Windrush crisis

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

I feel like Rudd should have resigned because she knew what was going on, not because she didn't

I don't think anyone really thinks she didn't know. If you watch the footage of the select committee hearing, it has the look of someone who desperately trying to answer the questions with out admitting the obvious. Given that there is a manifesto commitment to a specific figure for net migration and the way performance targets have become the management magic wand de nos jours it would seem highly improbable that there weren't deportation targets.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I feel like Rudd should have resigned because she knew what was going on, not because she didn't

I don't think anyone really thinks she didn't know. If you watch the footage of the select committee hearing, it has the look of someone who desperately trying to answer the questions with out admitting the obvious. Given that there is a manifesto commitment to a specific figure for net migration and the way performance targets have become the management magic wand de nos jours it would seem highly improbable that there weren't deportation targets.

they all have their heads so far up their collective ass that they see "misleading parliament" as worse than the original offence

rjsterry

The Standard is running a story that the reason Rudd said there weren't targets was because DG of Immigration Enforcement emailed her to say that there weren't any before the SC hearing. Probably just Osborne sticking up for his protégé.

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I feel like Rudd should have resigned because she knew what was going on, not because she didn't

I don't think anyone really thinks she didn't know. If you watch the footage of the select committee hearing, it has the look of someone who desperately trying to answer the questions with out admitting the obvious. Given that there is a manifesto commitment to a specific figure for net migration and the way performance targets have become the management magic wand de nos jours it would seem highly improbable that there weren't deportation targets.

I have read various bits that suggest she may have known about the targets, but that if she didn't, she should have, and that in itself was enough to force her to resign.

I would have preferred she resigned over the visa policies that she has continued to adopt that resulted in the Windrush crisis.

lostboysaint

She wrote a letter to the PM, her predecessor in the Home Office, in which she describes deportation targets as "ambitious but achievable". I'd suggest it's abundantly clear that she knew about them and lied.

It's also done May a favour as it's distracted the public from her immigration bus fiasco.

They're a shambles. Not a shred of ability, capability, decency or standards among them.

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

I feel like Rudd should have resigned because she knew what was going on, not because she didn't

I don't think anyone really thinks she didn't know. If you watch the footage of the select committee hearing, it has the look of someone who desperately trying to answer the questions with out admitting the obvious. Given that there is a manifesto commitment to a specific figure for net migration and the way performance targets have become the management magic wand de nos jours it would seem highly improbable that there weren't deportation targets.

I have read various bits that suggest she may have known about the targets, but that if she didn't, she should have, and that in itself was enough to force her to resign.

I would have preferred she resigned over the visa policies that she has continued to adopt that resulted in the Windrush crisis.

That would mean TM admitting that she was wrong. She still doesn't think she was wrong to call that election.

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

That would mean TM admitting that she was wrong. She still doesn't think she was wrong to call that election.

Wasn't she right to call the election, but wrong to not bother with policy, debates or a campaign?

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

That would mean TM admitting that she was wrong. She still doesn't think she was wrong to call that election.

Wasn't she right to call the election, but wrong to not bother with policy, debates or a campaign?

It was a straightforward request for a mandate for her version of magical unicorn Brexit, which got the answer "meh". Instead of listening to that she pressed on regardless without an ounce of self-reflection despite reality slowly grinding away her red lines. That same blindness has driven this mess.

tailwindhome

David Schneider
‏
Verified account

@davidschneider
22h22 hours ago
More
June 2017:
Amber Rudd stands in for Theresa May by taking part in the leaders debate instead of her.

April 2018:
Amber Rudd stands in for Theresa May by resigning over the hostile environment fiasco instead of her.

rick_chasey

Is not great for the remain cause.

rjsterry

Watching Oliver Letwin argue that both main parties (including himself) made a mistake by indulging anti-immigration rhetoric to try to neutralise UKIP, and that actually they should have fought back by making more of the benefits of immigration. See, that wasn't so hard.

rick_chasey

rjsterry wrote:

Watching Oliver Letwin argue that both main parties (including himself) made a mistake by indulging anti-immigration rhetoric to try to neutralise UKIP, and that actually they should have fought back by making more of the benefits of immigration. See, that wasn't so hard.

Economist last week was suggesting the main damage the “rivers of blood” speech did was immediately racialise the immigration debate, essentially shutting all discussion down.

Moonbiker

Why is it called "windrush crisis" alot off immigrants from other countries are in the same situation.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... rush-group

Jez mon

Moonbiker wrote:

Why is it called "windrush crisis" alot off immigrants from other countries are in the same situation.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... rush-group

Catchy name innit?

"The somewhat unsurprising outcome of creating a hostile environment, when sufficient record keeping does not seem to exist" just doesn't scan as well.

TheBigBean

They could have called it Windrushgate to annoy everyone.

rjsterry

Osborne is not happy with May for throwing Rudd under the bus.

George Osborne
(@George_Osborne)
Today’s @EveningStandard exclusive: PM personally vetoed Cabinet requests for extra visas for NHS doctors pic.twitter.com/Tm1xGFRl41

May 1, 2018

TheBigBean

It would be quite amusing if May were to go based on her time at the home office rather than the politics of Brexit.

Jez mon

TheBigBean wrote:

It would be quite amusing if May were to go based on her time at the home office rather than the politics of Brexit.

Who wants the top job? I think anyone with even a tiny bit of patience will wait out until Brexit is finalised...

surrey_commuter

Jez mon wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

It would be quite amusing if May were to go based on her time at the home office rather than the politics of Brexit.

Who wants the top job? I think anyone with even a tiny bit of patience will wait out until Brexit is finalised...

plenty of morons queueing up for that job

robert88

Jez mon wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

It would be quite amusing if May were to go based on her time at the home office rather than the politics of Brexit.

Who wants the top job? I think anyone with even a tiny bit of patience will wait out until Brexit is finalised...

When will I know when Brexit is finalized?

.. oops meant 'finalised'.

TheGardenGnome

Sajid Javid is a well picked candidate for the HO especially considering the current climate regarding immigrsntion. Not only does he have an immigrant background, he also physically looks different which will dispel any racism myths.

Jez mon

TheGardenGnome wrote:

Sajid Javid is a well picked candidate for the HO especially considering the current climate regarding immigrsntion. Not only does he have an immigrant background, he also physically looks different which will dispel any racism myths.

Good luck with that.

Jez mon

Robert88 wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

It would be quite amusing if May were to go based on her time at the home office rather than the politics of Brexit.

Who wants the top job? I think anyone with even a tiny bit of patience will wait out until Brexit is finalised...

When will I know when Brexit is finalized?

.. oops meant 'finalised'.

When we either go off a cliff edge, enter the transition period, or enter into the most comprehensive trade deal ever.

robert88

" enter into the most comprehensive trade deal ever."

That sounds like an excellent idea.

TheBigBean

Labour has tabled a motion that the government should publish all its internal Windrush discussions over the last 8 years. This has forced May to three line whip all the Tories to vote against as presumably transparency would reveal her role.

A nice bit of politics by labour.

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

Labour has tabled a motion that the government should publish all its internal Windrush discussions over the last 8 years. This has forced May to three line whip all the Tories to vote against as presumably transparency would reveal her role.

A nice bit of politics by labour.

Reveal? Was her role in some way hidden?

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Labour has tabled a motion that the government should publish all its internal Windrush discussions over the last 8 years. This has forced May to three line whip all the Tories to vote against as presumably transparency would reveal her role.

A nice bit of politics by labour.

Reveal? Was her role in some way hidden?

Her role in the Windrush crisis. Better?

rjsterry

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Labour has tabled a motion that the government should publish all its internal Windrush discussions over the last 8 years. This has forced May to three line whip all the Tories to vote against as presumably transparency would reveal her role.

A nice bit of politics by labour.

Reveal? Was her role in some way hidden?

Her role in the Windrush crisis. Better?

I meant that her role in the Windrush crisis is blindingly obvious and doesn't need a review of internal communications to show that (although resisting such a request only makes her look more guilty); I wasn't picking holes.

TheBigBean

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Labour has tabled a motion that the government should publish all its internal Windrush discussions over the last 8 years. This has forced May to three line whip all the Tories to vote against as presumably transparency would reveal her role.

A nice bit of politics by labour.

Reveal? Was her role in some way hidden?

Her role in the Windrush crisis. Better?

I meant that her role in the Windrush crisis is blindingly obvious and doesn't need a review of internal communications to show that (although resisting such a request only makes her look more guilty); I wasn't picking holes.

Either way she looks more guilty. She either chooses to release some juicy evidence which is not currently in the public domain or she looks like she is covering it up. That's why it was a nice bit of politics.

FishFish

So then what is the great crime that the then home secretary has committed. There is a policy of returning illegal immigrants and there are targets. Both are agreed by the government and are pretty acceptable to society.
The system was defective (in removing unregistered Caribbean immigrants and other 'low hanging fruit') because to make it a zero defect policy would require an audit of each situation which would be horrendously expensive (My calc of the present value being £250M at least).

So some stupid immigration officers playing games with the rules on targets. All of the returned immigrants Caribbean or not did not have the right to stay because they had not gone through the application procedures. There is no process for waiving the application process or fees.

Tell you what, let us make the NHS zero defect too.