PM Andy Burnham

Forums New posts
paigntonhibby said:
Best tell the EU group of five that in your esteemed opinion Rwanda disnae work. It might save them a few bob
Click to expand...
It may have worked if the torys had taken the time to get it done properly, and legally.

Like a lot of what they did it was shoot their mouths off first with a disregard UK and international law.

There were so many loopholes that were open to challenge it was never going to happen.

Perhaps if it had been properly considered and laws put into place to facilitate it it might have worked. Maybe that's what the EU are doing.
 
Jack said:
It may have worked if the torys had taken the time to get it done properly, and legally.

Like a lot of what they did it was shoot their mouths off first with a disregard UK and international law.

There were so many loopholes that were open to challenge it was never going to happen.

Perhaps if it had been properly considered and laws put into place to facilitate it it might have worked. Maybe that's what the EU are doing.
Click to expand...
So the UK were trendsetters then and the EU will perfect that option?

Then the UK can implement it again?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
So the UK were trendsetters then and the EU will perfect that option?

Then the UK can implement it again?
Click to expand...
The UK were all bluff and bluster. No thought about how to get it done other than a mail or express headline.

If the EU can get the legal stuff sorted I'd imagine there would be no reason the UK couldn't do the same. I'd imagine there would have been no reason the UK couldn't have done it before IF the policy had been properly thought through and implemented.

Rwanda was considered a dangerous country by international organisations. A load of tory MPs voting saying it's not doesn't make it safe! For example.
 
Yet the five EU nations don't seem to think it's dangerous or else they wouldn't be mooting it I would think.
 
Keepitgreen said:
He's here. He's there. He's every blinkin where.

He's Andy B.

He had a gogglebox appearance tonight.

Good? Or bad?

Personally I'm torn. If it was a tory @@$@ I can imagine being very annoyed. On the other hand, I l like our leader showing up on one of the few working class programmes on telly.

Does everyone here agree he comes across like a good @@$@?
Click to expand...
I reckon he probably is a not a bad C**t, but he is now discovering, thats not possible anymore. He'll have to be a c**t in some respects (or certainly make c**tish decisions) to be successful in his new career. Btw, what makes Googlebox working class TV?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Yet the five EU nations don't seem to think it's dangerous or else they wouldn't be mooting it I would think.
Click to expand...
I think you're mistaking some early discussions (as reported by a Green MSP) as some kind of authoritative statement of individual EU countries.
 
Archie said:
I think you're mistaking some early discussions (as reported by a Green MSP) as some kind of authoritative statement of individual EU countries.
Click to expand...

Well seems a bit more than discussions mate if they are having a gander.


Representatives of five EU countries visited Rwanda this week to discuss setting up return hubs for rejected African asylum seekers, the Rwandan government has confirmed.

The five EU Member States want to have return hubs in Rwanda in place by the end of the year. Rejected asylum seekers would then be housed there instead of in reception centres within the EU.

An EU regulation agreed in June by member states and the European Parliament gives legal grounds for countries that want to pursue such a plan. Besides Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya and Ghana are also seen as possible locations.

www.brusselstimes.com

EU delegates visit Rwanda to discuss building return hubs

Five European countries sent representatives to Kigali for talks over building return hubs for rejected African asylum seekers in the country.
www.brusselstimes.com www.brusselstimes.com
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Yet the five EU nations don't seem to think it's dangerous or else they wouldn't be mooting it I would think.
Click to expand...
I'm sure I saw reports a few months ago that the Rawanda government had been working hard to clean up it's act and was getting better reports.

Governments around the world now consider it safe in most areas. Which was not the case when to torys needed to grab headlines.
 
Jack said:
I'm sure I saw reports a few months ago that the Rawanda government had been working hard to clean up it's act and was getting better reports.

Governments around the world now consider it safe in most areas. Which was not the case when to torys needed to grab headlines.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm in no doubt at all it was headline grabbing Jack.

But it seems to have been something the EU thought isnae a bad idea.

So aye the UK were trendsetters.

Sort of.
 
Does calling Rwanda a "return hub" mean this is different from the Tories' Rwanda scheme? Under the Tories' scheme, asylum applications were to be processed in Rwanda, and successful applicants would be allowed to settle in Rwanda - not returned to settle in the UK. Whereas these articles talk about a hub which implies transiting people on to third countries after their applications have been looked at. All very vague and confusing though.
 
Jack said:
No. Other countries, like Australia and Israel were doing it.

If only the UK had taken hints and tips from them then the torys might not have made such an arse of it.
Click to expand...
Australia has politicians wi backbone, arrive without a visa arrested, granted a visa and commit a crime deported, seaborne migrants turned back at sea.
 
paigntonhibby said:
Australia has politicians wi backbone, arrive without a visa arrested, granted a visa and commit a crime deported, seaborne migrants turned back at sea.
Click to expand...
And their politicians have obviously got things sorted out.

Like I said. If the torys had maybe taken advice from countries already doing it they might not have wasted millions on a policy they had no idea how to implement.
 
Jack said:
And their politicians have obviously got things sorted out.

Like I said. If the torys had maybe taken advice from countries already doing it they might not have wasted millions on a policy they had no idea how to implement.
Click to expand...
Their pals in the legal profession have made (and are still making) a mint defending any attempts to deal with the influx of immigrants.
It's almost as if the stupidity of the government was deliberate.
 
Doc Shrink said:
Their pals in the legal profession have made (and are still making) a mint defending any attempts to deal with the influx of immigrants.
It's almost as if the stupidity of the government was deliberate.
Click to expand...
And labour supporting lawyers are making a fortune regarding 'human rights innit' legislation.

Great auld life being a lawyer by the looks of it.
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
And labour supporting lawyers are making a fortune regarding 'human rights innit' legislation.

Great auld life being a lawyer by the looks of it.
Click to expand...
I don't think the lawyers have to be supporting any particular political party, just doing their own version of 'ambulance chasing'.

Maybe Reform supporters........ plenty opportunities for making a ton of moola if these crooks ever got in.
 
Doc Shrink said:
Who?
Me?

I've worked with them for decades.
Some of them were clever right enough.
Click to expand...
I've worked for a few over the years as well and quite a few liked paying cash so they saved paying an extra 20%.

It's a funny auld world. 🙄
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
Nope they certainly do not Doc.

A pal of mine used to do cleaning for a government minister (at the time).

Cash in hand again.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised at that.
The Minister could simply have claimed it on his expenses rather than hand over cash.

Was it his moat that was being cleaned?


Or his motorhome?
 
EH17 Jimmy said:
I've worked for a few over the years as well and quite a few liked paying cash so they saved paying an extra 20%.

It's a funny auld world. 🙄
Click to expand...
I've done jobs for all sections of society including ones with titles and lots of them like nothing better than saving a few quid. Obviously no hertz *&*^ as they always pay in full.
 
Archie said:
Street homelessness is a really difficult issue to deal with. So you have to build a network of services to address the immediate issues and put preventative measures in place. It's not a one off payment. It's about looking after some very vulnerable people. Looking after our own.
Click to expand...
I reckon they should properly fund the existing services without having to build new networks. Early intervention must be the best way of preventing homelessness. Can't remember the figure offhand but care leavers make up a ridiculously high proportion of homeless people. Preparing them for life before they leave care should be done better than it is now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Hibs Chat
  • New Posts
  • Just Back
  • Chatroom