Del Woppio
Virgin geek fuckwad
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2009
- Messages
- 25,827
- Reaction score
- 12,246
Tbf, it'd only be breaking the law in a very limited and specific way
If bringing back Cameron firms up the wankers in the south who always vote Tory and if he can then convince the closet racists he might be on to something.Becoming clear to me that they are going to try and make the GE a single issue one and appeal to the same demographic they did last time. This new Treaty with Rwanda and subsequent legislation with be stuck in the courts until then and they'll continue to blame the ECHR, lefty lawyers and the wokerati throughout. Interesting one for Starmer to navigate
What. A. Prick
He's following Leenoch's (thanks @Sniffer ) lead and saying that he's just going to ignore the law and say it's safe to hurl people to Rwanda.
Excuse me Half Pint but I don't think the Lords will rubberstamp that somehow.
Should be easy enough. Who was in charge when the boats started arriving?who let the backlog of asylum claims go through the roof thus meaning the government had to take over hotels to accommodate them? How many asylum seekers can Rwanda take? What cost per asylum seeker going there? what is the point of sending them there as if/when their applications are rejected we have to bring them back here? Loads to be going at.Becoming clear to me that they are going to try and make the GE a single issue one and appeal to the same demographic they did last time. This new Treaty with Rwanda and subsequent legislation with be stuck in the courts until then and they'll continue to blame the ECHR, lefty lawyers and the wokerati throughout. Interesting one for Starmer to navigate
They need us more than we need themunless he plans pulling the country out of the UN.