RayC

Welfare State: A system whereby the state undertakes to protect the health and well-being of its citizens, especially those in financial or social need, by means of grants, pensions, and other benefits. This is what exists in the UK today. QED.

Thank you for that incisive comment.

Classic JonnyF. An angry, thinly veiled racist/xenophobic rant topped off by a snide personal attack. Nothing of substance offered. Nothing worthy of discussion. Nothing changes.

No they are not and it is completely irrational to suggest that they are. 'Mutually exclusive' means that two things cannot exist at the same time. The fact that welfare states exist and function in 27 EU states where open borders exist proves that they can co-exist. QED. So you now agree that an open borders policy and a welfare state can co-exist. You're correct: The UK does not have an 'Open Borders' policy. I'm pleased that you now agree with my original points.

The existing UK immigration policies may not be working, but whatever way you look at it the UK does NOT operate an 'Open Borders' policy. You can argue until the cows come home but that is a FACT. The UK welfare state - while far from perfect - has not collapsed. It functions. Neither here nor there. Completely irrelevant.

Look no further than Thailand

You are obviously perfectly entitled to your opinion, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my points which are: 1) the UK does not operate an 'Open Borders' immigration policy and 2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

And equally there are those on the right who feel that only their voice should be heard.

Governments - both Tory and Labour - have tried to stop illegal immigration. I am talking about legal immigration: A (limited) 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are not mutually exclusive situations.

Come on! What could be simpler than calculating links from inches (7.92) or fathoms from yards 2.0266 (reoccurring). I blame the metric system for declining mental arithmetic skills😉

"An open border is a border that enables free movement of people and often of goods between jurisdictions with no restrictions on movement and is lacking a border control" (Wikipedia) By definition, the UK does NOT now have an 'Open Borders policy' as immigration from all countries is subject to conditions being met. As I implied, the UK did have an 'Open Borders policy' (with 27 other nations) when we were a member of the EU, and that at least partially explains the overall increase in immigration numbers between 1990 and 2020. However, as we are obviously no longer an EU member, the increase in numbers since 2020 cannot be attributed to an 'Open Borders' policy.

Why ask a priest?😉

If that were the case then the welfare state would have ceased to function while we were a member of the EU. It didn't. There is no 'open borders policy'; in fact (almost) the exact opposite. Immigration to the UK is more tightly controlled now than at any time since the early '90s as a result of Brexit and the loss of freedom of movement.

Technically, the monarch has the power to dissolve parliament at any time. In practice, he would only do so when it is requested by the PM. The chances of the King dissolving parliament without the PM requesting it simply because Reform are ahead in the polls is zero; if he were to do so there would be a constitutional crisis. If widespread protests looked like turning to civil war then I suppose it's possible but we are not remotely close to that point, although as England hasn't had a civil war for close on 400 years, it might be thought that we are due one😊

It's difficult to take anyone seriously who believes that the 'British Imperial system' still dictates world affairs and sets the world agenda. Historians argue about the precise date that the US supplanted the UK as the major power on the world stage, but surely there can be little doubt that the US has been the major force since, at the very least, the end of WW2. The idea that Breton Woods was a British Imperial instrument and that the UK government set the agenda for this event and, consequently, the world monetary system is ridiculous: it was a US construct. It is also equally ridiculous to believe that London, not Wall Street, currently dictates the world financial system.

Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? Does it? In what way? Do you have any evidence to support that view? (Getting a bit repetitive this) Not based on the evidence presented by you it couldn't Of course, all the evidence presented by you points to FUBAR From the Daily Telegraph (well known bastion of DEI wokish opinion): "(In 2021) Ms Metreweli had already spent two decades in MI6, working in operational roles in Europe and crucially the Middle East. It’s safe to assume she worked in Iraq, stationed with MI6’s smallish team on the ground in Basra, as hostile an environment as there could be in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion". Do you have any evidence to support ... or never mind .....

But the shortlist for this post was not all-female. It comprised of 3 women and 1 man (Source: The Times). The Times also stated that, "Metreweli has been the internal frontrunner for several years and has been groomed for the top job." Now no doubt some will see this as confirmation of DEI at work, discounting the possibility that the selection panel simply considered these four individuals to be the best suited for the job, and that by identifying Metreweli at a relatively early stage in proceedings might be viewed as good succession planning.

You implied that those taking umbrage at Metreweli's appointment were 'realists' and, by extension, I assumed that you supported that view? Given the likelihood that this time last week, 99.9% of people - myself included - had never heard of Ms. Metreweli's existence, I struggle to believe that those criticising her appointment have the slightest idea about her abilities and suitability for the role. Therefore, I can't think of any other reason apart from misogyny - or perhaps, homophobia; someone has suggested she is a lesbian - for those posting here to object to her appointment.

That is no more evidence of bias i.e. that Metreweli was potentially a DEI appointment, than saying that the appointment of a male to a job was potentially an example of the glass ceiling and anti-female bias. A lot more convincing evidence is needed.

Yanukovych - the Ukrainian President who was overthrown - was elected on a platform which promised closer economic ties with the EU. The Ukrainian parliament had approved a bill authorising the signing of the 'EU-Ukraine Association Agreement' - which was seen as a precursor to Ukraine's eventual admission to the EU - but on the eve of the ceremony, Yanukovych - under pressure from Moscow - unilaterally decided to refuse to sign the Agreement and instead sought closer ties with Russia. The overwhelming majority of Ukrainians (>80%) were in favour of Ukraine joining the EU and felt betrayed. This was the catalyst for the Maïdan protests and Yanukovych's eventual overthrow. Separatists - aided by Russian support - had been engaged in terrorist activities in the Donbass region before 2014. Ukraine did not suddenly declare war on its' own people.

I'm sure that the overwhelming majority of EU member states would love to be rid of Orban's Hungary but, unfortunately, no mechanism exists to throw them out. Hungary would need to leave of its' own accord, like the UK; something it will never do while it is a net beneficiary of EU funds.

Unfortunately, You are almost certainly correct. You aren't cheering for Putin and/or celebrating the deaths of ordinary Ukrainian civilians but that is more than can be said for certain other posters.

How many dead Ukrainians does it take to satisfy you?

Could you explain why she is unsuitable for the role? Lack of ability? Skeletons in the closet?

For now I'll point out just one potential problem with your solution: What happens if France refuses to allow the RN to escort the dinghies back into French waters? Do we declare war on France?