The Conservative Party

Did Dowden get rinsed by Rayner in PMs Qs today?

And, just watching Sunak who says are Defence tech is the best in the world. How can somebody lie so bad that they can’t even see that all our equipment, especially our armour, is well past it or non-equistant?

Moving to 2.5% is an understatement, we’re that poorly equipped that we couldn’t mount a battle against Luxembourg.
 
The Future’s Blue! said:
Did Dowden get rinsed by Rayner in PMs Qs today?

And, just watching Sunak who says are Defence tech is the best in the world. How can somebody lie so bad that they can’t even see that all our equipment, especially our armour, is well past it or non-equistant?

Moving to 2.5% is an understatement, we’re that poorly equipped that we couldn’t mount a battle against Luxembourg.
Click to expand...

They'll be cleaning bits of Dowden out of the benches for a while. Rayner didn't hold back, but shouldn't have referred to Sunak as a pint-sized loser, accurate though it may be.

There was a bit of a dingdong over the Conservatives obstructing the no-fault eviction laws. Mostly Dowden was his usual whiny self trotting out rubbish.

There was the usual train of Conservatives standing up to abuse Labour mayors and Dowden praising the crook Houchen - is there an election coming up? Gullis had the first question and ranted for about 3 minutes before he was told to shut up by the Speaker.
 
inbetween said:
None of these policies make sense at all whichever way we do it. They're costly schemes that go to attack an issue that actually is not really an issue, we're talking about less than 50,000 people per year, less than 10% of total immigration. It has been made into an issue purely because of the negativity and costs involved, costs that are a result of Tory policy and the shambolic public sector.

You only have to look into where most of the costs come from, they come from housing and feeding people whilst applications are processed, that's it. Slow application processing isn't because there are too many applications, it's because the policy is purposely complicated and the Home Office isn't resourced to do the work.

Rwanda vastly increases the costs even more by adding an extra step in the process, ie, people are sent somewhere after being processed. All they're hoping is that it will act as a deterrent and so it will reduce costs in the long run because less will come over but there's no evidence of this.

Why not just accelerate the application process so that it becomes cheaper? As some claim, if migrants are here for a free lunch then why not remove it by ensuring that applications are processed faster? Those people are then released into the wild and well that in itself will act as a deterrent.

Either way it makes no sense that we pay so much and obsess over such a tiny percentage of immigration. It represents less than 10% of immigration and yet nobody is doing a single thing about the other 90%.
Click to expand...
Well, quite. More clerks at £35k a year processing applications and you wouldn't need judges hearing appeals at £135k a year.
 
inbetween said:
To be fair it is a problem but whether it's a big problem is just a point of view. I often read that we need to work with the EU but the EU hasn't been able to address their own problem in Europe either.

Basically there's no solution other than to ask whether it is actually a priority? It is currently costing us a fortune but that can be stopped because the biggest costs come down to choices.

The government has for example chosen to pay to put migrants in hotels because it refuses to process applications fast enough. Soon it will pay tons of money to both process applications and then send people to Rwanda.

They could quite easily change that policy, process applications 10x faster and not send people to Rwanda, the costs would be MUCH smaller because we wouldn't need hotels etc. We would have to accept 50,00 people per year but that's nothing in the grand scheme of immigration and until Rwanda comes into play we would still be accepting them all for the most part anyway.
Click to expand...
Can they drive a bus, lay bricks, pick crops, empty bedpans or any of the other shortage occupations that don't pay the minimum pay level for getting a visa?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.