way, so it’s a dogfight over around 150 seats to get a majority, get 50 of those, and Labour are in.
It seems like they’re planning to devote more energy and time sorting out Rwanda’s problems than our own over the next six months.
'Development' Money already sent to Rwanda for scheme that will probably never happen - £140m
Money pledged for the NHS to alleviate winter pressures (which cause actual excess deaths) - £200m
That £140m would have paid for a massive acceleration in processing of asylum applications, they could have dealt with the backlog. It is entirely a manufactured problem, made worse by the totemic idiocy of not wanting to cooperate with EU countries to curb the people trafficking issue.
If there is a continued switch in support away from tories to reform
I still don't trust Reform not to pull their candidates in blue marginals, whatever they've said on the matter.
Development’ Money already sent to Rwanda for scheme that will probably never happen – £140m
I wonder what the governments (and therefore ‘our’) legal bill is for all this Rwanda nonsense, so far? Surely we must be able to add on at least the same again?
Then there’s all the expense of that daft barge
With those two ridiculous white elephants they must have seen off a couple of billion by now? And for what? Housing a few hundred asylum seekers?
What’s the present backlog of claims? 170,000? It’s almost as if they’re deliberately avoiding addressing the real issue, no doubt as that would require some actual ideas and effort, and are just looking for headline-grabbing distractions instead
We're potentially over a year away from a general election, so folk thinking the tories will call one early aren't understanding politics!
The big issue for me just now is that the tories are moving away from the hard right, with minimal pushback so far, they have a year to get their house in order, they have several carrots that they'll be feeding the population between now and the general election, and as always, the tories have a strong backbone of voters, so only have to sway those voters who have voted tory in the past back into the fold to get a hung parliament, or potentially win.
Folk who think the next GE is a foregone conclusion forget the population have short term memories, and with a lot of influences aimed at causing the labour party to implode, it's going to be a long 12 months, forget about the polls just now, nobody cares about that, it's the polls in the final month, and the actual final push that matters more.
Dream on
My comment was clearly hypothetical and qualified by 'If'.
The wider post was, as stated, based on playing with the electoral calculus tool which only provides a snap shot in time and is not a reflection of my view.
The big issue for me just now is that the tories are moving away from the hard right, with minimal pushback so far
Well that’s what they’d like everyone to think, but it takes more than sacking Cruella and appointing a more remainy foreign secretary to move towards the centre
Sunaks views aren’t that different from Cruellas, he just hid behind her willingness to voice them
Yesterday he stood at a lectern, flanked by lots of flags and announced ‘emergency legislation’ which will probably mean the suspension or tearing up of legally binding international treaties. Why? So he can deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, without having to comply with those pesky laws that apply to the rest of us. He’s making a statement that he and his government are above the law and can effectively do what the hell they like, without legal constraint
That’s pretty far right, by any metric.
Lord Sumption, a former supreme court judge, has dismissed the notion that legislation like this would make any difference. He told the News at 10 last night:
<br />I have never heard of them trying to change the facts, by law. For as long as black isn’t white, the business of passing acts of parliament to say that it is profoundly discreditable.
<br />I have never heard of a situation in which parliament intervenes to declare the facts – the safety or unsafety of Rwanda – to change the facts from those which have been declared by the courts to be correct.
The courts have perused hundreds of pages of documents to arrive at this conclusion. For parliament simply to say the facts are different would be constitutionally really quite extraordinary.
They’re just going to open up a can of worms and mire themselves deeper in a legal quagmire that they can’t ‘win’
Honest Bob Jenrick was funny on Newsnight last night. He was trying to say that they knew this was coming and have had this planned for months. Yeah, right. We all know, not least from Cruellas resignation huff, that there was no Plan B and Rishi cooked this up on the back of a fag packet yesterday afternoon. It’s going to actually be funny watching them trying to go to war with the legal establishment on the strength of that
The really weird thing about all this is the fact they've known for at least a couple of years now that they won't be able to send people to Rwanda, make them apply for asylum there and wash their hands. Their own lawyers would've told them that, and the Appeals Court told them that. All this time they could've developed a new plan has been wasted while they continue to spin (lie) about how they'll go ahead and do this, when they know full well that all the lanes to achieve this are now closed (and in reality have been from the get-go) But rather than face their own supporters with the reality of an unworkable plan, we're now here.
I didn't think jenrick was funny on Newsnight - he was pathetic and duplicitous.
So that nice mr sunak says work on Plan B has been ongoing for some time and you, mr jenrick, say you were doing that with braverman.
That being the case, why did she say there was no Plan B?
Illegal migrants, Rwanda, more waffle and no answer.
This has nothing to do with fixing the asylum/small boats problem. It's a rallying cry for their hard of thinking supporters.
If they give up this dog whistle, they'll have to find another marginalised group to blame their failures on.
I didn’t think jenrick was funny on Newsnight – he was pathetic and duplicitous.
He's another one like Johnson, where you know that they're lying because their lips move.
When I said it was funny, I mean watching Victoria Derbyshire tear him a new one and leave him looking like an absolute idiot
We all know that there is no 'Plan B'. They're literally making it up as they go along. Not something that is generally done by the legal establishment, who tend to deal in certainties rather than winging it and hoping for the best. I wonder who's going to come out on top of the fight that Rishi is now picking
I'm sure they'll dial the 'Enemies of the People' rhetoric up to the max
If they give up this dog whistle, they’ll have to find another marginalised group to blame their failures on.
I await the war on cyclists. Want to bet compulsory helmets, number plates and insurance gets raised by someone?
The really weird thing about all this is the fact they’ve known for at least a couple of years now that they won’t be able to send people to Rwanda,
Its almost like a creating a culture war was the entire plan all along. It was never designed to work only to generate headlines. The courts knocking this back is actually a win for the government.
But rather than face their own supporters with the reality of an unworkable plan, we’re now here.
Its working perfectly well although it does depend on its meant to achieve.
Currently they get to skim lots of taxpayers money off for housing the asylum seekers in hotels etc to various well connected people and get to blame the courts and the EU ECHR (yes I know entirely separate...).
I await the war on cyclists. Want to bet compulsory helmets, number plates and insurance gets raised by someone?
That gets raised fairly regularly. It's a very reliable Dead Cat when you want the media to generate its own screaming headlines and opinion columns and phone ins while ignoring the latest ****up in whatever Government department has ****ed up this time.
They've already installed an anti-woke minister, that'll be the next target.
I worry that this government, and Russia and Elon Musk, have much darker intentions than a war on cyclists or bureaucrats or looney left teachers. I know this gets said all the time - but Italy, France, Poland, the US and now the UK all have fascist movements operating in the mainstream space.
Ahem, don't forget the rise of the Swedish Democrats over here. They've been trying (and succeeding) to pull strings within the government here. They are a minor partner in the governing coalition, but with a lot of power because of the relative weakness of Ulf Kristersson and his party without them. Hell, they were the third largest party in my local area at the last election ( https://valresultat.svt.se/2022/kommunval-03800344-balinge-vastra-tatort.html) in an area that is close to Stockholm with a large university full of international students and educated people. As a foreigner, that result does not make me happy, but I got a huge kick out of seeing the helpers at my local polling station being new citizens from Somalia and Singapore.
Anyway, this is the danger... It's not taking over, it's having enough sway over a more moderate core that is deperate for power that they influence policy to be more extreme. Nutcase Republicans _can_ and have influenced more moderate decisions. ERG have done it in the UK, SD do the same here. I just hope that people start seeing all of them for what they are and, eventually, call them on their bullshit before their ideals become [more] mainstream.
I await the war on cyclists. Want to bet compulsory helmets, number plates and insurance gets raised by someone?
I thought the same this morning.
Oh look, an otter! will be deployed as a distraction soon.
Its a year old but the video is still relevant!
Crikey, ex-PM David Cameron as UK Foreign Secretary ... FFS!
Has UK started to recycle the politicians? The bloke is in already in "sunset" heading toward retirement and they got him back.
Don't they know this is Not LOTR return of the "king" and we are not in the movie set?
I ain't voting for a "recycling" (politicians especially) that I am sure.
They knew they'd lose, probably betting on it. It was only 200 a year sent to Ruanda so even the far right voters would have gone 'hold on, we spent £140m to send a planes worth 'home'?".
Next plan is no doubt to play along with the lie they are going to leave x, y and z, change our laws to allow it etc etc- House of Lords would knock all that back and iirc Sunak couldn't force it through as last session of parliament before election. Milk that, tell the punters that voting us back in will definitely mean it will happen and hope the mugs all fall for it again.
Two people who could be described as experts - boo, hiss - were interviewed separately on radio today.
Jonathan Lord Sumption ex Supreme Court judge and Chris Cole a solicitor who specialises in 'complex asylum and human rights cases' have both said...it won't happen.
I know most (all?) people posting to the thread are saying that a Rwanda treaty is a non-starter but I doubt if they have comparable practical and judicial experience.
Clearly, a half-way competent administration would commission in-depth legal advice before going public.
This is, IMO, a case of a government believing it's own publicity.
In other news, Ree-Smug is on QT tonight; expect drivel.
In other news, Ree-Smug is on QT tonight; expect drivel.<br /><br />
I can only hope someone walks out of the audience and knocks that put on accent out of him
Clearly, a half-way competent administration would commission in-depth legal advice before going public.
It depends why you are doing it though?
The current plan isnt a bad one so long as you lack any morals and also any useful ideas about how to address the problem. Getting into a fight with the courts for years allows you to say "well this plan was great but it was stopped by them" (them and they always being a good way of impersonalising whoever you dislike) whilst funnelling lots of cash to your friends (that 6 million a day cost is going to be padding some bank accounts nicely) as opposed to having to shrug and go "nahhhh out of ideas. I reckon its time for someone else to try. I cant think of anything which can enrich the donors since slavery is banned".
So, according to Ian Dunt (who knows a bit about this stuff), unless Sunak gets his emergency legislation into the commons today, it can't be passed before the election
The Parliament Act allows a government to ignore Lords opposition if a bill has been passed by the Commons in two successive sessions. There's also one other element. It has to be sent to the Lords one month before the end of the session. It's all needlessly complicated - welcome to the exciting world of parliamentary rules - but what it adds up to is that the Lords can only delay a bill for 13 months. They can't kill it.
So here's a fascinating bit of electoral maths. The latest that parliament can dissolve for the next election is December 17th 2024. So if this legislation was going to be passed in time for the election, it would have to go to the Lords no later than November 17th 2024. And according to the Parliament Act timescales, that means that it would need to have its first reading in the Commons Chamber on November 17th 2023.
And that's… Well, that's today. Unless they get that thing into the Chamber sometime in the next few hours, they're out of time and the Lords has the upper hand.
(Unless, of course, they follow Braverman's instructions and make MPs sit during Christmas recess)
I get the impression that they are starting to get ready to fight the next election on the 'will of the people' (it isn't) to breach people's human rights being thwarted by sinister unelected lefty judges and other 'elites'
2019 was a 'Get Brexit Done' election, turned out well for them, perhaps they think that this is the issue to harness the gammonrage in 2024? When it becomes obvious that Sunak is out of time for plan B, he'll call an election as a mini-referendum on this issue and this issue alone.
'We can't even make our own laws! Defeat the Corbynistas/Europe etc! Take Back Control!'
It's clearer every day that there is no chance for this legislation - they need the fig-leaf of the new 'Rwanda Treaty' to be in place before they try to enact a law to say the place is safe. And god knows what Rwanda will try to extract in return for this.
Its fairly obvious to everyone now that the whole Rwanda scheme has been, and still is, just an enormous dead cat.
Cruella herself is now saying (as if its nothing to do with her!) that they all knew it was a non-starter unless they were prepared to leave the ECHR and rip up international countless international treaties and obligations.
The only people seriously advocating doing that are the real looney tunes and if it was feasible to do, which it isn't, it would leave us as international pariahs akin to Russia
Its all just letting the racists know that they're on their side. Then they'll shrug and say 'we really, really, really wanted to do it, honest, but they wouldn't let us. Oh well...'
But, lest we forget; it was Boris and Goves similar posturing in order to heroically lose that delivered us Brexit. Its a very, very dangerous game that they're playing
they need the fig-leaf of the new ‘Rwanda Treaty’ to be in place before they try to enact a law to say the place is safe.
As lots of knowledgable legal people have said, courts work on evidence. The government passing a law saying black is white won't stand up in a court case saying that black is white, when all the evidence is to the contrary
Ultimately it won't make a blind bit of difference in front of a judge, but then it was never meant to. Its being done for purely divisive political purposes and unfortunately I think @martinhutch is probably bang on with that summary of their motivations. They really are horrible bastards who will resort to anything to cling on to power and **** the consequences!
Sunak saying on TV that they cant get the new laws through to enable the Rwanda scheme... cos. Labour. Wtaf??
Haven't the Tories got a majority meaning they don't need Labour to comply?
They might just be desperate enough to call an election near the end of next summer and base it on "Labour stopping us, sovrinty, will of the peeeple and stuffs! Get Rwanda Done!"
I don't see it working but it would make for a proper nasty election. I can see another attack on an MP or something similar happening.
MoreCashThanDash
If they give up this dog whistle, they’ll have to find another marginalised group to blame their failures on
It's so odd isn't it? This marginalised group have 2 dedicated news channels just for them, the majority of the press and a government basing it's whole policy on them as Rome burns.
The poor little disenfranchised darlings. Not living their best life due to wokery and rubber dinghies. Absolute f*****s.
I think we can do away with any notion that Sunak is any different from Cruella.
He's worse!
She served her purpose as his nasty fig-leaf, but now its clear to see that she was simply doing his bidding and he's the really nasty one. I think this is the sign of things to come. I don't think there are any limits to what he'll stoop to now. Any election campaign will be based on pure nastiness, racism and division.
Sunak saying on TV that they cant get the new laws through to enable the Rwanda scheme… cos. Labour. Wtaf??
That's the entire point of it.
They're doing their best to persuade us that our life is rubbish, not because of 13 years of Tory smash-n-grab plundering the nation's resources, but because immigrants are coming over here, stealing our jobs and also living off benefits at the same time. And probably raping and pillaging too. They do that you know.
Life could be WONDERFUL for all us good hard-working, tax-paying BRITISH folk if They (the immigrants and foreigners) weren't coming over here. So we need to Stop The Boats and also get rid of the immigrants that are here to some holiday camp in Rwanda (which is both a lovely safe place and a total shithole, the prospect of ending up there being a deterrent to them coming by Boat in the first place).
However the good and well-meaning Government can't actually do any of this because Labour / the courts / the EU / the ECHR / the leftie liberal woke lawyers. Life would be WONDERFUL if it wasn't for them. We'd have done everything we promised if it wasn't for them.
Vote Tory to get rid of the leftie liberal wokeism.
That's all it is. A nasty little culture war, it's all they have left. Literally the only thing "left" about an otherwise far-right Government.
The only people seriously advocating doing that are the real looney tunes
This is the logical next step of Brexit though, and the same folks are talking up leaving these international treaties and remodelling the UK as some mythical "swashbuckling" trading nation of their fantasies. These folks spend way too much time in the Carlton Club talking to each other in the same way that a generation ago the members of the Clermont Club did the same thing to British Industry under Margret Thatcher*.
* see Adam Curtis documentary The Mayfair Set
Its astonishing how far the tentacles of this go back
Sunak saying on TV that they cant get the new laws through to enable the Rwanda scheme… cos. Labour. Wtaf??
Haven’t the Tories got a majority meaning they don’t need Labour to comply?
They might just be desperate enough to call an election near the end of next summer and base it on “Labour stopping us, sovrinty, will of the peeeple and stuffs! Get Rwanda Done!”
I don’t see it working but it would make for a proper nasty election. I can see another attack on an MP or something similar happening.
My only worry is if the pushback against the nasty narrative from Labour is as weak as SKS has been over calling for a ceasefire, and he ends up prioritising "looking like a PM in waiting" and allowing the appearance of a split in his own party rather than offering something substantially different to Lil' Rishi and chums.
The simple thing Labour need to do here is to Vow to actually deal with the Asylum backlog, and to "Stop the Boats" by setting up a means for asylum applications to be made from Calais, circumventing the need for people smugglers and dinghys.
When they're challenged on costings and VFM simply point to the Bibby Stockholm, Asylum hotels, the (mounting) Legal bill for Rwanda and now the costs of propping up a Rwandan detention centre with UK staff and money...
Tot that lot up and you have your budget, then point out that devising new and spiteful ways to treat vulnerable foreigners has already been very expensive and fruitless, make the policy to stop pissing public money at culture war projects and actually tackle the issues directly...
Sunak saying on TV that they cant get the new laws through to enable the Rwanda scheme… cos. Labour. Wtaf??
Haven’t the Tories got a majority meaning they don’t need Labour to comply?
I didn't see Sunak say that but I can only assume that he was referring to the House of Lords.
Emergency legislation simply refers to the ability of the government to fast track laws in the event of a national emergency such, as the covid pandemic. The government can do this because they set the timetable for the House of Commons.
However they don't set the timetable for the House of Lords, the Lords set their own timetable. It remains to be seen whether the House of Lords will consider that the issue of desperate people arriving in small boats amounts to a national emergency.
It would appear that quite a few sitting in the House of Lords aren't over impressed with the idea of deporting people to a country that the Supreme Court has deemed unsafe, and not just Labour Lords and crossbenchers but also Tory Lords.
Although Sunak will obviously blame Labour.