The Labour Government

[metalblue]

Exhibit A

I didn’t see anything remotely racist in that comment. Care to explain?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I didn’t see anything remotely racist in that comment. Care to explain?

Changing the framing of what is racist and what isn’t.

 

[PPT]

I didn’t see anything remotely racist in that comment. Care to explain?

Some people go out of their way to be offended and find what they are looking for when it’s more than obvious that it it isn’t there. If you argue black is white and you agree white is black, they will then argue the opposite. It’s laughable mate.

 

[Don Karleone]

Scumbags

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Some people go out of their way to be offended and find what they are looking for when it’s more than obvious that it it isn’t there. If you argue black is white and you agree white is black, they will then argue the opposite. It’s laughable mate.

Given I never said that post was racist, I’m not sure you’ve seen the wood for the trees.

Seems VAT on private schools has energised you to post your frustrations. Everyone has triggers.

 

[TinFoilHat]

The Keith Stalin mask has dropped.

 

[Postman Pep]

To be fair to McDonnell, he says he will vote for the SNP amendment. It needs to be more than a handful though and I suspect you're right.

Fair play to him

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Scumbags

I think this is a good thing in some ways, as going forwards, if you can't afford to have more than two children, you shouldn't expect others to pay for them instead.

But if you lose your job or they move the goal posts after you have them then it's really a different issue.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Anybody who is still trying to defend the Rwanda scheme (of which there still seems to be a few) needs to read this paper from March. They clearly must think the country just has bags and bags of money to fritter around.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CDP-2024-0054/CDP-2024-0054.pdf

View attachment 126175

For anybody doing the maths that is £170,874 per person over 5 years + £400,000 per person for the first 300 people. An eye-watering sum of money that doesn’t even capture the additional fixed contributions to the ETI fund. Storing claimants on Bibby Stockholm costs £45,000+ per year. Another incredible waste of money.

Actually processing an asylum claim costs £12,000 plus whatever support an approved refugee might require if they are successful. But if they are successful then they aren’t economic migrants are they?

And this as a deterrent? Well here’s one for you. Even if through this policy you deterred every single asylum seeker from coming here for an entire year, then we would still be paying more to Rwanda than we would save. If we generously ignore the huge up-front fixed cost, then if we send 1,000 people to Rwanda each year we would need to deter between 50-75% of unsuccessful asylum claimants from coming here for it to make economic sense in the long-term. That is fantasy. Are people really willing to bet close to a billion pounds on deterring over half of a group of people who clearly aren’t deterred by the much higher odds prospect of drowning in the Channel?

So Yvette Cooper is entirely correct when she describes this as an obscene waste of money. If people think we can sensibly afford a scheme like this right now they are living in an alternate reality.

Evidence suggests that the scheme was starting to work. But in no way can I defend the amount of money that this has cost.

 

[Don Karleone]

I think this is a good thing in some ways, as going forwards, if you can't afford to have more than two children, you shouldn't expect others to pay for them instead.

But if you lose your job or they move the goal posts after you have them then it's really a different issue.

I'm more arsed about punishing kids that had no say in that decision, to be honest.