Continuation General UK Politics V Suella Strikes Back

[Andy_Ross]

When parliamentarians and the Deputy Chairman of the ruling party say ‘ignore the law’ and that judges are ‘enemies of the people’ you are on a very slippery slope.

[jimbob]

From Grumble on Scrutable

https://x.com/Samfr/status/1724472099790573950?s=20

Originally Posted by Sam Freedman

@Samfr
The best bit in Braverman's letter is where she says she was prepared to accept Sunak despite him having no public mandate as long as he agreed to her secret deal the public didn't even know about.

[jeremyp]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

New polling today from Savanta shows Labour lead Conservatives by 18 points

Labour 46% (+1)
Conservative 28% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 10% (-1)
Reform UK 6% (+1)
Green 4% (+1)
SNP 2% (=)


Seems his reshuffle hasn't had the desired effect.

It's having the effect that I desire.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

When parliamentarians and the Deputy Chairman of the ruling party say ‘ignore the law’ and that judges are ‘enemies of the people’ you are on a very slippery slope.

Already tried by Johnson in 2019

[jeremyp]

Originally Posted by GlennB

I thought it was Johnson + Patel's baby?

Yes it was.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61097114

But Braverman is very much the adoptive mother.

[Worm]

Originally Posted by Darat

Please, please - not illegal immigrants or immigrants - asylum seekers. Asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants.

Quite right. I sit corrected.

[Pixel42]

Originally Posted by Worm

Quite right. I sit corrected.

Likewise. I copied the wording from the "breaking news" banner on the BBC news site, but they too seem to have now corrected it.

[Andy_Ross]

I'm impressed by the way “actions we have taken” have brought down the USA and Germany’s inflation rates as well as the UK.

[The Don]

Typical that rather than reconsidering an illegal policy, they're looking to change, or break, the law

[Darat]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

I'm impressed by the way “actions we have taken” have brought down the USA and Germany’s inflation rates as well as the UK.

The reason the government chose this month for meeting their "halving the inflation rate" target was they knew last year's energy increases would fall out of the statistics.

[Nessie]

I want a policy that sends Tories to Rwanda.

[Andy_Ross]

The new Home Secretary says

Quote:

We’ve reduced small boat crossings by a third.
But we won’t stop there.
This government is prepared to do whatever it takes to stop the boats.

Should someone tell him that winter storms might have something to do with it?

[Andy_Ross]

Rishi says

Quote:

My commitment to stopping the boats is unwavering.

The Government has been working on a new treaty with Rwanda, and we’ll finalise that in light of today’s judgment.

If necessary, I am prepared to revisit our domestic legal frameworks.

[Filippo Lippi]

Originally Posted by GlennB

I thought it was Johnson + Patel's baby?

Some sick came into my mouth

[Filippo Lippi]

Sky reporting (my commentary added)

Quote:

BREAKING: Rishi "very big liar" Sunak says he will 'not allow foreign court to block flights' after Rwanda ruling

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi

Sky reporting (my commentary added)

Wow, demented or what? He's going to define Rwanda as safe, by law

[Vixen]

Prime Minister Rish! Sunk has come out with some fighting talk. The Supreme Court ruled that Rwanda was not a safe country. So what will Rish! do? Follow Boorish Johnson's advice to pass a law saying that 'Rwanda is a safe country'. He has to get it passed Parliament first. But it is all talk, Rish! must have seen the legal advice. The TIMES legal journalists in a column today writes:

Quote:

The Supreme Court’s Rwanda ruling was about as bad as it could get for the government. There is now no realistic prospect that Rishi Sunak will be able to fulfil his pledge to get planes off the ground to Rwanda this side of the next election (Oliver Wright writes).

The court’s judgment made it clear, based on evidence from the UN high commissioner for refugees, that they did not believe the Rwandan government’s assurances around its asylum processes and human rights record.

According to the most senior judge, Reed, of Supreme Court (unanimous decision of five), ECHR and HRA would not be the only unlawful part but there is a whole plethora of international laws that would be broken.

Quote:

Importantly, Reed said the policy of non-refoulement is also protected under the UN Refugee Convention and other international treaties and domestic legislation that protect against torture and inhumane treatment.

He said: “The Human Rights Act is not the only relevant legislation.”

As expected, Sunak is going to seek a new Treaty with Rwanda (Rwanda being the only country who would agree to take the UK's unwanted asylum seekers/immigrants).

Quote:

The prime minister is expected to press ahead with the policy by tweaking it to address the concerns raised by the courts, including seeking a new agreement with Rwanda that elevates it to a treaty and ratifying this in parliament.

TIMEShttps://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/r...news-0x99fjkpt

As Sweller points out in her 'up yours' letter, he could have done all of this already, knowing that higher courts usually uphold the lower courts and are there as safety nets, not as decision makers, the earlier Appeal Court already having sifted through the Home Office submissions. It was a case then of Braverman spitting out in a hissy huff that she was going to take it to the Supreme Court when she lost the Appeal Court simply because she didn't like the verdict but nothing really changed. "If you won't let me have sweets Mummy, I am going to ask Daddy instead, so there!"

Nobody seriously thought the Supreme Court would change anything, or if they did, Sunk would surely have waited before giving Sweller the boot.

Sunak again is just showing defiant reaction to the Supreme Court but it is all hot air IMV, an attempt to show face. I can't see any plane soon, contrary to his assertions, flying off to Rwanda any time soon before the next election.

Once again, it is just window dressing for the tabloids to make it look as though the government is very busy in 'delivering'. Delivering a load of performative nonsense.

The average Brit is struggling with cost of living concerns, their kids getting on the housing ladder and getting a decent education, not some poor sods turning up on the beach in a dinghy.

[Garrison]

How do the journalists get through these press conferences without someone going full Jonathan Pie. If Sunak wants a mandate to tear up the Human Rights Act then let him call a General Election and win it.

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by Filippo Lippi

Sky reporting (my commentary added)

It wasn't a foreign court.

I have noticed that all the usual Tufton Street puppets and talking heads are attacking the Supreme Court today. Calls for it's 'revision' and that it's the 'enemy of the people'

Meanwhile Rishi says he will introduce emergency legislation on the Rwanda asylum plan that will "confirm Rwanda is safe". He says it's needed to prevent the "merry- go-round" of legal challenges the policy has faced.

Once the new legislation is in place he is already working on a new treaty with Rwanda. Once in Rwanda, people could claim asylum there, return home, or seek asylum in a third country but not the UK.
That is different to the original plan which was to house them there while their application is considered.

[jimbob]

Originally Posted by Garrison

How do the journalists get through these press conferences without someone going full Jonathan Pie. If Sunak wants a mandate to tear up the Human Rights Act then let him call a General Election and win it.

I really don't know.

I need to recalibrate my cynicism because I really didn't have "pass a law saying that Rwanda is safe" anywhere in my mental list of possibilities.

Nice move in trying to appease those who might drift towards the Lib Dems.

I think he's overtaking Truss now.

[Andy_Ross]

His actual words

Quote:

Following today’s ruling, I’m taking the extraordinary step of introducing emergency legislation to confirm Rwanda is safe.

I will not allow a foreign court, like the European Court of Human Rights, to block these flights.

[Vixen]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

It wasn't a foreign court.

I have noticed that all the usual Tufton Street puppets and talking heads are attacking the Supreme Court today. Calls for it's 'revision' and that it's the 'enemy of the people'

Meanwhile Rishi says he will introduce emergency legislation on the Rwanda asylum plan that will "confirm Rwanda is safe". He says it's needed to prevent the "merry- go-round" of legal challenges the policy has faced.

Once the new legislation is in place he is already working on a new treaty with Rwanda. Once in Rwanda, people could claim asylum there, return home, or seek asylum in a third country but not the UK.
That is different to the original plan which was to house them there while their application is considered.

Prime Minister Sunak did say he was not going to let 'any foreign court' stop him, referring to the ECHR.

UK, are you OK?


Sounds like a complete mad house there.

[Nessie]

France is safe, why not use France? The UK does not need to go to any expense transporting migrants there, they arrive of their own accord, and we could process them in France. If anyone ignores that and arrives in the UK on a boat, they just get sent back to a processing centre in France. Do that a couple of times and the boats stop.

[P.J. Denyer]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

I'm impressed by the way “actions we have taken” have brought down the USA and Germany’s inflation rates as well as the UK.

Probably the same way that Gordon Brown sparked a crisis in the US banking industry that spread worldwide...

[KDLarsen]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

His actual words

What good is that going to do, when the Supreme Court already compared the aspiration of Rwanda vs. the reality on the ground, which showed that Rwanda to not be a safe country.

It's equivalent of passing emergency legislation that the UK has met the goal of the Paris climate agreement, while reality is something completely different?

Of course, it's about getting positive headlines in the Scum and on GB news, but still..

[Andy_Ross]

Originally Posted by KDLarsen

What good is that going to do, when the Supreme Court already compared the aspiration of Rwanda vs. the reality on the ground, which showed that Rwanda to not be a safe country.

It's equivalent of passing emergency legislation that the UK has met the goal of the Paris climate agreement, while reality is something completely different?

Of course, it's about getting positive headlines in the Scum and on GB news, but still..

Well, if he passes a law that says it's safe the court has to uphold the law I suppose.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

His actual words

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...-rwanda-ruling in case anybody needs the link.

It's a pity that Chamberlain didn't think of this in September 1939, he could have just passed a law to say Germany didn't invade Poland and saved a lot of trouble, lives and equipment at Dunkirk. [insert facepalm smiley]

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

The new Home Secretary says



Should someone tell him that winter storms might have something to do with it?

Also Albania is now "safe".

[Andy_Ross]

All those gobby patriots who are so vociferous about immigrants coming over here and supposedly not obeying “our laws” all seem pretty happy when it comes to our government flagrantly ignoring “our” laws

[wobs]

Labour "we're determined to lose" party.
Three (?) have quit front bench.

[Matthew Best]

Pointless bickering over nothing. It really doesn't matter what the powerless opposition party in a country that has no influence says about what's happening in Israel/Palestine - it's all just theatre.

[Garrison]

Originally Posted by wobs

Labour "we're determined to lose" party.
Three (?) have quit front bench.

Well there are still people in Labour more interested in pointless gesture politics and ideological purity than you know actually gaining power so they can do anything useful. And I suspect one of them will be along shortly to explain why this was totally worthwhile.

[Nessie]

Labour are still infighting over anti-Semitism.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Garrison

Well there are still people in Labour more interested in pointless gesture politics and ideological purity than you know actually gaining power so they can do anything useful. And I suspect one of them will be along shortly to explain why this was totally worthwhile.

As an active party member for the best part of a quarter of a century, I can confirm that this is Labour Party SOP.

It's also one of the reasons why I'm no longer a party member.

[Andy_Ross]

Victoria Derbyshire "How long have you been working on Plan B for Rwanda?"

Robert Jenrick "Suella Braverman and I have been working on it for months"

VB "So she lied in her letter to Rishi Sunak when she insisted there was no Plan B?"

RJ "No"

Twat

[The Don]

Originally Posted by Andy_Ross

Victoria Derbyshire "How long have you been working on Plan B for Rwanda?"

Robert Jenrick "Suella Braverman and I have been working on it for months"

VB "So she lied in her letter to Rishi Sunak when she insisted there was no Plan B?"

RJ "No"

Twat

They rely on the fact that too many people are simply not paying enough attention and can be easily distracted by that kind of denial. At least Victoria Derbyshire tries to hold politicians to account as opposed to giving them a completely free ride like too many journalists.

[Gulliver Foyle]

Originally Posted by wobs

Labour "we're determined to lose" party.
Three (?) have quit front bench.

That kind of thing happens when the leadership is doing its best to alienate voters.

[wobs]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

That kind of thing happens when the leadership is doing its best to alienate voters.

From upthread:
Labour 46% (+1)
Conservative 28% (-1)
Liberal Democrat 10% (-1)
Reform UK 6% (+1)
Green 4% (+1)
SNP 2% (=)

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by Gulliver Foyle

That kind of thing happens when the leadership is doing its best to alienate voters.

Well, they've since got rid of Corbyn, but they're still trying to shoot themselves in the foot.

[Mongrel]

Originally Posted by Darat

The reason the government chose this month for meeting their "halving the inflation rate" target was they knew last year's energy increases would fall out of the statistics.

Not forgetting that they are using a shifting target to define success and switching between CPI & Core inflation to get the best result.

Covered over at A Different Bias