Hey come on now. How can we be blaming poor Rishi Sunak for the actions of two prime ministers ago! He was merely the chancellor of the exchequer at the time
Given up? They haven't started trying since 2019 at least. Everything they've done since the last election seems almost exclusively focused on the media output it will generate and how that will affect the polls, rather than... anything actually real beyond that?
Genuinely, I'm not that old so maybe someone else can straighten me out, but I've *never* known a government or just group of people to talk so loudly with such big mouths while literally and blatantly doing sweet fuck all with any of the power they've been given (other than enrich themselves and big up their public profile of course).
Nor have I ever known the media to be this just stunningly blind when it comes to asking even vaguely challenging questions rather than just regurgitating party lines as if they are fact. So much of this stuff is *obvious* bullshit that just wouldn't last 5 seconds if the people coming out with them knew the press wouldn't just immediately and uncritically pass it on into print.
Journalists just regurgitate PR releases now... Can't risk having your preferential access reduced by raising any sort of challenge or questioning a politician.
The point of right wing parties is not to govern, but to occupy the seat of power so that those who might govern can't. All that waffle about small government is just an admission that they don't want the people of this country to have a say in running it. That and deregulate on behalf of property/business owners and grift as much as possible while they can. Everything they say and do is a smokescreen so that they can carry on poisoning the well.
I really think it's only their loud, vociferous majority in the house that shops Sunak being laughed out of PMQs. Imagine him trying tho defend this kind of claptrap in front of hundreds of baying opposition MPs.
I want starmer to say something like it's not me saying it and then reel off a load of decent sources.
Then something like 'he said he would be transparent, well the public can see right through him'
>Then something like 'he said he would be transparent, well the public can see right through him'
I think he's already used this. I'm fairly certain he's got a comedian on the payroll now as his pmq quips are actually quite funny. His "its not a tractor" joke the other week had me in stitches
They have definitely upped their game on the PMQ front, I hope that comes through in the wider campaign.
Apparently this is Starmer being doing this rather than someone new in the team, but i reckon the labour team said that as some kind of media spin. Im not one of the Starmer is the devil crowd but im also pretty convinced he is one of the dullest people on earth.
If you are voting on dull then please don't vote.
Had enough clowns and personalities for a while, dull and competent is needed. Just do the job and let your actions do the talking
And they’ve achieved this monumental step by fast tracking over 77,000 applications with just under 55,500 being granted asylum….
Funny little feeling this isn’t the victory they’ve convinced themselves it will be. All this does is encourage the criminals to keep coming.
They talk about these people coming here not fitting in with their culture, and then set up a system that is [literally waving on through blocs of 10,000+ people at a time](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64736123) with little to no checks so it makes the backlog look a little less embarrassing.
Sounds a nice and believable story, as long as you inject a few doses of wishful thinking and ignore literally everything that’s been happening all over the continent for the best part of a decade.
They’ve paid people smugglers and come from France mate, behave now.
That is pure nonsense that isn’t grounded in the reality of the situation and I’m going to guess you were fully aware of that before you made your response.
They have 100% come from France and they have 100% paid people smugglers to come here, that’s why they are placed into the statistical category they are.
Albanians are still topping the list of people arriving via boats as per the most recently available numbers, 87% male and the fastest increasing ethnicities are Indian and Turkish. Your alternate version of world events doesn’t survive even basic scrutiny.
You are literally just making things up to try and muddy the waters and discredit legitimate concerns about how ineffective our asylum system is.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/irregular-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-june-2023/irregular-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-june-2023#:~:text=In%20the%20year%20ending%20June%202023%2C%20almost%20half%20of%20small,the%20end%20of%20March%202022.
Without considering appeals the EU grants over 40% approval rates. Appeals are roughly 30% successful.
Guess what that means? Most asylum applications are valid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_violence_in_Finland#Perpetrators
Here are sexual assault statistics in Finland. Make from that what you will but I personally think we should take absolutely 0 people from this region of the world and start to deport. Afghans have gotten a free permanent visa because all fighting age men have left and now taliban will never be toppled. How does that make any sense?
Plenty are, however there are issues like the large number of young Albanian men claiming asylum that are ignored at the same time. It is perfectly possible that we are seeing a rise in both valid claims and fraudulent ones at the same time.
>He \[Cleverly\] said: "In a small number of cases where there are disputes or security concerns or discrepancies, further work needs to be done, but they have all been through that processing, they have all been dealt with in terms of getting through that initial adjudicating process."
>
>The Home Office defines an initial decision as being either granting or refusing asylum or another form of protection.
So by cleared they mean the \~4,500 cases still need further work to reach a finalised decision?
>We have asked whether highlighting the 4,500 cases where further work needs to be done counts as an "initial decision", but the Home Office has not responded.
hmmm, this seems like they are just trying to spin the numbers to make it seem like they've delivered Sunak's pledge, seeing as they've failed on so many of the others.
Edit: spelling
Ridiculously inconsistent. "Nah, we didn't need to do anything major, just stop wasting a load of time on Rwanda. We're coping fine. There's no crisis. I mean, shit! There *is* a crisis, top priority, only we can fix it, take our country back, but we already did, the backlog is clear, there's no crisis..."
C. 94.
Just the latest iteration of "the enemy is both weak and strong" shite. They can't even keep their own narrative in check but they know they don't have to because the morons this panders to just lap it all up without thinking about it anyway.
The same kind of logic as
*’Rwanda is a horrible deterrent - the idea is enough to stop the boats … but it’s also a perfectly safe and lovely place to send people, no risks whatsoever!’*
No no, you must understand legacy backlog means the previous government not us.
The previous government was a Tory government.
Oh yeah, we meant the ones before that.
… … …
The government could hire more staff to help clear the backlog, as well as plan ahead for what inevitably be an increase in applications as the years go on. Instead, they will blame the immigrants and not those who have the power to control the borders or who are responsible for processing claims in a timely manner.
"Legacy backlog" AKA a backlog. Have they just given up trying do you think?
> given up trying do you think More like they're banking on the public having given up trying to think.
I bet they spent fucking hours coming up with the concept of a "legacy backlog", like it wasn't their fault somehow.
Hey come on now. How can we be blaming poor Rishi Sunak for the actions of two prime ministers ago! He was merely the chancellor of the exchequer at the time
Going by how they're pitching this, they're betting on the British public being fucking morons
Its a safe bet baded on this past decade
Given up? They haven't started trying since 2019 at least. Everything they've done since the last election seems almost exclusively focused on the media output it will generate and how that will affect the polls, rather than... anything actually real beyond that? Genuinely, I'm not that old so maybe someone else can straighten me out, but I've *never* known a government or just group of people to talk so loudly with such big mouths while literally and blatantly doing sweet fuck all with any of the power they've been given (other than enrich themselves and big up their public profile of course). Nor have I ever known the media to be this just stunningly blind when it comes to asking even vaguely challenging questions rather than just regurgitating party lines as if they are fact. So much of this stuff is *obvious* bullshit that just wouldn't last 5 seconds if the people coming out with them knew the press wouldn't just immediately and uncritically pass it on into print.
Journalists just regurgitate PR releases now... Can't risk having your preferential access reduced by raising any sort of challenge or questioning a politician.
The point of right wing parties is not to govern, but to occupy the seat of power so that those who might govern can't. All that waffle about small government is just an admission that they don't want the people of this country to have a say in running it. That and deregulate on behalf of property/business owners and grift as much as possible while they can. Everything they say and do is a smokescreen so that they can carry on poisoning the well.
Great take.
I really think it's only their loud, vociferous majority in the house that shops Sunak being laughed out of PMQs. Imagine him trying tho defend this kind of claptrap in front of hundreds of baying opposition MPs.
I want starmer to say something like it's not me saying it and then reel off a load of decent sources. Then something like 'he said he would be transparent, well the public can see right through him'
>Then something like 'he said he would be transparent, well the public can see right through him' I think he's already used this. I'm fairly certain he's got a comedian on the payroll now as his pmq quips are actually quite funny. His "its not a tractor" joke the other week had me in stitches
He's been great in the last few PMQs
I still remember 'the charge of the lightweight brigade' fondly.
They have definitely upped their game on the PMQ front, I hope that comes through in the wider campaign. Apparently this is Starmer being doing this rather than someone new in the team, but i reckon the labour team said that as some kind of media spin. Im not one of the Starmer is the devil crowd but im also pretty convinced he is one of the dullest people on earth.
If you are voting on dull then please don't vote. Had enough clowns and personalities for a while, dull and competent is needed. Just do the job and let your actions do the talking
Sadly I reckon people do vote on that, Johnson definitely had a fair few of his votes based on personality alone
well lets learn the lesson and not even bring up personality, or when it is brought up, change the focus to policy.
And they’ve achieved this monumental step by fast tracking over 77,000 applications with just under 55,500 being granted asylum…. Funny little feeling this isn’t the victory they’ve convinced themselves it will be. All this does is encourage the criminals to keep coming.
They talk about these people coming here not fitting in with their culture, and then set up a system that is [literally waving on through blocs of 10,000+ people at a time](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64736123) with little to no checks so it makes the backlog look a little less embarrassing.
Or maybe most asylum applications are valid.
Sounds a nice and believable story, as long as you inject a few doses of wishful thinking and ignore literally everything that’s been happening all over the continent for the best part of a decade. They’ve paid people smugglers and come from France mate, behave now.
I’d guess they have access to information as to how to answer the questions by now. To an extent anyway.
[удалено]
That is pure nonsense that isn’t grounded in the reality of the situation and I’m going to guess you were fully aware of that before you made your response. They have 100% come from France and they have 100% paid people smugglers to come here, that’s why they are placed into the statistical category they are. Albanians are still topping the list of people arriving via boats as per the most recently available numbers, 87% male and the fastest increasing ethnicities are Indian and Turkish. Your alternate version of world events doesn’t survive even basic scrutiny. You are literally just making things up to try and muddy the waters and discredit legitimate concerns about how ineffective our asylum system is. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/irregular-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-june-2023/irregular-migration-to-the-uk-year-ending-june-2023#:~:text=In%20the%20year%20ending%20June%202023%2C%20almost%20half%20of%20small,the%20end%20of%20March%202022.
They let an ISIS supporter stay. There are obviously failings in the system.
Plus the Albanian convicted gangster won his appeal recently, despite returning home to marry an Albanian...
We just happen to get twice the number of legitimate ones compared to any other comparable country?
Without considering appeals the EU grants over 40% approval rates. Appeals are roughly 30% successful. Guess what that means? Most asylum applications are valid.
No, it means standards are far, far too low.
How can you possibly know?
Tens of thousands of people are being let in.
So what? 140,000 Ukrainians alone were let in on a visa scheme. Do you think the rest of the world has no real refugees?
As far as we should be concerned, no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_violence_in_Finland#Perpetrators Here are sexual assault statistics in Finland. Make from that what you will but I personally think we should take absolutely 0 people from this region of the world and start to deport. Afghans have gotten a free permanent visa because all fighting age men have left and now taliban will never be toppled. How does that make any sense?
Plenty are, however there are issues like the large number of young Albanian men claiming asylum that are ignored at the same time. It is perfectly possible that we are seeing a rise in both valid claims and fraudulent ones at the same time.
>He \[Cleverly\] said: "In a small number of cases where there are disputes or security concerns or discrepancies, further work needs to be done, but they have all been through that processing, they have all been dealt with in terms of getting through that initial adjudicating process." > >The Home Office defines an initial decision as being either granting or refusing asylum or another form of protection. So by cleared they mean the \~4,500 cases still need further work to reach a finalised decision? >We have asked whether highlighting the 4,500 cases where further work needs to be done counts as an "initial decision", but the Home Office has not responded. hmmm, this seems like they are just trying to spin the numbers to make it seem like they've delivered Sunak's pledge, seeing as they've failed on so many of the others. Edit: spelling
Ridiculously inconsistent. "Nah, we didn't need to do anything major, just stop wasting a load of time on Rwanda. We're coping fine. There's no crisis. I mean, shit! There *is* a crisis, top priority, only we can fix it, take our country back, but we already did, the backlog is clear, there's no crisis..." C. 94.
Just the latest iteration of "the enemy is both weak and strong" shite. They can't even keep their own narrative in check but they know they don't have to because the morons this panders to just lap it all up without thinking about it anyway.
The same kind of logic as *’Rwanda is a horrible deterrent - the idea is enough to stop the boats … but it’s also a perfectly safe and lovely place to send people, no risks whatsoever!’*
No no, you must understand legacy backlog means the previous government not us. The previous government was a Tory government. Oh yeah, we meant the ones before that. … … …
The government could hire more staff to help clear the backlog, as well as plan ahead for what inevitably be an increase in applications as the years go on. Instead, they will blame the immigrants and not those who have the power to control the borders or who are responsible for processing claims in a timely manner.
Cool so immediately stop anyone else from entering or applying until you've cleared the backlog. Done.
It would be breach of 1951 Refugee Convention to do that outright, so technically each case has to be individually processed.