A Rish(i) Called (R)Wanda

It’s not often I agree with Suella Braverman. In fact, I think the only previous two times was when she resigned as Home Secretary, but I didn’t think she should have that job either. The reason that’s two times if because she resigned twice.

She has said the Government’s Rwanda bill 'as drafted' would not achieve the goal of stopping the boats. I agree. We may come at this from different sides. I think the flan is fundamentally flawed, she thinks it’s not hard enough, but it’s a thing of beauty when both sides of the political divide can agree.

Meanwhile Rishi Sunak is excited that he might finally get the plan and some planes off the ground. MPs and peers are getting ready for a long night of voting, how the heart bleeds.

Many would agree that it’s not the role of the House of Lords to scupper Government legislation. Even the House of Lords thinks that and after a bit of ping-pong they tend to stop fighting. It’s worth remembering that there are more Conservative members of the upper house than Labour members, so this is a case of the Tories failing to convince their own people about this bill.

What does a win look like? When the bill passes Rishi will try to claim that. He has said , "No ifs, no buts, these flights are going to Rwanda." I’m sure they are. Probably empty, but I’m sure they’ll fly. Best case scenario, a few dozen people might take part in the scheme. That won’t be enough to put people off making the small boat crossing they have planned.

They’ll think, “What are the odds that I’ll end up in Rwanda?” Those odds will be low, and for context, let’s remember that the pill is only 99% effective. And we still get up to a lot of rumpy-pumpy.

Worst case, no one will go. Either way, the UK has given Rwanda £240million so far for pretty much nothing, and last week we heard the news that the scheme could be rolled out to other countries. How? We just give hundreds of millions of pounds to some random countries? Is this what’s replacing Comic Relief now that Lenny has quit?

MPs rejected some of the amendments suggested by the House of Lords including a report on the safety of Rwanda. We know we don’t need that because the Government passed a bill declaring Rwanda safe. That sorts that then. If we could only pass another declaring London safe we will have fixed all that knife crime.

14 people a year a killed by vending machines falling on them. Quick, declare them safe before I get my Twix.

Another amendment said those who had worked with UK forces should never to be deported there. If they’d have phrased the same amendment but using the term “our boys” they Government would have been forced to get behind it.

The prime minister described the plan as an "indispensable deterrent " that removes the incentive for people to make the dangerous Channel crossing.

Under the terms of the deal Rwanda can return to the UK any asylum seeker who commits a crime. So another way to look at this is a great system to make sure that we only keep the criminal element in the UK while deporting the rest to Rwanda. And it only costs us £240. So far.

» Read the source story

 | ☕ TIP (Help by donating)
 | 📻 LISTEN (to the new radio podcast)
 | 📺 WATCH (YouTube)



Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com



The SomeNews Live Show
See where the SomeNews Live Show will be next.


If you need to get in touch email info@somenews.co.uk. See the About SomeNews page for more info.

Blog Archive