National News Boris Johnson - Ousted Former PM

Essexyellows said:
It certainly does matter! Probably not for the same reasons though.............

It shouldn`t be a problem housing illegal immigrants in barracks, for a short period of time before shipping them straight back to France.

By all means, migrate but do it through the proper channels. Likewise claim refuge or asylum in line with the UN Convention.

"Article 31 of the UN Refugee Convention states that refugees cannot be penalised for entering the country illegally to claim asylum if they are “coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened” provided they “present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence”.

Last time I checked France wasn`t threatening anyone life or freedom.

Unfortunately, until someone plays hardball people will continue to be trafficked and people will continue to die.
Click to expand...

Did you read the article?

PHE documents from the time contradict what Priti Patel told Parliament with regards Napier Barracks being Covid compliant.

And the High Court has said it is unlawful* to use Napier Barracks yet they are continuing to be used for the same purpose.

*There's that word again with this Govt.
 
Marked Ox said:
Did you read the article?

PHE documents from the time contradict what Priti Patel told Parliament. And the High Court has said it is unlawful* to use Napier Barracks yet they are continuing to be used.

*There's that word again with this Govt.
Click to expand...
Cue the response: "yeah, but Tony Blair...."
 
Marked Ox said:
Did you read the article?

PHE documents from the time contradict what Priti Patel told Parliament with regards Napier Barracks being Covid compliant.

And the High Court has said it is unlawful* to use Napier Barracks yet they are continuing to be used for the same purpose.

*There's that word again with this Govt.
Click to expand...

You think PP visited in person to check or was just told it was fine by whoever was in charge on-site?

To right they should continue to use them until such a time as a more robust resolution is put in place.

Compliant or not they are probably better than what said people are used to.

Maybe they would rather be back in a tent on a polluted landfill site in Calais?
 
Essexyellows said:
You think PP visited in person to check or was just told it was fine by whoever was in charge on-site?

To right they should continue to use them until such a time as a more robust resolution is put in place.

Compliant or not they are probably better than what said people are used to.

Maybe they would rather be back in a tent on a polluted landfill site in Calais?
Click to expand...

If she wasn't sure then she shouldn't have said so in Parliament.

So because it is slightly better than a tent or a landfill site it is acceptable in this country? I thought this country was supposed to have some standards but then again with this Govt....
 
What I don't understand is Hancock's sister got a contract that was ok .... Cummins and goves peeps got a contract and that's unlawful? Oh the double standards are deafening .... He got the right name Boris ..bj a mouth full of cum and f**k all after....
 
Oh and can I add he was shite as mayor of London...and believe you me had plenty of dealings wit the sad baffoon...full of hot air and bull shite ...promises he never kept ...ring a bell pm ?
 
SteMerritt said:
Who has time for that, just read the headlines

Starter for 10... Where does the buck stop?
Click to expand...

Minister gets a report on desk that says "It`s fine" .............. stands up in parliament and repeats report.

The information then gets called out as "wrong".

Remind me who is at fault the person who wrote it or the person that believed it?

A shrewd person can make an Executive Summary say whatever needs to be said............ says the author of several papers to our "Financial Recovery Board". As long as the bottom line appears at least cost neutral or at best cost saving it sails through.
 
Essexyellows said:
Minister gets a report on desk that says "It`s fine" .............. stands up in parliament and repeats report.

The information then gets called out as "wrong".

Remind me who is at fault the person who wrote it or the person that believed it?
Click to expand...
The minister should be more careful who they appoint to get their information.

You'd be first calling out Starmer if he'd said something to parliament that was false, irrespective of who prepared it.
 
SteMerritt said:
The minister should be more careful who they appoint to get their information.

You'd be first calling out Starmer if he'd said something to parliament that was false, irrespective of who prepared it.
Click to expand...

So far I make it that it doesn't matter if the Govt acts unlawfully, as that is a flexible concept, as is lying to parliament and ignoring parliament's rules and giving contracts to mates/Family/Tory donors/neighbours. And now Ministers aren't responsible for what their Depts do or what the Govt does. And all of this is acceptable for the Govt to hide.

It begs the question why bother having a democracy at all...
 
SteMerritt said:
The minister should be more careful who they appoint to get their information.

You'd be first calling out Starmer if he'd said something to parliament that was false, irrespective of who prepared it.
Click to expand...

I would be first to say Starmer should be calling it out as Leader of the Opposition. Except the "Inquisitor General" appears to be fecking useless.

The thing about politics is that none of it is properly black or white. There can`t be a yes or no. It is all so grey that those in power can push the boundaries.

Its why I`ll never progress beyond my current position..... I tell it like it is and don`t do "grey".......... ;)
 
Essexyellows said:
Minister gets a report on desk that says "It`s fine" .............. stands up in parliament and repeats report.

The information then gets called out as "wrong".

Remind me who is at fault the person who wrote it or the person that believed it?

A shrewd person can make an Executive Summary say whatever needs to be said............ says the author of several papers to our "Financial Recovery Board". As long as the bottom line appears at least cost neutral or at best cost saving it sails through.
Click to expand...
“Yes, Minister”
 
Marked Ox said:
I don't disagree with this. He isn't exactly doing a good job at the moment. If he was at least pulling the Labour Party together into a cohesive unit again but if he is then it is being kept quiet.
Click to expand...
But even if he was it wouldn't be being reported as such so we'll never know.
 
QR said:
But even if he was it wouldn't be being reported as such so we'll never know.
Click to expand...

Kinnock started the process and then John Smith did the same under not dissimilar circumstances. It would be reported anyway in the likes of the Daily Mirror, Guardian, BBC, Sky News etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Northstandboy
National News Boris Johnson
24 25 26
Replies
502
Views
31K
m
m
Peterdev
National News Boris Johnson successor
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
7K
Marked Ox
M
gofish2
Boris (spaffing the facts) Johnson
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
12K
gofish2
gofish2
M
National News Boris goes to Jail
Replies
13
Views
2K
chuckbert
chuckbert
mooro
National News After Boris
2 3
Replies
48
Views
5K
QR
QR
Back
Top Bottom