The simple fact is they wouldn't need to go to such lengths if any of the cruel, evil pieces of shit actually believed that what they were doing was right on a legal and moral level
I genuinely believe there won't be a single flight to Rwanda containing migrants who don't want to go there. And the Tory cu....er....scum will look like the vile pieces of failed shit they are.
If you have to go to such lengths, and make changes to the judicial system of such magnitude, just to strip people who have come to this country with nothing of the last vestiges of humanity then you should know that what you're doing is not right. Tory scum.
I used to work in an IRC 10 years ago and smartphones were never allowed, they were always taken off them and they were provided with basic phones (bought and credit paid for by the taxpayer) to maintain contact. There was always free internet access - the internet suite in the IRC where I worked had just under 100 computers available 10 hours of the day - to research any phone numbers they needed for legal or charity aid. This isn't a new policy to try and stop them fighting deportation to Rwanda.
IRCs are detention centres, secure establishments that hold people in custody at the request of the home office. In my experience they have similar levels of violence and drug use/smuggling as any mixed population category C prison - and the London ones are sometimes worse. Allowing smartphones in would be just as stupid as allowing smartphones into prisons. I also remember that some mobile phones with limited internet access can be used but there are severe restrictions on what they can access to ensure they're only using it for purposeful reasons - phones had internet access before smartphones.
Is it a sad indictment of the current "Labour" set up that so many of these hard line "Tories" are willing to jump ship and join the Labour Party?
I doubt there are many more (far) right wing MPs than Natalie Elphicke, Starmer should have told her she's not welcome.
I'm not entirely convinced that it is, albeit that I can understand why plenty of people on the left of the Labour party will be distinctly unimpressed by the latest defection. Certainly if a bookmaker had been offering odds on which Tory MP would defect next, I'd have expected to see Natalie Elphicke as a very big outsider before midday today. The problem I have with this defection is it just looks odd. With Christian Wakeford and Dan Poulter before her, there was at least some sort of logic to their decisions based on key issues of the day and them keeping their own counsel until they took the plunge. But, even though one article I've read this afternoon has suggested Ms Elphicke's views are actually somewhat closer to Labour's position on issues like housing and small boat crossings than might be apparent, appearances look rather different based on the immediate optics of a seemingly hard-nosed, hard-line Brexiteer Tory crossing the floor. That, of course, is the point, though. The Labour calculation has to be that, in the minds of non-partisan voters, this plays far more as 'Rishi Sunak can't deliver one of his fundamental pledges', rather than anything else. I suspect they're probably right.
Rishi Sunak to warn next few years 'most dangerous' for UK in major speech That headline. It's almost as if he actively doesn't want to be elected. I'd say re-elected, but the useless, short arsed prick never had a mandate in the first place.
Sounds like fear mongering that he/tories are the only ones to get us through......even though its mostly the tories fault. People will fall for it too.
