Donate SIGN UP

They Just Can't Help It Can They.

Avatar Image
gulliver1 | 14:16 Fri 16th May 2025 | News
28 Answers

BBC Question Time Audience were left in stiches with tears  rolling down their eyes as Fiona Bruce... Skewers Tory/Con Chairman over his Party's record.   Con MP Nigel Huddleston was left on the back foot after he tried to attack Labours record on immigration. Criticising Labour for scrapping the great Tory plan to send immigrants to Rwanda.But Fiona then interrupted him to remind the stupid Con that his party never sent any immigrants to Rwanda. What a Plonker.

Gravatar

Answers

21 to 28 of 28rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by gulliver1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

//As the new government scrapped the Rwanda plan, it must have been in operation prior to that.//

The key word is PLAN.  It was a plan. That's why it wasn't in operation. If only there hadn't been so much squealing about how cruel the plan was it could have been put into operation. My view is that it in time it might have acted as a deterrent but an expensive one. But we may never know how successful it would have been.

NMA, you might want to have a read of this link to see how many millions of pounds were spent on the scheme, during which only four volunteers went to Rwanda.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/medp-with-rwanda-and-the-illegal-migration-act-associated-costs/breakdown-of-home-office-costs-associated-with-the-medp-with-rwanda-and-the-illegal-migration-act-2023

And why was it none were sent to Rwanda ?

 

The anti-British blockers and their legal loopholes, maybe.

//The anti-British blockers and their legal loopholes //

Otherwise known as 'the law'.

They've overcome this hurdle in America by ignoring it. Go and live there if they'll let you in.

Whose law?  British law said yes.  The ECHR, an organisation not fit for purpose, had other ideas. 

//The ECHR//

Something we have signed up to abide by and in fact had a part in setting up.

People that disagree with the law, such as yourself, still have to abide by it. 

Loopholes are where folk try to abuse the intent of the law to achieve that which they should not.

 

But in any case, no one else seems to think ECHR decisions need to be adhered to. They get treated as guidelines. Therefore there's no reason the illegals couldn't go.  Lack of guts prevented it.

Yes Tomus, and something we should have abandoned years ago.  An organisation unfit for purpose.

21 to 28 of 28rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

They Just Can't Help It Can They.

Answer Question >>