Jump to content

Court of Appeal rules: Government plan to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda is unlawful.


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Parliament is subject to the laws Parliament enac

That makes no sense at all. Laws are applicable to everyone, but Parliament make those Laws and can repeal or amend them.  That is self evident, which is the point I made in my first post. 

Posted

The op post is factual incorrect as the Court overturned a previous High Court ruling made in December 2022 At no point has this case ever reached the Supreme Court

it is not possible for a High Court to overturn any Supreme Court ruling

  • Thanks 1
Posted
11 hours ago, vinny41 said:

The op post is factual incorrect as the Court overturned a previous High Court ruling made in December 2022 At no point has this case ever reached the Supreme Court

it is not possible for a High Court to overturn any Supreme Court ruling

That is what got me confused, how can the 'Supreme Court' be overruled? It wouldn't be Supreme?

Posted
15 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Thank goodness for the Courts.  Time for this evil government to go.

You do realize this is in the UK? not sure I'd call their Govt EVIL.

Posted

Rwanda. A good place to keep people without a visa? 

 

I guess Thailand could look into it. 

  • Haha 2
Posted
57 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The reason the UK are ‘putting up’ these ‘illegal immigrants’ is because the UK Government has failed to manage asylum assessment and clearance.

 

Result, people claiming asylum are not being processed at anywhere near an acceptable rate, the Government fix for this was remove the definition of required processing time.

 

Outcome genuine asylum seekers are not being cleared and allowed to earn their own living in the UK, while bogus asylum seekers are not being identified and removed.

 

Nobody objects to bogus asylum seekers being removed.

 

The question to be asked is why have the Government spent time and money on their Rwanda scheme, which they were warned would break UK and international law instead of fixing the asylum claim assessment and removal of bogus claimants?


 

Why? Show business policy,

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

Parliament make the Laws. Parliament is supreme, not the Judiciary, whose job it is to interpret the will of parliament. This is screwed up, as usual, by Human Rights Law, which in far too many cases thwarts the will of Parliament and indeed of the people.  

Got a problem with human rights? The court decided that Rwanda wasn't a safe place. You don't care if safe or not so long as not on your lawn?

 

Populist politics loses this one.

Edited by ozimoron
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Got a problem with human rights? The court decided that Rwanda wasn't a safe place. You don't care if safe or not so long as not on your lawn?

 

Populist politics loses this one.

They didn't arrive from Rwanda. 

 

That would have been a hell of a trip in a dinghy.

 

They are economic migrants looking to exploit the idiocy of the champagne socialists virtue signalling from their ivory towers.

  • Confused 2
  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Pathetic.

 

This type of nonsense plays into the hands of far right groups. Time to enforce sensible immigration policies like The East is doing.

 

No wonder the East is surging ahead of the West with this type of idiocy. Stop pandering to the left wing woke mob. Implement a sensible policy an enforce it.

‘Playing into the hand of right wing groups’ and then you launch into an anti ‘left wing woke mob’.

 

You might want to consider the posit hat the whole doomed Tory policy is not at all intended to address immigration but designed to distract the public from the ever growing litany of Tory failures.

 

The ‘Rwanda’ scheme is an agreement to ‘exchange’ asylum seekers, with Rwanda sending asylum seekers to the UK. 
 

It’s already cost well over a hundred million of tax payers pounds and will continue to cost more millions with zero impact on immigration.

 

It does get right wingers wound up into an ‘anti left woke mob’ rant while blinding to the Government’s failures.

 

You’re being played and you are willingly playing your part.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

You might want to consider the posit hat the whole doomed Tory policy is not at all intended to address immigration but designed to distract the public from the ever growing litany of Tory failures.

Not sure what a posit hat is but maybe a tin foil hat would be more appropriate for your bizarre conspiracy theories.

 

They are implementing the policy gradually to avoid a huge reaction from the woke MSM. 

 

Give it time. As long as Labour stay in the wilderness we will move in a positive direction. Labour would simply open the gates while back slapping at Islington wine parties.

  • Confused 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...