Cable Forum
Page 13 of 20 « First 39101112 13 14151617 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Starmer’s chronicles (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33712992)

OLD BOY 17-05-2025 17:59
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196696)
Possibly, Old Boy, possibly.

But what are your definitions of high levels of immigration? And acceptable levels?
Acceptable levels are related to the skills we need to bring into the country and under our asylum system. You can’t really put a number on it, because this varies over time. As a general rule, if people do not have the skills that employers need, they shouldn’t be accepted into this country. We must also bear in mind that we need labour where there are shortage areas, such as in farming.

I do believe we have many people claiming benefits who could go out to work, with many abusing the system. I’ve seen it first hand, so I know it’s true. Those people should be refused benefit if they are clearly trying to avoid getting a job or getting trained for one. That in itself should help to bring down the numbers.

We should aim to steadily reduce immigration until our population reduces to a level whereby our residents population can get accommodation and our public services are able to function more efficiently.

Illegal immigration must stop and the government must introduce laws that enable us to turn away anyone who enters the country illegally with no right of appeal.

One other exception is students. I do think we should welcome students into this country who are paying for a university course. However, once their studies are complete, they shouldn’t be return to their country. We also need to keep an eye on them to ensure that they do not absent themselves from their studies, which I believe happens a lot.

I just want common sense to prevail and to recognise that we can’t take in everyone who wants to be here. Starmer’s latest plan to pay landlords to take in illegal immigrants will only serve to deprive our own people from getting accommodation. How is that right?

Hugh 17-05-2025 18:18
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36196720)
Acceptable levels are related to the skills we need to bring into the country and under our asylum system. You can’t really put a number on it, because this varies over time. As a general rule, if people do not have the skills that employers need, they shouldn’t be accepted into this country. We must also bear in mind that we need labour where there are shortage areas, such as in farming.

I do believe we have many people claiming benefits who could go out to work, with many abusing the system. I’ve seen it first hand, so I know it’s true. Those people should be refused benefit if they are clearly trying to avoid getting a job or getting trained for one. That in itself should help to bring down the numbers.

We should aim to steadily reduce immigration until our population reduces to a level whereby our residents population can get accommodation and our public services are able to function more efficiently.

Illegal immigration must stop and the government must introduce laws that enable us to turn away anyone who enters the country illegally with no right of appeal.

One other exception is students. I do think we should welcome students into this country who are paying for a university course. However, once their studies are complete, they shouldn’t be return to their country. We also need to keep an eye on them to ensure that they do not absent themselves from their studies, which I believe happens a lot.


I just want common sense to prevail and to recognise that we can’t take in everyone who wants to be here. Starmer’s latest plan to pay landlords to take in illegal immigrants will only serve to deprive our own people from getting accommodation. How is that right?
fyi

Quote:
the University is required to report you to UKVI if you break the terms and conditions of your visa. This requirement applies to all universities, not just the University of Sheffield. You can ensure that you comply with the terms and conditions of your student visa by doing the following:

Enrol for every year of your studies. If you are unable to enrol, you must inform the University so that we know where you are.
Keep good attendance at all teaching sessions. If you are in the UK on a student visa you must study full time.
Do not take a break from your studies unless this is absolutely necessary
Do not work more hours than permitted. Your visa will tell you what hours you can work, if any.
The University will notify the Home Office if:

You do not register
You are absent, without authorisation, from teaching sessions
You withdraw from your course
You take an authorised leave of absence
You change your course of study
We know that you have broken the terms and conditions of your visa
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/internat...plication/faqs

The above is from Sheffield University, but all other Unis have to do the same in order to be able to issue CASs - if the Unis don’t do this, they lose the right to issue CASs, so foreign students couldn’t attend.

Itshim 17-05-2025 19:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Se that asylum seeker's are charge with spying , really need to get more in , after all we haven't spent that much on them have we

telegramsam 17-05-2025 20:07
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36196720)
Acceptable levels are related to the skills we need to bring into the country and under our asylum system. You can’t really put a number on it, because this varies over time. As a general rule, if people do not have the skills that employers need, they shouldn’t be accepted into this country. We must also bear in mind that we need labour where there are shortage areas, such as in farming.

I do believe we have many people claiming benefits who could go out to work, with many abusing the system. I’ve seen it first hand, so I know it’s true. Those people should be refused benefit if they are clearly trying to avoid getting a job or getting trained for one. That in itself should help to bring down the numbers.

We should aim to steadily reduce immigration until our population reduces to a level whereby our residents population can get accommodation and our public services are able to function more efficiently.

Illegal immigration must stop and the government must introduce laws that enable us to turn away anyone who enters the country illegally with no right of appeal.

One other exception is students. I do think we should welcome students into this country who are paying for a university course. However, once their studies are complete, they shouldn’t be return to their country. We also need to keep an eye on them to ensure that they do not absent themselves from their studies, which I believe happens a lot.

I just want common sense to prevail and to recognise that we can’t take in everyone who wants to be here. Starmer’s latest plan to pay landlords to take in illegal immigrants will only serve to deprive our own people from getting accommodation. How is that right?
So what about the jobs that are low level skills that British people don't want to do but foreigners are willing to do?

papa smurf 17-05-2025 20:10
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196722)
Se that asylum seeker's are charge with spying , really need to get more in , after all we haven't spent that much on them have we
Don't worry they'll probably get a suspended sentence and of course we can't deport them it's against their human rights

Sephiroth 17-05-2025 22:16
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36196723)
So what about the jobs that are low level skills that British people don't want to do but foreigners are willing to do?
That's where the government seems to be getting it wrong - as in kneejerk reaction. I'm talking about permitted/visa entry. It is wishful thinking to suppose that this new training budget will deliver carers (e.g.).

What is even more wrong, is the NI-free influx of Indian workers, many of them talented on decent salaries. The employers will gladly save on their NI bill.

Itshim 18-05-2025 11:36
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36196724)
Don't worry they'll probably get a suspended sentence and of course we can't deport them it's against their human rights
So true need to leave ECHR

Sephiroth 18-05-2025 11:48
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196728)
So true need to leave ECHR
… and/or sort out that the immigration judges are also the immigration lefty lawyers.

Russ 18-05-2025 14:19
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196728)
So true need to leave ECHR
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?

telegramsam 18-05-2025 14:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?

papa smurf 18-05-2025 14:33
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
The right to spout bullshit?

Sephiroth 18-05-2025 15:29
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
Would those be the people who are paid for by taking away the winter fuel allowance?

As for your list - this is the UK, not Russia or Iran.

Btw, it would be silly to leave the ECHR if we don't at the same time leave the UNHRC. However, we should work out careful legal derogations from the provisions that keep the lefty lawyers in funds paid for by hard working people.

papa smurf 18-05-2025 15:59
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196733)
Would those be the people who are paid for by taking away the winter fuel allowance?

As for your list - this is the UK, not Russia or Iran.

Btw, it would be silly to leave the ECHR if we don't at the same time leave the UNHRC. However, we should work out careful legal derogations from the provisions that keep the lefty lawyers in funds paid for by hard working people.
and pensioners, many of us pay income tax.

Russ 18-05-2025 16:04
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196733)

As for your list - this is the UK, not Russia or Iran.
Interesting choice of countries given that we would join Russia (and Belarus) as the only European countries outside of the ECHR.

Still, I admire your optimism that no UK government would abuse the new found ‘freedoms’ they’d have if we left the ECHR.

papa smurf 18-05-2025 16:06
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196736)
Interesting choice of countries given that we would join Russia (and Belarus) as the only European countries outside of the ECHR.

Still, I admire your optimism that no UK government would abuse the new found ‘freedoms’ they’d have if we left the ECHR.
Yea they'll be locking you up for texting next

OLD BOY 18-05-2025 16:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196721)
fyi



https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/internat...plication/faqs

The above is from Sheffield University, but all other Unis have to do the same in order to be able to issue CASs - if the Unis don’t do this, they lose the right to issue CASs, so foreign students couldn’t attend.
Thanks for pointing that out, Hugh. That’s reassuring.

---------- Post added at 16:13 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36196723)
So what about the jobs that are low level skills that British people don't want to do but foreigners are willing to do?
Seethe last sentence of my first paragraph. By the way, the reason our people don’t want those jobs is because they are happier simply claiming benefits, which is a ridiculously easy option for them to take.

---------- Post added at 16:14 ---------- Previous post was at 16:13 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by telegramsam (Post 36196723)
So what about the jobs that are low level skills that British people don't want to do but foreigners are willing to do?
See the last sentence of my first paragraph. By the way, the reason our people don’t want those jobs is because they are happier simply claiming benefits, which is a ridiculously easy option for them to take.

---------- Post added at 16:19 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
A fair trial for what? If they come over on these boats with no right to be here, then, guess what? They shouldn’t be here!

Why do you need a trial to determine that? They should be automatically deported on the same day as they arrive.

As for those human rights you quoted, they are available in every EU country they pass through to get here. We already accept refugees, but we can’t take them all, which is what you are suggesting.

---------- Post added at 16:23 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196736)
Interesting choice of countries given that we would join Russia (and Belarus) as the only European countries outside of the ECHR.

Still, I admire your optimism that no UK government would abuse the new found ‘freedoms’ they’d have if we left the ECHR.
Oh, so we should do it because other countries do? That isn’t much of an argument. All we need is a Bill of Rights, worded in a way to accommodate our needs and to avoid abuses, to replace the existing legislation. It’s not difficult.

nomadking 18-05-2025 16:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
Those would still be there, but with our own clearly defined boundaries.
Currently you can't deport an adult convicted murderer, who has served their sentence, just because his parents live in this country. Is that how the original ECHR was envisaged?

1andrew1 19-05-2025 10:47
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196725)

What is even more wrong, is the NI-free influx of Indian workers, many of them talented on decent salaries. The employers will gladly save on their NI bill.
NI-free is the historic standard for such deals.

---------- Post added at 10:47 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196705)
The link is about the winter fuel payment possible u-turn.

This is a purely political move (if it happens) and, if the government is to balance its fiscal books, the u-turn will need to be offset by a tax grab elsewhere. There's 'owt for nowt in this game.
The government needs to diverge from the austerity of BoJo and Sunak and instead focus on growing the pot...not cutting expenditure to fit in the existing pot.

Doing this through cutting red tape in trade with our trading blocs is vital. I'm delighted to hear that we have finally secured a veterinary deal that will kick red tape into touch for farming and fisheries exports to our biggest market, the EU.

As a result, our agrifood exports to the EU look set to grow by more than a fifth, per economists at Aston University. Thereby growing the pot.

That's the good news. The bad news is that with increased expenditure needed on defence, we won't necessarily feel better off.

Sephiroth 19-05-2025 11:30
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196770)
NI-free is the historic standard for such deals.

<SNIP>
Trouble is, India makes an industry out of this.


BTW, I have no problem with the bit of your post that I snipped. I don’t see the so-far-announced agreement with the EU as a Brexit reversal.

Russ 20-05-2025 12:41
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196744)
Those would still be there, but with our own clearly defined boundaries.
And you really trust a UK government to not make these new "boundaries" self-serving?

Yeah good luck with that.

---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:38 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36196738)
A fair trial for what?
JAYSUS seriously?

Currently, YOU have the right to a fair trial under the ECHR along with the other benefits I mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36196738)
That isn’t much of an argument. All we need is a Bill of Rights, worded in a way to accommodate our needs and to avoid abuses, to replace the existing legislation. It’s not difficult.
And you too are naive enough to believe a government wouldn't make them at least partially self-serving.

Wow these people walk amongst us....

nomadking 20-05-2025 16:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196854)
And you really trust a UK government to not make these new "boundaries" self-serving?

Yeah good luck with that.

---------- Post added at 12:41 ---------- Previous post was at 12:38 ----------



JAYSUS seriously?

Currently, YOU have the right to a fair trial under the ECHR along with the other benefits I mentioned.



And you too are naive enough to believe a government wouldn't make them at least partially self-serving.

Wow these people walk amongst us....
At the moment it's the lawyers for the criminals that make any boundaries "self-serving".
Under the ECHR, there is no Article 6.1 "right to a fair hearing" in deportation and extradition matters.
Link
Quote:
40. The Court concludes that decisions regarding the entry, stay and
deportation of aliens do not concern the determination of an applicant's civil
rights or obligations or of a criminal charge against him, within the meaning
of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
41. Consequently, Article 6 § 1 is not applicable in the instant case

Russ 20-05-2025 17:05
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196868)
At the moment it's the lawyers for the criminals that make any boundaries "self-serving".
Under the ECHR, there is no Article 6.1 "right to a fair hearing" in deportation and extradition matters.
Link
As someone who has worked for a law firm for over a decade I can tell you that solicitors have to uphold the due passages of Law.

You won’t be aware of this but one of the highest tenets of the Solicitors Regulation Service is to put the client’s best interests first, not that of the solicitor. Lawyers can be (and have been) struck off for putting their own interests first, even prosecuted.

Why people are thinking I’m talking about immigrants when it comes to the right to a fair trial is anyone’s guess. The ECHR ensures that YOU are entitled to a fair hearing, just like everyone else.

nomadking 20-05-2025 17:15
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196869)
As someone who has worked for a law firm for over a decade I can tell you that solicitors have to uphold the due passages of Law.

You won’t be aware of this but one of the highest tenets of the Solicitors Regulation Service is to put the client’s best interests first, not that of the solicitor. Lawyers can be (and have been) struck off for putting their own interests first, even prosecuted.

Why people are thinking I’m talking about immigrants when it comes to the right to a fair trial is anyone’s guess. The ECHR ensures that YOU are entitled to a fair hearing, just like everyone else.
The solicitors are self-serving in that they are imposing their own version of "human rights" and trying to attract other criminals as clients.
Real case. Are you saying that a "right to family life" entails an adult convicted murderer being allowed to stay in this country, because his parents live here? Is that how it was originally envisaged?

Russ 20-05-2025 18:33
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196870)
The solicitors are self-serving in that they are imposing their own version of "human rights" and trying to attract other criminals as clients.
There is only ONE “version” of human rights. I think you’re mistaking ‘opinion’ with ‘rights enshrined in Law’.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196870)
Real case. Are you saying that a "right to family life" entails an adult convicted murderer being allowed to stay in this country, because his parents live here? Is that how it was originally envisaged?
I’m a Paralegal, not a solicitor so I don’t get to make that call. If there’s a scenario that you mention out there and said murderer can demonstrate his human rights have been breached then a solicitor can represent him in court.

Solicitors (and indeed Paralegals at my level as well as pretty much anyone working for a Law firm) are ‘officers of the Court’ and duty bound to defend the Law. We work for The Crown.

The very same people who would rigorously defend YOU if you were unfairly accused of a crime or had your human rights breached.

nomadking 20-05-2025 19:19
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196876)
There is only ONE “version” of human rights. I think you’re mistaking ‘opinion’ with ‘rights enshrined in Law’.



I’m a Paralegal, not a solicitor so I don’t get to make that call. If there’s a scenario that you mention out there and said murderer can demonstrate his human rights have been breached then a solicitor can represent him in court.

Solicitors (and indeed Paralegals at my level as well as pretty much anyone working for a Law firm) are ‘officers of the Court’ and duty bound to defend the Law. We work for The Crown.

The very same people who would rigorously defend YOU if you were unfairly accused of a crime or had your human rights breached.
So where in the ECHR does it specify that an adult has to remain in the same country as their parents?
Certain firms, solicitors, and barristers make immigration and human rights their source of income.
What proportion of non-criminals are able to bring a human rights case? They don't have the funding to do it.

Itshim 20-05-2025 19:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
So you don't trust our courts to get it right, mind you as Starmer was one of the top officers of it you might well be right. I am sure that a Romanian or Hungarian judge would be fairer

Russ 20-05-2025 19:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196880)
So where in the ECHR does it specify that an adult has to remain in the same country as their parents?
That’s for the judge to decide, not the solicitor.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196880)
Certain firms, solicitors, and barristers make immigration and human rights their source of income.
Yep just like people in banking, engineering, security, retail, farming etc etc specialise in certain areas.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196880)
What proportion of non-criminals are able to bring a human rights case? They don't have the funding to do it.
I’m not even sure stats are kept. Human rights issues are often included in employment tribunals for example.

papa smurf 20-05-2025 19:36
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196882)
So you don't trust our courts to get it right, mind you as Starmer was one of the top officers of it you might well be right. I am sure that a Romanian or Hungarian judge would be fairer
No case of importance came over his desk

Russ 20-05-2025 19:36
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196882)
So you don't trust our courts to get it right,
Ah so we’re back to “making up things Russ didn’t say”. Good to know.

Sephiroth 20-05-2025 19:52
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196883)
That’s for the judge to decide, not the solicitor.



<SNIP>
... but when the judge is from an immigration lawyers' chambers and has also appeared for clients .....?

Russ 20-05-2025 20:06
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196886)
.. but when the judge is from an immigration lawyers' chambers and has also appeared for clients .....?
How often has that happened?

Sephiroth 20-05-2025 20:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196888)
How often has that happened?
Dunno - exactly; but if you go to https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-j...bunals-judges/

and scroll down the list of immigration judges, then look up their careers and past chambers, you may get my point. It's a lot of work - so you may wish to take my word for it.

Russ 20-05-2025 20:33
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
I don’t deal in hypotheticals when it comes to my area of employment.

If you have a specific case in mind, cite it.

Otherwise acknowledge your conjecture.

nomadking 20-05-2025 20:42
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196876)
There is only ONE “version” of human rights. I think you’re mistaking ‘opinion’ with ‘rights enshrined in Law’.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196883)
That’s for the judge to decide, not the solicitor.

Yep just like people in banking, engineering, security, retail, farming etc etc specialise in certain areas.

I’m not even sure stats are kept. Human rights issues are often included in employment tribunals for example.
Link
Quote:
In August 2007, an Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruled that Chindamo could not be deported to his home country of Italy on completion of his prison sentence.[11] He had resided in the UK for 19 years, long enough to make him a permanent resident under EU law after discounting 10 years spent in jail.
...
The tribunal found that even if the EU law argument had failed, he would have a right to stay under human rights law. In the exceptional circumstances of his having lived in England since age 6, an Article 8 right to "family life" was found in relation to his mother and siblings.[13]

Russ 20-05-2025 20:58
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
And your point is…?

Hugh 20-05-2025 21:15
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196886)
... but when the judge is from an immigration lawyers' chambers and has also appeared for clients .....?
I would suggest that you appear to be conflating barristers (not lawyers) chambers, and "immigration barristers chambers" - whilst quite a few chambers have renowned immigration law practices, they are almost always multi-disciplinary, providing advocacy in many other areas.

For example
Goldsmith Chambers
Animal Rights
Civil
Clinical Negligence & Healthcare
Crime
Extradition
Family
Immigration and Public Law
Inquests and Inquiries

Doughty Law
Actions Against the Police and Public Authorities
Administrative & Public Law
Anti-Trafficking, Modern Slavery and Business & Human Rights
Business Crime & Investigations
Children's Rights Group
Climate and Environmental Justice
Clinical Negligence, Personal Injury & Product Liability
Community Care and Health
Court of Protection & Mental Health
Criminal Law
Criminal Appeals
Education
Employment, Discrimination and Equality Law
Extradition
Housing, Social Welfare and Property
Immigration
International Law
Inquests and Public Inquiries
Media, Communications & Information
Mediation
Professional Discipline and Regulation[/quote]

Any KCs from any chambers who have been made Judges (when they have to leave the Chambers) could actually have been specialising in one of many areas of expertise.

I put it to you that unless you can provide a solid evidentiary link between Judges who previously specialised in Immigration Law in a multi-disciplinary Chambers, and before becoming Judges had advocated on behalf of clients and the clients’ solicitors on Immigration matters, and then subsequently, after becoming a Judge, have ruled in favour of Barristers from the Judge’s previous Chambers on an Immigration matter, your rhetorical question

Quote:
but when the judge is from an immigration lawyers' chambers and has also appeared for clients .....?
is more imaginary than hypothetical…

nomadking 20-05-2025 21:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196895)
And your point is…?
Only one version, yet the judges get to decide.

Russ 20-05-2025 21:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196897)
Only one version, yet the judges get to decide.
Well yes….they judge whether it has been breached or not.

---------- Post added at 21:31 ---------- Previous post was at 21:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196896)
<snip>
Dammit i was hoping to give him enough rope to hang himself with.

1andrew1 20-05-2025 23:25
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196896)
...is more imaginary than hypothetical…
Indeed. Sounds like someone may have taken an overdose of GB News to reach that conclusion. ;)

---------- Post added at 23:25 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196897)
Only one version, yet the judges get to decide.
How dare judges judge! Whatever next? Nurses get to nurse? Teachers get to teach? :D

Paul 20-05-2025 23:39
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196906)
Teachers get to teach? :D
Well that would be a first ;)

nomadking 21-05-2025 07:00
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196906)
Indeed. Sounds like someone may have taken an overdose of GB News to reach that conclusion. ;)

---------- Post added at 23:25 ---------- Previous post was at 23:23 ----------


How dare judges judge! Whatever next? Nurses get to nurse? Teachers get to teach? :D
That would make it reality, not imaginary. Real examples exist.



Either there is one version of the law or judges can decide whatever they choose. Which is it? When you have decisions going clearly against the law and it's intent, it's not one version of the law.

Russ 21-05-2025 07:49
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196911)
That would make it reality, not imaginary. Real examples exist.



Either there is one version of the law or judges can decide whatever they choose. Which is it? When you have decisions going clearly against the law and it's intent, it's not one version of the law.
Tell us you have no idea of how the Law works without telling us you have no idea how the Law works

It goes a little bit like this:

Solicitor 1: “My interpretation of the Law is my client has had his human rights breached because of XYZ reasons”

Solicitor 2: “My interpretation of the Law is no human rights have been breached because ABC reasons”

Judge: “Looking at all the evidence my ruling is *insert agreement with Solicitor 1 or 2 here*.”

Get it now?

Itshim 21-05-2025 17:36
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Referring to getting out of echr

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196730)
Yep and lose the right to a fair trial, the right to free from torture, free from prosecution, the right to life, the right to free expression, right to privacy, right to be free from inhumane treatment etc etc

But a small price to pay to get rid of some brown people eh?
Sorry did I misunderstand this

---------- Post added at 17:35 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196885)
Ah so we’re back to “making up things Russ didn’t say”. Good to know.

---------- Post added at 17:36 ---------- Previous post was at 17:35 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196882)
So you don't trust our courts to get it right, mind you as Starmer was one of the top officers of it you might well be right. I am sure that a Romanian or Hungarian judge would be fairer

Russ 21-05-2025 18:07
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196928)
Referring to getting out of echr



Sorry did I misunderstand this
Yep pretty much looks that way.

nomadking 21-05-2025 19:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicl
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196912)
Tell us you have no idea of how the Law works without telling us you have no idea how the Law works

It goes a little bit like this:

Solicitor 1: “My interpretation of the Law is my client has had his human rights breached because of XYZ reasons”

Solicitor 2: “My interpretation of the Law is no human rights have been breached because ABC reasons”

Judge: “Looking at all the evidence my ruling is *insert agreement with Solicitor 1 or 2 here*.”

Get it now?
Not with First Tier Tribunals. As long as the First tier Judge fully explains their decision, they can make any decision they want. Common sense, facts, or law don't come into it. It's only if they haven't fully explained their reasons, that the judgement can be challenged for an "error in law". Even then, if it gets to the Upper Tier Tribunal, it's likely to be tossed back to the 1st Tier for another hearing. And so the process repeats itself.
Link to decisions published from the Upper Tribunal Immigration and asylum chamber.

Russ 21-05-2025 20:05
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Well finally someone has discovered Google.

The subject has been about the ECHR and how they work. Believe it or not they don’t just apply to immigration.

papa smurf 22-05-2025 09:14
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Judge temporarily bans UK from completing deal to hand over Chagos Islands


Ministers had been expected to complete a deal that would have seen the UK hand over sovereignty of the archipelago to Mauritius in the coming hours.

But in an emergency injunction granted early on Thursday, brought against the Foreign Office, Mr Justice Goose allowed "interim relief" to Bertrice Pompe, who had previously taken steps to bring legal action over the deal.

Ms Pompe is a Chagossian woman who sees the deal as a betrayal of their rights.

https://news.sky.com/story/judge-tem...lands-13372472

looks like starmers been goosed

Hugh 22-05-2025 09:29
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
But, but, but…

AcTiV1sT JuDgES!!!!

Sephiroth 22-05-2025 09:31
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196945)
But, but, but…

AcTiV1sT JuDgES!!!!
In what context?

papa smurf 22-05-2025 09:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Ms Pompe, who filed the application for interim relief, believes the British government is acting with disregard for the human rights of the Chagossian people.

She has argued completion of the deal would amount to a breach of the Human Rights Act and the Equality Act.


Shame on Starmer wasn't he a human rights boff

Hugh 22-05-2025 09:57
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196946)
In what context?
In a humorous, satirical context, perhaps whimsically reflecting on those whose first impulse, when a Judge rules in a manner which does not coincide with their viewpoint (as has happened not only in this forum, but often in the Telegraph/Mail/Express/GBNews), is to make an ad hominem attack on the Judiciary…

1andrew1 22-05-2025 09:57
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Now that the party who favoured high immigration rates is out of power, net immigration has halved!
Quote:
Net migration to the UK estimated to have halved

Net migration to the UK is estimated to have halved from 860,000 in the year ending December 2023 to 431,000 in the year ending December 2024, the Office for National Statistics has said.

Net migration is the difference between the number of people settling in the UK long-term and the number of people leaving.

This is the biggest calendar-year drop since the early stages of the pandemic.

The ONS has said the decline has been driven by falling number of people coming to work and study in the UK.
https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...isons-12593360

Sephiroth 22-05-2025 10:21
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196948)
In a humorous, satirical context, perhaps whimsically reflecting on those whose first impulse, when a Judge rules in a manner which does not coincide with their viewpoint (as has happened not only in this forum, but often in the Telegraph/Mail/Express/GBNews), is to make an ad hominem attack on the Judiciary…
It wasn't humorous nor satirical. It was misinformation by you, linking an injunction pleaded by a Chogassian to the widely made criticism of lefty lawyers who become left judges and allow illegal immigrants to remain in the UK because their son doesn't like Iraqi chicken nuggets.

Hugh 22-05-2025 11:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196952)
It wasn't humorous nor satirical. It was misinformation by you, linking an injunction pleaded by a Chogassian to the widely made criticism of lefty lawyers who become left judges and allow illegal immigrants to remain in the UK because their son doesn't like Iraqi chicken nuggets.
It’s as if Drax were in the room with us…

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2025/05/1.gifv

The injunction was granted by Mr Justice Goose after a case was brought by two Chagossian women, represented by Michael Polak, who said the legal action was aimed at challenging the legitimacy of a handover agreement without formal consultation with the Chagossians.

Michael Polak, according to his Chambers profile

Quote:
Michael Polak represents clients in the most high profile and important cases before international courts, United Nations bodies, in human rights related arbitrations, in proceedings around the world, and before the courts of England and Wales.
Pretty sure that if this had been another case involving immigrants, the usual suspects would have been frothing at the mouth at another "lefty human rights lawyer" being able to get a Judge to agree to an injunction, whilst insinuating there was some sort of link between the lawyer and the Judge…

papa smurf 22-05-2025 12:06
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196958)
It’s as if Drax were in the room with us…

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2025/05/1.gifv

The injunction was granted by Mr Justice Goose after a case was brought by two Chagossian women, represented by Michael Polak, who said the legal action was aimed at challenging the legitimacy of a handover agreement without formal consultation with the Chagossians.

Michael Polak, according to his Chambers profile



Pretty sure that if this had been another case involving immigrants, the usual suspects would have been frothing at the mouth at another "lefty human rights lawyer" being able to get a Judge to agree to an injunction, whilst insinuating there was some sort of link between the lawyer and the Judge…

But it isn't

nomadking 22-05-2025 13:03
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196939)
Well finally someone has discovered Google.

The subject has been about the ECHR and how they work. Believe it or not they don’t just apply to immigration.
Known about tribunals and how they operate for quite some time(more than a decade). Along with the published decisions of the Upper Tribunals.
How many of the immigration cases are not ECHR related?
Even within the Administrative Appeals Chamber, any ECHR issues tend to be immigration related.

---------- Post added at 13:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:54 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196949)
Now that the party who favoured high immigration rates is out of power, net immigration has halved!

https://news.sky.com/story/politics-...isons-12593360
Quote:
So, why is this happening?
The decrease last year has been driven by fewer people coming to work and study in the UK, while emigration has risen by around 11%.

...
The fall follow the introduction in early 2024 of restrictions on people eligible to travel to the UK on work or study visas, introduced by the Conservative government under Rishi Sunak.
Mary Gregory, the director of population statistics at the ONS, said the figures show falling immigration is "driven by falling numbers of people coming to work and study, particularly student dependents".
She added: "There has also been an increase in emigration over the 12 months to December 2024, especially people leaving who originally came on study visas once pandemic travel restrictions to the UK were eased."
You were saying?

1andrew1 22-05-2025 13:14
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196963)
You were saying?
They were in power for 14 years and did this just before the election.

Hugh 22-05-2025 13:43
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36196963)
Known about tribunals and how they operate for quite some time(more than a decade). Along with the published decisions of the Upper Tribunals.
How many of the immigration cases are not ECHR related?
Even within the Administrative Appeals Chamber, any ECHR issues tend to be immigration related.

---------- Post added at 13:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:54 ----------

You were saying?
How many are?

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...n-human-rights

Quote:
Current rules require the Home Office to make a deportation order against any foreign criminal serving a prison sentence of 12 months or more. Only “exceptionally” can automatic deportations be avoided if they would breach the ECHR, which in practice typically means the right to family life contained in article 8.

The number of people able to invoke this protection is relatively small. Most appeals fail and, of those that succeed, only about one in three are successful on human rights grounds. In the 13 years between 2008 and 2021, the last period for which records are available, that was a total of 2,400 such cases out of 21,500 appeals.

Itshim 22-05-2025 17:14
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196932)
Yep pretty much looks that way.
I read this as you don't trust the uk courts to deal with these problems. Me l just don't trust them .

Sephiroth 22-05-2025 17:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
As I understand Starmer's explanation for the Chagos deal, had we ignored the advisory ruling that Chagos belongs to Mauritius, then it would be further litigated until the UN formally declares Chagos as Mauritian. If that happens, then any assertion to the contrary by the UK would result in charges under international law. Starmer also said that we could be banned from using the military radio frequencies that would then belong to Mauritius.

I suppose I can accept that evaluation (as in beyond my ken to challenge it from the legal side).

But it just goes to show how stacked the UN is and maybe something new needs to emerge - though I can't think what. It also comes to mind that countries such as USA, China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are not members of the ICC and thus beyond its reach. Could the UK not have withdrawn from the ICC? Or isn't it as simple as that?

1andrew1 22-05-2025 18:13
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196973)

But it just goes to show how stacked the UN is and maybe something new needs to emerge - though I can't think what. It also comes to mind that countries such as USA, China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are not members of the ICC and thus beyond its reach. Could the UK not have withdrawn from the ICC? Or isn't it as simple as that?
I don't think we want to aspire to be down on the same list as those countries when it comes to human rights!

papa smurf 22-05-2025 18:21
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196973)
As I understand Starmer's explanation for the Chagos deal, had we ignored the advisory ruling that Chagos belongs to Mauritius, then it would be further litigated until the UN formally declares Chagos as Mauritian. If that happens, then any assertion to the contrary by the UK would result in charges under international law. Starmer also said that we could be banned from using the military radio frequencies that would then belong to Mauritius.

I suppose I can accept that evaluation (as in beyond my ken to challenge it from the legal side).

But it just goes to show how stacked the UN is and maybe something new needs to emerge - though I can't think what. It also comes to mind that countries such as USA, China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are not members of the ICC and thus beyond its reach. Could the UK not have withdrawn from the ICC? Or isn't it as simple as that?

would it not just get vetoed by the uk at that point

---------- Post added at 18:21 ---------- Previous post was at 18:19 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36196974)
I don't think we want to aspire to be down on the same list as those countries when it comes to human rights!
well Starmers just pissed on the chagossians human rights

1andrew1 22-05-2025 18:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36196975)
well Starmers just pissed on the chagossians human rights
That sentence was not down on my Papa Smurf bingo for 2025! :D

Sephiroth 22-05-2025 18:28
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
@Papa
It was a vote of the UN General Assembly. Nobody has a veto there.

papa smurf 22-05-2025 18:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36196978)
@Papa
It was a vote of the UN General Assembly. Nobody has a veto there.
ok thanks for that

Paul 22-05-2025 18:42
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
It wasnt much of a delay, deal completed today.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/clyvv04wk8zt

Russ 22-05-2025 19:19
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36196970)
I read this as you don't trust the uk courts to deal with these problems.
The courts work within the guidelines set out in Law, which mainly come from the Government.

Any government given the mandate to write its own 'human rights' is NOT to be trusted, and I don't care which party that is.

Sephiroth 22-05-2025 19:26
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
The Chagos deal has been published: https://assets.publishing.service.go...ego_Garcia.pdf

Itshim 23-05-2025 17:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36196982)
The courts work within the guidelines set out in Law, which mainly come from the Government.

Any government given the mandate to write its own 'human rights' is NOT to be trusted, and I don't care which party that is.
And decide what the government meant , or at least what he/she / thingy want them to mean , even if makes no sense to anyone else.

Russ 23-05-2025 17:27
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
If you want to believe that then all the power to you.

nomadking 23-05-2025 19:09
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36196966)
Not just article 8. Wonder how they counted what was successful? In the case below, it was the Home Office that appealed and lost, so no deportation.
Eg They can win if they can claim their step-mother is going to hit them if they go back.
Recent Real Case
Quote:
His younger sister was sent away to live with a grandmother, but he and his brother were required to remain in the family compound with his father’s first wife, whom he refers to as his stepmother. She, and those around her, physically abused the boys, forcing them to work long hours and punishing them if they refused to do so.
They're both adults now and could live elsewhere in the country, but still common sense doesn't prevail in the decision making.


The publicly available list doesn't have categories attached to them, so no easy way to filter them.
Even where the First Tier Tribunal has refused an appeal, they can appeal to the Upper Tribunal, who may find an "error of law" and the case has to be heard again. And so it repeats itself, and they remain here all that time.

Sephiroth 29-05-2025 22:19
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
What's with the silence on Starmer's latest screw-up?

To recap: Farage has made a few electoral promises that Starmer reckons are as unfunded as Truss's enacted policies.

With 4 years to go before the next GE, there is time for Farage to put policies forward that have been studied and researched that square the funding circle.

But Starmer, with his 400+ MPs is shit-scared of Reform and its 5 MPs; so Starmer goes for the man at a press conference and he gets shredded by the media when they question him.

Wonderful stuff since nothing else that Labour is doing has any worth.

Mr K 29-05-2025 22:24
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197305)
What's with the silence on Starmer's latest screw-up?

To recap: Farage has made a few electoral promises that Starmer reckons are as unfunded as Truss's enacted policies.

With 4 years to go before the next GE, there is time for Farage to put policies forward that have been studied and researched that square the funding circle.

But Starmer, with his 400+ MPs is shit-scared of Reform and its 5 MPs; so Starmer goes for the man at a press conference and he gets shredded by the media when they question him.

Wonderful stuff since nothing else that Labour is doing has any worth.
You can promise anything without saying how you're going to pay for it.

Sephiroth 29-05-2025 22:32
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36197306)
You can promise anything without saying how you're going to pay for it.
Didn't Starmer do just that? "Fully costed", he said.

1andrew1 29-05-2025 23:28
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36197306)
You can promise anything without saying how you're going to pay for it.
To be fair, Farage has said how he's going to pay for it but the figures make no sense. His worse case scenario is finding himself in power like the Liberal Democrats did when they had to row back on eliminating tuition fees. He would have to row back on the £20k tax rate.

papa smurf 30-05-2025 09:07
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Starmer mentioned Farage 16 times in yesterdays rant, what made me laugh was starmer asking if Farage could be trusted with our pensions /jobs etc, he gets the irony award 2025.

Russ 30-05-2025 14:17
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
It's a legit enough question.

However bad of a job the current government is doing, anything with Farage in control will make us ten times worse. Better the devil you know than the populist BS-spouting ex-stockbroker MEP pension-receiving you don't.

Sephiroth 30-05-2025 14:25
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36197317)
It's a legit enough question.

However bad of a job the current government is doing, anything with Farage in control will make us ten times worse. Better the devil you know than the populist BS-spouting ex-stockbroker MEP pension-receiving you don't.
How true is that? We knew Starmer when he made his bid (and promises) to become PM. That devil is as bad news as any of his recent predecessors.

Walking past your hatred of Farage (which significantly blinds you), he has quite a considerable time to put his proposition together; and if it stacks up, the political and economic observers will then say so.

1andrew1 30-05-2025 14:28
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197313)
Starmer mentioned Farage 16 times in yesterdays rant, what made me laugh was starmer asking if Farage could be trusted with our pensions /jobs etc, he gets the irony award 2025.
I think it's to give out the message that it's now a two-party race between Labour and Reform. The likely messaging is that the Conservatives are out of the race and Labour is now the party of sound finances and government experience so Conservative voters should come over to Labour. Vote Labour or get Liz Truss in trousers with Jeremy Corbyn's policies on benefits and Trump's belief on the NHS in his back pocket.

Sephiroth 30-05-2025 14:35
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Starmer is a complete failure and his press conference proved that.

You don't need to look much further for other proof - like asking other countries to take our illegal immigrants. We has the Rwanda agreement in place which, at least, that fool should have tried. But no, ideology got in the way. Btw, I haven't heard anything on the forum from the hitherto Rwanda bleaters (critics) about Starmer's approaches to other countries.

Russ 30-05-2025 14:37
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197318)
How true is that?
Extremely true, there's a clip doing the rounds of him as a younger MEP discussing how to screw as much of his MEP expences in to his own pocket as possible.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197318)
Walking past your hatred of Farage
I don't 'hate' anyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197318)
(which significantly blinds you),
But he freely gives us so much to be blind to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197318)
he has quite a considerable time to put his proposition together; and if it stacks up, the political and economic observers will then say so.
That's just the problem - it doesn't.

1andrew1 30-05-2025 14:43
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36197320)
Starmer is a complete failure and his press conference proved that.

You don't need to look much further for other proof - like asking other countries to take our illegal immigrants. We has the Rwanda agreement in place which, at least, that fool should have tried. But no, ideology got in the way. Btw, I haven't heard anything on the forum from the hitherto Rwanda bleaters (critics) about Starmer's approaches to other countries.
I'm not a fan but I think your anti-Labour bias precludes your objectivity. He has done well in some areas and badly in others. The badly areas have doubtless been done to death here. The successes include with Trump where he got a trade deal and helped heal the rift between Trump and Zelensky and moved Trump on from not viewing Putin as a friend. And the UK is outperforming many of its peers economically, even if it doesn't feel like it sometimes.

But he lacks the connection with the public despite being a football fan. And there's few people left who don't know his dad was a toolmaker!

Russ 30-05-2025 14:56
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36197322)
I'm not a fan but I think your anti-Labour bias precludes your objectivity.
Obliviously accusing others of similar....

Hugh 30-05-2025 15:10
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36197323)
Obliviously accusing others of similar....
See, that’s where you’re going wrong - only "lefties" are biased and blinded to others’ viewpoints.

"Righties", obviously are totally objective, see all sides of the argument impartially, have no bias, and anyone who doesn’t agree with them or their views must, according to these precepts, be wrong/biased/mistaken…

Hope this helps…

Paul 30-05-2025 15:16
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36197321)
I don't 'hate' anyone.
Boris will be glad to hear that.

Russ 30-05-2025 15:23
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36197325)

Hope this helps…
Dammit :(

---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:22 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197327)
Boris will be glad to hear that.
How wonderful

Itshim 30-05-2025 17:50
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ (Post 36197317)
It's a legit enough question.

However bad of a job the current government is doing, anything with Farage in control will make us ten times worse. Better the devil you know than the populist BS-spouting ex-stockbroker MEP pension-receiving you don't.
Yes Starmer is doing great job , creeping to Donny, give away the Chagos Islands and then paying to use them. Getting great deal from the EU , give away fish, for a shorter queue . So sad.

Russ 30-05-2025 17:51
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Has anyone said Starmer is “doing a great job”?

Hugh 30-05-2025 17:58
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36197335)
Yes Starmer is doing great job , creeping to Donny, *give away the Chagos Islands and then paying to use them. Getting great deal from the EU , *8give away fish, for a shorter queue . So sad.
Continuing the previous deals negotiated by *James Cleverley/Rishi Sunak and **Johnson - can’t seem to find your criticism of them for the same deals…

papa smurf 30-05-2025 18:20
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197327)
Boris will be glad to hear that.
He would if was true

nomadking 30-05-2025 19:08
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36197337)
Continuing the previous deals negotiated by *James Cleverley/Rishi Sunak and **Johnson - can’t seem to find your criticism of them for the same deals…
The previous fishing deal allowing the EU to catch fish in our waters, was about to expire. Starmer extended it for another 12 years.

Hugh 30-05-2025 19:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
So they continued the previous deal…

papa smurf 30-05-2025 19:28
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36197340)
So they continued the previous deal…
The EU fishing deal was due to expire at the end of June 2026. However, a new agreement has been reached, extending it until the summer of 2038.

Mr K 30-05-2025 20:47
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197341)
The EU fishing deal was due to expire at the end of June 2026. However, a new agreement has been reached, extending it until the summer of 2038.
The previous Govt thought it was a great Brexit deal. What's wrong with continuing it?

I've no sympathy for fishermen that voted for Brexit. The others do have my sympathy.

nomadking 30-05-2025 20:53
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36197344)
The previous Govt thought it was a great Brexit deal. What's wrong with continuing it?

I've no sympathy for fishermen that voted for Brexit. The others do have my sympathy.
The deal was time-limited for a reason.It was to give the EU time to adjust to the loss of fishing rights.
The EU was desperate for a new fishing deal, so that should've been a huge bargaining chip.

Mr K 30-05-2025 20:55
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36197346)
The deal was time-limited for a reason.It was to give the EU time to adjust to the loss of fishing rights.
The EU was desperate for a new fishing deal, so that should've been a huge bargaining chip.
And why don't we have a strong negotiating hand? Because our position is now so weak, hanging on to the EU's coat tails/charity.

papa smurf 30-05-2025 21:03
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36197347)
And why don't we have a strong negotiating hand? Because our position is now so weak, hanging on to the EU's coat tails/charity.
or the country is run by a traitor

daveeb 30-05-2025 21:22
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197348)
or the country is run by a traitor
Think you're getting confused, it's not 2019-2022 any more.

Paul 30-05-2025 21:46
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveeb (Post 36197349)
Think you're getting confused, it's not 2019-2022 any more.
Different year, same issue.

Mr K 30-05-2025 21:55
Re: Starmer’s chronicles
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197348)
or the country is run by a traitor
I really would change from the Daily Express. The Beano is a more informative read.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:38.
Page 13 of 20 « First 39101112 13 14151617 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum