Chomper Higgot

Or to put it more simply. There’s no need for evidence, an accusation is enough. So long as it’s the GOP making the accusations.

A strawman taken to the level of a rant.

So you are not yourself keeping up on the policy positions of the major UK UK political parties. You should try, it might improve your contributions.

Why is being knighted for public service inconsistent with representing all the electorate, let alone just the working class?

Please show me the warm sunlit uplands. Or a unicorn.

Hogwash. There’s a gaping gap between the two major parties. I suggest you go read up on the public opinion polls.

If you have anything to add to the discussion, feel free to post it.

I’m more concerned at the spiraling costs of the Government’s failure to clear applications and the constant scapegoating of migrants for a whole range of other Government failures, This ‘asylum barge’ is a testament to the Government’s continuing failure. ’Stop the boats’ has morphed into ‘put them in big boats’, of which hundreds would be required to house the back log. I can picture the scene in the cabinet room, Sunak screaming ‘do something, anything but do something’. So what gets done is a pointless show at cost to the tax payer and profit to chums of the Government.

Forgive me, I thought the Government were running the country, including housing policies? Am I wrong?

From the article you chose to post: Daily Mail speak at its best. There's no suggestion of wrongdoing, but some have speculated as to whether Paul may have had a steer about the upcoming Senate vote

More whataboutary.

Most asylum seekers are genuine. “75% of initial decisions made in 2022 resulted in a grant of asylum or other form of protection” https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/information/refugee-asylum-facts/the-truth-about-asylum/

So you don’t like Government being held accountable to the law. I think we got that.

I’m aware of both. I’m also aware that Britain has a housing crisis and that this was not caused by asylum seekers, regardless of how they arrived. Could money spent housing asylum seekers be spent elsewhere? Yes of course. So get on, clear the applications, pass bona fide asylum seekers into society where they can work to keep themselves, contribute and pay taxes. Deport those found to be bogus asylum seekers. Would money saved by doing this be spent on the homeless? I very much doubt it, certainly not by this Government.

Non of this is about any Labour failures you might want to throw in as a bit of whataboutary. Let’s hold the Government of the day accountable for the failures of government of the day.

Perhaps you did, perhaps you saw nothing of the sort. The absence of any links suggests the latter.

That doesn’t get you out of your baseless accusation. So you move directly to the ad hominem.

Throw in a housing crisis red-herring. 14 years to fix it, not fixed, so let’s blame asylum seekers and give the Government a free pass on another one of its failures.

Virtue signaling ‘ex military’. This Government has it in its power to help the ex military if it chooses to do so. Nothing at all whatsoever to do with asylum seekers.

An odd accusation given's that I have frequently and consistently argued that asylum applications should be cleared to allow bona fide asylum seekers to move into society, earn their own keep, contribute and pay taxes while bogus asylum seekers should be identified and deported. It is the Government’s failure to do this that is wasting taxpayers’ money.

Not a warm sunlit upland insight, let alone a unicorn.

‘Got nothing’ you say. How about the inconvenient fact that Labour haven’t been in power for over 14 years?

Here’s the proof: https://amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/07/legal-reprieve-asylum-seekers-bibby-stockholm-dorset-barge

There’s irony in ignorance. A central issue of the Government’s failed management of the UK’s asylum system is the fact that bona fide asylum seekers are left in limbo at tax payers expense when they could be cleared to enter society, earn their own keep, contribute and pay taxes.

What you have is proof that someone who disagrees with you.