The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[Sir Ralph]

7 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Rwanda was never a good idea. The numbers were too small and it was too expensive. If people are willing to risk drowning crossing the Channel they would be willing to risk the small chance of being deported to Rwanda. There is also some conflict out there which means it is not necessarily a safe country.

Not at all surprised that you have so little regard for human rights. So you have moved on from looney lefties to looney human rights lawyers now.

It doesnt matter whether it was expensive to start with. It was a disincentivising plan. once it had started and people know thats what happened when you come to Britain they would more likely have stayed in Europe.

You have too much regard for human rights of some people and not others. Human rights lawyers are principle good but many of them are financially incentivised to protect bad people, like convicted extremists.

Edited yesterday at 10:48 by Sir Ralph

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, Sir Ralph said:

It doesnt matter whether it was expensive to start with. It was a disincentivising plan. once it had started and people know thats what happened when you come to Britain they probably would have stayed in Europe.

You have too much regard for human rights of some people and not others.

It was for 200 people at a time. We get 50k per year. I think most would fancy their odds.

[Sir Ralph]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

It was for 200 people at a time. We get 50k per year. I think most would fancy their odds.

The problem was it was never given the chance. With political will it could have been ramped up and then there could have been a lag until numbers reduced. People saying there are no good solution but dismissing this which could have been enacted legally. Again, its political will.

Edited yesterday at 10:49 by Sir Ralph

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

It doesnt matter whether it was expensive to start with. It was a disincentivising plan. once it had started and people know thats what happened when you come to Britain they would more likely have stayed in Europe.

You have too much regard for human rights of some people and not others. Human rights lawyers are principle good but many of them are financially incentivised to protect bad people, like convicted extremists.

No it wasn’t. Even a prominent Tory called the plan “Batshit Crazy.” It was only ever going to happen to a small minority, not everybody.

You can’t have too much regard for human rights lawyers. It is not for you to decide who deserves them or not. That is down to a court, thank goodness. Your idea of who is a “bad person” is not a good starting point.

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

No it wasn’t. Even a prominent Tory called the plan “Batshit Crazy.” It was only ever going to happen to a small minority, not everybody.

You can’t have too much regard for human rights lawyers. It is not for you to decide who deserves them or not. That is down to a court, thank goodness. Your idea of who is a “bad person” is not a good starting point.

The example I gave was of a convicted extremist!

[sadoldgit]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The problem was it was never given the chance. With political will it could have been ramped up and then there could have been a lag until numbers reduced. People saying there are no good solution but dismissing this which could have been enacted legally. Again, its political will.

The numbers were limited by the numbers Rwanda could take. It was never, ever a good idea and has been discredited by many senior politicians who are better placed to make a call than you are.

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

The numbers were limited by the numbers Rwanda could take. It was never, ever a good idea and has been discredited by many senior politicians who are better placed to make a call than you are.

It was supported by two Tory governments so there was mixed opinions. It was supported by other politicians who are better placed to make a call than you are.

[sadoldgit]

4 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The example I gave was of a convicted extremist!

Everybody is entitled to legal representation. Extremists are no different.

I should have mentioned that the Rwanda plan was also morally wrong. Not that you seem to worry about little things like that.

[sadoldgit]

8 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

It was supported by two Tory governments so there was mixed opinions. It was supported by other politicians who are better placed to make a call than you are.

So it was supported by some and not by others. Hardly a ringing endorsement is it?

It was playing to the supporters of Farage and was just a stunt. Seems like you swallowed it too.

Read this…

https://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/articles/Is-the-Rwanda-plan-acting-as-a-deterrent-Here's-what-the-evidence-says-about-this-approach#:~:text=Researchers have found that people,upcoming local and national elections.

Edited yesterday at 11:06 by sadoldgit

[Farmer Saint]

17 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The problem was it was never given the chance. With political will it could have been ramped up and then there could have been a lag until numbers reduced. People saying there are no good solution but dismissing this which could have been enacted legally. Again, its political will.

But you have to keep it going ad infinitum or as soon as you reduce the numbers people will keep coming in. And how many are you planning to send to Rwanda?

[whelk]

25 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Cancelling elections again.

Wanting to do away with or limit Jury Trials.

Record number of arrests for anyone disagreeing with the Gov narrative.

Hmm. Labour sound a little like dictators. I await all the usual BS trying to defend it, but if Farage or the Tory's did this you lot would be up in arms big time. Own it. Accept it. It is again a FACT!

What elections are being cancelled? You really are an anxious pisspot. Man up FFS not everything should scare a grown man

[sadoldgit]

Only 1% of the boat people per annum were likely to be deported to Rwanda. Not much of a deterrent.

Mist of these people are unlikely to know about the plan before leaving France. Not much of a deterrent.

The cost of deporting them to Rwanda is £63,000 more than keeping them here. Not cost effective.

The plan was announced just before elections and was clearly just an effort to win votes.

Instead of wasting money on expensive gimmicks we need to get our money’s worth out of the French. We need to stop them leaving the beaches in the first place and make more legal routes available.

Edited yesterday at 11:23 by sadoldgit

[east-stand-nic]

18 minutes ago, whelk said:

What elections are being cancelled? You really are an anxious pisspot. Man up FFS not everything should scare a grown man

Mayoral elections on top of council elections. Care to apologise now for yet another childish rant when I am in fact correct?

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Mayoral elections on top of council elections. Care to apologise now for yet another childish rant when I am in fact correct?

Go and read up on why the elections have been postponed (not cancelled - there is a big difference as well you know).

You are not correct.

As usual.

[whelk]

Just now, east-stand-nic said:

Mayoral elections on top of council elections. Care to apologise now for yet another childish rant when I am in fact correct?

I had assumed you meant local govt and I am aware of the reasons. You seem to imply it is Labour trying to stop democracy rather than being pragmatic considering organisations and authority size are likely to change. I assume you won’t have read round it and probably were sent a meme about dictatorships.

[Weston Super Saint]

5 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

Mayoral elections on top of council elections. Care to apologise now for yet another childish rant when I am in fact correct?

Why do you care about Mayoral elections in the UK?

I can guarantee there's not one person who gives a shiny shit about Mayoral elections in Thailand where you allegedly live!

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Well, we've asked you guys over and over for realistic, workable ideas, and no-one has shown anything. It's like the Manager question, the classic "it's not our job". It's not, but it would be good if you even had a slight go at it.

Didn't we have this discussion a few months ago and the response from the other side was that whilst some of it was unworkable, some of it wasn't but it would cost money? 

[sadoldgit]

Oh, and the jury trials are being limited (not done way with) because the CJS is in its knees after 14 years of austerity and measures need to be taken to fix it.

If you are so precious about juries are you going to start a campaign to have all magistrates courts moved over to jury trials?

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Rape is a dreadful crime isn’t it Batman? Good to hear that the police are bringing in specialised teams to deal with it.

So is the production of child pprnography that you described as not a big deal.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Oh, and the jury trials are being limited (not done way with) because the CJS is in its knees after 14 years of austerity and measures need to be taken to fix it.

If you are so precious about juries are you going to start a campaign to have all magistrates courts moved over to jury trials?

Those who work in the profession say that the backlog is not caused by juries and that it will make no difference. Some are talking about strikes which would make the situation much worse rather than fixing it.

[east-stand-nic]

27 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Go and read up on why the elections have been postponed (not cancelled - there is a big difference as well you know).

You are not correct.

As usual.

No difference at all. They are making a habit of not allowing people to vote. That is a dictators way of ruling.

So, correct as ever thanks. Suck it up and own it. You support a dictator.

[tdmickey3]

22 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

No difference at all. They are making a habit of not allowing people to vote. That is a dictators way of ruling.

So, correct as ever thanks. Suck it up and own it. You support a dictator.

Your level of stupidity grows every time you post 🤡

[sadoldgit]

20 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

No difference at all. They are making a habit of not allowing people to vote. That is a dictators way of ruling.

So, correct as ever thanks. Suck it up and own it. You support a dictator.

No you are not and people are not being prevented from voting. All that is changing is the date. Thicko.

So, moving on. Your thoughts on Trump’s disgusting words after the death of Rob Reiner. Ok with that? I am sure you and your like kicked off about “looney lefties” supposedly disrespecting Charlie Kirk after his death. I don’t think I read anything that even comes close to the level of disrespect displayed by Trump. Can you bring yourself to call it out for what it is?

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Put them on a plane to Afghanistan later today.

There are no direct flights from the UK to Afghanistan.

Edited yesterday at 12:35 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

1 hour ago, east-stand-nic said:

 

Wanting to do away with or limit Jury Trials.

Number of criminal cases that go before a jury in Thailand annually.......

Zero

[Weston Super Saint]

48 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

There are no direct flights from the UK to Afghanistan.

Everything is possible if there is a will.

[AlexLaw76]

49 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

There are no direct flights from the UK to Afghanistan.

Why does it have to be a direct flight?

Fecking hell, there were Afghani asylum seekers going back there on holiday....did they swim?

Edited yesterday at 13:25 by AlexLaw76

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

It was playing to the supporters of Farage and was just a stunt.

🤡Farage said it was a “con," "pathetic," and "doomed to fail". So they played to his supporters by……. disagreeing with him. Looks like you & Nige are on the same page on this one….

[badgerx16]

35 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Why does it have to be a direct flight?

Fecking hell, there were Afghani asylum seekers going back there on holiday....did they swim?

How do you ensure they don't bunk off at the first stopover and try to return to the UK ?

Edited yesterday at 14:00 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

No you are not and people are not being prevented from voting. All that is changing is the date. Thicko.

😂 Classic, imagine if trump postponed the next election for 2 years, you’d be beside yourself . Certainly wouldn’t be relaxed about “changing the date”.  You’re so funny, thanks for being you…

[badgerx16]

Looks like the UK is rejoining the Erasmus scheme.

[AlexLaw76]

https://fotbot.org/chagossians-announce-government-in-exile

[Turkish]

19 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

So is the production of child pprnography that you described as not a big deal.

Hardly the crime of the century……

[Farmer Saint]

Inflation down more than expected, 0.5% rate cut please BoE.

[egg]

6 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Inflation down more than expected, 0.5% rate cut please BoE.

I'm not sure they'll be that brave, but it's necessary. I spoke with a Showman friend yesterday - business has never been so bad, everyone is skint. 0.5% is a needed boost. 

[hypochondriac]

4 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

https://fotbot.org/chagossians-announce-government-in-exile

I'm not trying to be funny but can someone explain this situation to me? I think I read that Mauritius have never had a claim to the land. We kicked out the people who do and now we are not giving the land back to the people who always lived there but someone else instead and we are paying to rent the land off then when they've never owned it before? Is that right?

Edited 7 hours ago by hypochondriac

[Farmer Saint]

51 minutes ago, egg said:

I'm not sure they'll be that brave, but it's necessary. I spoke with a Showman friend yesterday - business has never been so bad, everyone is skint. 0.5% is a needed boost. 

I agree they probably won't be that brave, but I wish they would be for once.

[Farmer Saint]

So we're back in the Erasmus scheme and looks like we're trying to get into the EU electricity scheme...how long until Customs Union is negotiated?

[egg]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm not trying to be funny but can someone explain this situation to me? I think I read that Mauritius have never had a claim to the land. We kicked out the people who do and now we are not giving the land back to the people who always lived there but someone else instead and we are paying to rent the land off then when they've never owned it before? Is that right?

On the face of it, giving land to people who never owned the land makes so sense, but equally it doesn't feel right that we retain land that we've stolen.

[egg]

28 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

So we're back in the Erasmus scheme and looks like we're trying to get into the EU electricity scheme...how long until Customs Union is negotiated?

I'd hazard a guess by next summer. It's a political hot spud, so just get on with it. 

[whelk]

2 hours ago, egg said:

business has never been so bad, everyone is skint

Everyone isn’t skint but lots of people are because of wealth disparity and bills taking larger chunk of any disposable income.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

On the face of it, giving land to people who never owned the land makes so sense, but equally it doesn't feel right that we retain land that we've stolen.

Surely the answer would be to negotiate some sort of reasonable renumeration for the original owners of the land. Why are Mauritius involved at just because they happen to live nearby? My guess is there's some sort of spy shit we are doing on there which they don't want to admit to publicly so this is an easier way to do it without scrutiny.

Edited 5 hours ago by hypochondriac

[egg]

18 minutes ago, whelk said:

Everyone isn’t skint but lots of people are because of wealth disparity and bills taking larger chunk of any disposable income.

Very literal! The masses are skint. 

[egg]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Surely the answer would be to negotiate some sort of reasonable renumeration for the original owners of the land. Why are Mauritius involved at just because they happen to live nearby? My guess is there's some sort of spy shit we are doing on there which they don't want to admit to publicly so this is an easier way to do it without scrutiny.

Seemingly Mauritius had a claim to the islands, hence the deal and lease. Re spy shit, I think it's widely acknowledged that Chagos is vitally important to the US for all sorts military and similar purposes. Some conspiracy theories will tell you that's where that missing plane from a few years back ended up. The whole carry on is odd. 

[iansums]

4 hours ago, egg said:

I'm not sure they'll be that brave, but it's necessary. I spoke with a Showman friend yesterday - business has never been so bad, everyone is skint. 0.5% is a needed boost. 

The government could have given business a boost in the last two budgets but no, welfare and public sector took priority. BoE will most likely cut just 0.25%

[egg]

13 minutes ago, iansums said:

The government could have given business a boost in the last two budgets but no, welfare and public sector took priority. BoE will most likely cut just 0.25%

Yep, should have binned the triple lock - an unaffordable welfare spend. Should also have kept the 2 kid cap.  Otherwise, they didn't have much to work with. 

Edited 3 hours ago by egg

[tdmickey3]

25 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep, should have binned the triple lock - an unaffordable welfare spend. Should also have kept the 2 kid cap.  Otherwise, they didn't have much to work with. 

Not another one who wants to stuff pensioners as if those pensioners who have no other income who are living it up.... 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Not another one who wants to stuff pensioners as if those pensioners who have no other income who are living it up.... 

Where did I say that? Triple lock for ALL pensioners is not the same as a means tested supplement for those who need additional income. 

[tdmickey3]

22 minutes ago, egg said:

Where did I say that? Triple lock for ALL pensioners is not the same as a means tested supplement for those who need additional income. 

Fair enough but we know how good all governments are at means testing....

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Yep, should have binned the triple lock - an unaffordable welfare spend. Should also have kept the 2 kid cap.  Otherwise, they didn't have much to work with. 

I think the two kid cap removal is fine, but also needs to be part of a complete rehaul of the benefits system in general.