What is that "mate" of mine Sadiq Khan trying to achieve ?

 

You lost you demented little cretin, get over it and concentrate on your job you terrorist sympathiser.

4 minutes ago, Dimron said:

Would you be guilty of people trafficking?

Who cares? Really?

3 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Not sure what alternatives there are on this, its obvious the government trying to deter immigrants from crossing the channel.
What was labours position last election perhaps they can/have come up with an alternative that folk would vote for. 

It doesn't matter what Labour would or wouldn't have done,as they're not in power. This is on the face of it, a ridiculous idea. It won't work, we all know it. It'll be scrapped before it even starts

Edited April 14, 20224 yr by Sweep

4 minutes ago, Sweep said:

It doesn't matter what Labour would or wouldn't have done,as they're not in power. This is on the face of it, a ridiculous idea. It won't work, we all know our. It'll be scrapped before it even starts

Do we know what the DUP, Lib Dems and SNP suggest we do? 

14 minutes ago, Sweep said:

It doesn't matter what Labour would or wouldn't have done,as they're not in power. This is on the face of it, a ridiculous idea. It won't work, we all know it. It'll be scrapped before it even starts

It’s like you want it to fail. 

20 minutes ago, Sweep said:

It doesn't matter what Labour would or wouldn't have done,as they're not in power. This is on the face of it, a ridiculous idea. It won't work, we all know it. It'll be scrapped before it even starts

I’d like to hear what Labours position is or would be, other than oppose it a decent opposition should be illustrating what they’d do. 

18 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Do we know what the DUP, Lib Dems and SNP suggest we do? 

Snp have been trying to send the English back for years 

2 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Snp have been trying to send the English back for years 

And none of the parties mentioned are relevant. 

Edited April 14, 20224 yr by Mounts Kipper

1 hour ago, Dimron said:

Would you be guilty of people trafficking?

I asked that a few hours ago

1 hour ago, Duck Egg said:

Hopefully there's one or two in this government with a shred of humanity who'll make their voices heard.  It's not like they're strangers to u turns.

Its took partygate off the front page

Classic bozo

15 minutes ago, Casino said:

Its took partygate off the front page

Classic bozo

Yep.

"You think the parties were bad? Wait 'til you hear our latest policy proposal!"

3 hours ago, Winchester White said:

Which this why this awful law they recently brought in will be legally challenged.

It really is a shithouse decision this, just nasty for no reason. It will prove to be very costly imo.

When its champion is from a family who fled a shithole it really does turn my stomach

The vile bitch

1 hour ago, gonzo said:

Do we know what the DUP, Lib Dems and SNP suggest we do? 

Has anybody asked darren from halliwell?

9 hours ago, royal white said:

It’s like you want it to fail. 

I just think it's a daft idea, that will end up costing us far more money than it does now. 

Priti Patel arrives at her final solution. What a deplorable woman she is.

15 hours ago, mickbrown said:

I don't think they've thought this through. And she's still an obnoxious twat.

 

 

 

£461m to process 239 asylum seekers? Seems a bit steep to me 

I'd just let them sneak in and spend it on something else

1 minute ago, Zico said:

£461m to process 239 asylum seekers? Seems a bit steep to me 

I'd just let them sneak in and spend it on something else

I assume friends of the cabinet are managing the logistics. 239 isn’t even much more than a mid-sized jet. You could charter one of those for a lot less than a million pounds.

15 hours ago, Ani said:

I know the Partridge comparison has been made, but can you imagine being in a meeting in any job, in any sector and someone saying let's ship it all of to Rwanda and everyone thinking it was a good idea ? 
 

Has any explanation of why Rwanda been given ? 

Denmark had set up (but not implemented) an arrangement with Rwanda, so this turkey was oven-ready.

Australian statistics seem to show that illegal entry by boat dried up soon after the Nauru arrangement came into operation. It doesn't follow that the same will happen with those trying to cross the channel.

2 hours ago, Zico said:

£461m to process 239 asylum seekers? Seems a bit steep to me 

I'd just let them sneak in and spend it on something else

If this happens I'm worried about getting my car washed for a tenner 

14 hours ago, Casino said:

When its champion is from a family who fled a shithole it really does turn my stomach

The vile bitch

It’s her job, she’s got to implement the government policy on immigration, the voters clearly asked that our borders were controlled better, I’m not saying that she’s hit on the right policy but I’m still waiting for suggestions as to how to stop it happening. 

4 hours ago, MalcolmW said:

Denmark had set up (but not implemented) an arrangement with Rwanda, so this turkey was oven-ready.

Australian statistics seem to show that illegal entry by boat dried up soon after the Nauru arrangement came into operation. It doesn't follow that the same will happen with those trying to cross the channel.

This is the most important point of this  plan. If it does work in the same way then the boat crossings will stop, many lives will be saved, the people making money from desperate people will go away and the migrants will have to stay in France. There are worse places to find refuge. 
 

21 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Not sure what alternatives there are on this, its obvious the government trying to deter immigrants from crossing the channel.
What was labours position last election perhaps they can/have come up with an alternative that folk would vote for. 

Not the last election but Blair considered it. 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3485996.stm

39 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

Not the last election but Blair considered it. 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3485996.stm

It's not a terrible idea in essence, providing it's managed well - and not used as an excuse to deny a safe haven to legitimate asylum seekers. 

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

It's not a terrible idea in essence, providing it's managed well - and not used as an excuse to deny a safe haven to legitimate asylum seekers. 

Itll be a shitshow, as you well know

See Rwanda.

10 minutes ago, kent_white said:

It's not a terrible idea in essence, providing it's managed well - and not used as an excuse to deny a safe haven to legitimate asylum seekers. 

It’s a pragmatic approach to a problem that has caused hundreds of deaths. 
As my link showed, it’s not a new idea. 
Something has to be done. If The Tories recycle an old Labour idea and it works then surely everyone is happy whatever their political views.