India were proud that the prime minister of the UK was a person of Indian heritage. So I'm kind of relieved that the person who may take him down also has Indian heritage, and is not someone with "white privilege"
“I once arrived at a climate change conference by domestic short haul flight” please log in to view this image
‘Maybe if Hamas, an organisation that has a charter to wipe out all Jews, had better weapons an equipment, they might behave better’ is a phenomenal take! please log in to view this image 6
If Braverman has such a low opinion of Sunak how come she was happy to work for him up until the second she was sacked? Why didn’t she resign? No need to answer. Not that the vast majority of people give a toss. The Tories are toast, surveys have Labour beating their 1997 result. So we’ll get to see the next bunch **** it up as they will inevitably do, with Starmer straddling the widest wall he can find. Though hopefully their team won’t include anyone as repugnant as Braverman, Rees Mogg, Cameron, Johnson, Hancock, Coffey etc etc etc. But I’m sure they will do their best to match the venality.
Bit weird every Tory MP and their cheerleaders are celebrating inflation being a mere 4.6%, way over the actual target but meeting the arbitrary target Rishi knew would be achieved anyway.
Lovely crisp beach walk today. If they could guarantee every day would be like this I’d probably vote for them. Michael Gove tells me it’ll rain every day under Labour.
Another thing I need explained to me, by you who know. The Supreme judges say, although they are not actually against deportation to a safe country in principle they are against deportation to Rwanda as they are not trusted to actually not send them back to their country of origin ( where they may be tortured etc). So why is Sunak, still pursuing a new treaty with Rwanda.
So he can say he hasn’t given up on the policy, which would cause him to lose face and seem to justify Braverman’s attacks. Of course he has abandoned the policy in reality, it was always a non starter unless we withdraw from the ECHR, which the majority of Tory party MPs would oppose, or at least the ones who are bright enough to know that the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. Except for the word European, which of course makes some people start shaking and frothing at the mouth. It’s all to do with internal Tory party politics, nothing to do with immigration, dealing with asylum seekers or the public good. So, in that sense, business as usual. The numbers of asylum seekers who would have been punished by being sent to Rwanda would have always been tiny in proportion to the numbers arriving and far too low to put any one off trying, and the cost of it would be insane. But it might have kept a few xenophobes happy for a bit.
