The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[hypochondriac]

If they're scheduled to depart on a flight then give them a time limit to appeal. Any appeal needs to be done and dusted to allow time for the flight to leave with the people on board.

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I think if we're sending them back to France I don't see the relevance. Hand them to French authorities and let them deal with it. Don't come here illegally.

You've just asked for a change to the law. What change are you calling for? 

We can't just "send them back". You know better than to make comments like that. 

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

If they're scheduled to depart on a flight then give them a time limit to appeal. Any appeal needs to be done and dusted to allow time for the flight to leave with the people on board.

How can an asylum seeker meet a deadline to finalise an appeal when the application/asylum/appeal system is beyond their control?!

 

[hypochondriac]

56 minutes ago, egg said:

How can an asylum seeker meet a deadline to finalise an appeal when the application/asylum/appeal system is beyond their control?!

 

You misunderstand me. Their activist lawyers deliberately put in last minute appeals to delay their deportation. If we tell them they are getting deported in a week then they have to put an appeal in with enough time to process and reject it and then get sent off on the flight as planned. No last minute appeals and gunging up of the system. 

Edited 1 hour ago by hypochondriac

[skintsaint]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You misunderstand me. Their activist lawyers deliberately put in last minute appeals to delay their deportation. If we tell them they are getting deported in a week then they have to put an appeal in with enough time to process and reject it and then get sent off p bthe flight as planned. No last minute appeals and gungong up of the system. 

Reading this on the BBC, it seems fairly obvious they just threw in an appeal to avoid the deportation. According to the BBC when arriving here, he said to officials he had not been exploited. 

[hypochondriac]

I'd certainly be looking to renegotiate the echr where right to family life is routinely abused. Probably in partnership with other countries who are keen to make changes as well. If it's Impossible then we will likely have no choice but to leave. 

I'd look to be a tougher with some of these countries as well. If they don't  assist in taking back illegal citizens then they shouldn't be receiving substantial aid from us and we certainly shouldn't be making life easy for them. We need to be a lot more serious about tackling the problem.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Reading this on the BBC, it seems fairly obvious they just threw in an appeal to avoid the deportation. According to the BBC when arriving here, he said to officials he had not been exploited. 

Of course he did, they always do. It shouldn't be allowed. If you're making an appeal then it needs to be done earlier. If you miss the deadline to appeal then off you go. If you complain then tough you shouldn't have come here illegally.

[egg]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

You misunderstand me. Their activist lawyers deliberately put in last minute appeals to delay their deportation. If we tell them they are getting deported in a week then they have to put an appeal in with enough time to process and reject it and then get sent off p bthe flight as planned. No last minute appeals and gungong up of the system. 

That comes back to asylum seekers having to meet a deadline to which is beyond their control. The only ways to address the issue, I think , is (a) to tighten the criteria in all respects (including the relevance of slavery issues), (b) get the home office geared up to process and determine claims, and (c) throw judges at the appeal system. The watered down appeal system will just lead to more judicial reviews I'd imagine, and that'll probably be slower than the current system. 

There's no easy solution though. If we throw judges at this it takes them away from other areas of the system. 

It's a mess. 

 

 

[Gloucester Saint]

6 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Reading this on the BBC, it seems fairly obvious they just threw in an appeal to avoid the deportation. According to the BBC when arriving here, he said to officials he had not been exploited. 

It’s as subtle as a fart in Winchester Cathedral yet Clive Sheldon fell for it https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1dqe2443l1o

UK’s finest legal mind my arse. The double glazing firms and charity chuggers need to get round to his house pronto so he can give his life savings away. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Gloucester Saint

[egg]

5 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

Reading this on the BBC, it seems fairly obvious they just threw in an appeal to avoid the deportation. According to the BBC when arriving here, he said to officials he had not been exploited. 

Yep. Initially he is said to have said that he wasn't exploited. He was when it would help him. 

[Gloucester Saint]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep. Initially he is said to have said that he wasn't exploited. He was when it would help him. 

Dreadful from Sheldon. Bottled it. So obvious he had to go and he was being manipulated but couldn’t help himself. If he gets plenty of stick in public now then limited sympathy. Simple to do his job on this case and failed. Probably best that he steps down and lets another justice who can cope with lobbyist manipulation step up to the plate.

Edited 1 hour ago by Gloucester Saint

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

That comes back to asylum seekers having to meet a deadline to which is beyond their control. The only ways to address the issue, I think , is (a) to tighten the criteria in all respects (including the relevance of slavery issues), (b) get the home office geared up to process and determine claims, and (c) throw judges at the appeal system. The watered down appeal system will just lead to more judicial reviews I'd imagine, and that'll probably be slower than the current system. 

There's no easy solution though. If we throw judges at this it takes them away from other areas of the system. 

It's a mess. 

 

 

Not sure what you mean by this. They will have legal representation. The legal representation will be aware of a deadline for appeal which is why now they are able to appeal at the very last minute in order to delay the flight. If they are given notice that they have to appeal for the sake of argument let's say seven days before deportation then there is enough time to assess the validity of the appeal and reject it so they are cleared to be deported as planned.

[hypochondriac]

In fact looking at this case he has 14 days now to get the necessary evidence together. If the deadline for appeal had been 14 days ago then he would have had the time necessary to gather the evidence and he would be being deported now. As soon as you come here illegally.You have a limited time to provide evidence that you've been trafficked or you are gone.

[egg]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure what you mean by this. They will have legal representation. The legal representation will be aware of a deadline for appeal which is why now they are able to appeal at the very last minute in order to delay the flight. If they are given notice that they have to appeal for the sake of argument let's say seven days before deportation then there is enough time to assess the validity of the appeal and reject it so they are cleared to be deported as planned.

You said:

"If we tell them they are getting deported in a week then they have to put an appeal in with enough time to process and reject it and then get sent off p bthe flight as planned".

We can't give them a week to have an appeal dealt with if the appeal can't be dealt with in that timescale. That's a process beyond their control. They can only appeal. The rest is down to the system. 

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

You said:

"If we tell them they are getting deported in a week then they have to put an appeal in with enough time to process and reject it and then get sent off p bthe flight as planned".

We can't give them a week to have an appeal dealt with if the appeal can't be dealt with in that timescale. That's a process beyond their control. They can only appeal. The rest is down to the system. 

A week is a hypothetical example. The deadline for an appeal needs to be early enough that the appeal can be done and dusted before the flight is due to take off whether that's a week, three weeks or whatever. What we can't have is last minute appeals designed to delay things. One appeal with enough tine to process you and reject it and then you're in the flight with no further delays. If we'd said to this bloke three weeks ago that you have until next week to appeal your deportation and then two weeks to prove your case or you're leaving then that would have been preferable.

Edited 1 hour ago by hypochondriac

[skintsaint]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

A week is a hypothetical example. The deadline for an appeal needs to be early enough that the appeal can be done and dusted before the flight is due to take off whether that's a week, three weeks or whatever. What we can't have is last minute appeals designed to delay things. One appeal with enough tine to process you and reject it and then you're in the flight with no further delays. If we'd said to this bloke three weeks ago that you have until next week to appeal your deportation and then two weeks to prove your case or you're leaving then that would have been preferable.

That would be too sensible.

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

A week is a hypothetical example. The deadline for an appeal needs to be early enough that the appeal can be done and dusted before the flight is due to take off whether that's a week, three weeks or whatever. What we can't have is last minute appeals designed to delay things. One appeal with enough tine to process you and reject it and then you're in the flight with no further delays.

I agree that there should be a finite deadline for appeals to be filed, but the appellant can only file the appeal. The rest is down to the system, and then the criteria to be applied. 

 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

I agree that there should be a finite deadline for appeals to be filed, but the appellant can only file the appeal. The rest is down to the system, and then the criteria to be applied. 

 

And you give the appellant a deadline for filing the appeal with enough time for the system to look at it and reject it with no more appeals necessary. That's a much better approach than we have now.

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

And you give the appellant a deadline for filing the appeal with enough time for the system to look at it and reject it with no more appeals necessary. That's a much better approach than we have now.

Although we have deadlines already...from the refusal to first tier tribunal, then to the upper tribunal, then judicial review. I think what's happened in the case reported above, is that the modern slavery point was made belatedly meaning an injunction preventing deportation. I'm with you completely that all grounds of application/appeal should be made within the laid down process, not new ones lobbed in after you've lost. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Although we have deadlines already...from the refusal to first tier tribunal, then to the upper tribunal, then judicial review. I think what's happened in the case reported above, is that the modern slavery point was made belatedly meaning an injunction preventing deportation. I'm with you completely that all grounds of application/appeal should be made within the laid down process, not new ones lobbed in after you've lost. 

Right well if thays the case then I don't believe we should allow belated modern slavery appeals. If you miss the clearly communicated deadline then that's on you.

[whelk]

Won’t see the BBC covering this positive story for the country

https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/09/16/microsoft-30-billion-uk-ai-future/

[rallyboy]

2 minutes ago, whelk said:

Won’t see the BBC covering this positive story for the country

https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2025/09/16/microsoft-30-billion-uk-ai-future/

It's already on the BBC....😊

[whelk]

1 minute ago, rallyboy said:

It's already on the BBC....😊

They took my complaint seriously