The Windrush People

What's Hot
245

Comments

  • OctafishOctafish Frets: 901
    Lest we forget that it was May who brought in those despicable vans covered in hateful messages to immigrants. 
    IIRC those vans were aimed at economic migrants, failed asylum seekers, and other people who didn't ought to be here. There was no reason to think they were also aimed at the Windrush people.
    Nah it was part of the dog whistle politics aimed at gently fellating the right wing press, appeasing those on who were anti-immigration and smokescreening the failure to deal with illegal immigration. It wasn't a serious proposition to deal with those here illegally and simply stirred up anti-immigration sentiment. It was the equivalent to solving crime by driving around with a van asking criminals to go and hand themselves in at the nearest police station.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8435
    That didn't make them any less abhorrent
    I didn't find them so. IMO there's not a lot wrong with telling people who don't belong here that they don't belong here. However there is everything wrong with telling people who have every right to be here that they don't belong here. YMMV.
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ESBlondeESBlonde Frets: 2230
    BBC claims Mrs.May just told Jeremy that the plan to destroy the cards was taken in 2009 under labour administration.
    The above comment about the civil service is very true in my limited experience of working for a council as a temp and knowing a number of people employed in the service over the decades. They really do blunder from one task to the next once they get around to it.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 10684
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    It's not like May to lie to the commons or the public is it? How out of character... :/

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    3reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8435
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    You're blaming it on him?
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    Ladies and gents, we have a non reader. Please speak slowly

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    You're blaming it on him?

    Nope, but he blames it on May, and it back-fired spectacularly. 

    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    Ladies and gents, we have a non reader. Please speak slowly

    So the decision wasn't made in 2009 then? 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8435
    quarky said:
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    You're blaming it on him?

    Nope, but he blames it on May, and it back-fired spectacularly. 

    I see what you mean
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    edited April 18
    quarky said:
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    You're blaming it on him?

    Nope, but he blames it on May, and it back-fired spectacularly. 

    I see what you mean
    The whole thing is a complete deflection. The date on which some slips of paper were destroyed is many years ago. It was the pandering to the right wing press that led to this current scenario. It's also blatantly obvious that it's only now being dealt with because of the massive push back. They've known about the windrush problem since 2015 but done fuck all about it until they had to. 

    So, claiming that it's a bad day for Corbyn, when he's not the one being grilled and slated publicly, has never been in the home office, and is quite rightly asking questions as leader of the opposition. That's his job. Quite how you can follow this course of events and claim *he's* the liability I've no idea. Rose tinted specs or a hard on for Skeletor obviously. 

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8435
    @quarky's point would seem to be that Corbyn blamed May for the destruction of the data and then it turns out that the destruction happened under a LABOUR government does make Mr Corbyn look somewhat silly. If the party's leader is made to look silly or says something that eventually makes him look silly, then it's not good for the party hence the liability bit. Whether Theresa May or Amber Rudd come up smelling of roses is a different issue entirely.
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 30902
    I can pretty much guarantee that if it was something done by the Blair/Brown government, Corbyn would have opposed it anyway...

    It doesn't absolve May of responsibility either, since even if the decision was made in 2009, the key change to immigration legislation that made it an actual problem rather than a potential one wasn't made until 2014, right in the middle of her tenure as Home Secretary and her direct responsibility.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/apr/16/immigration-law-key-clause-protecting-windrush-immigrants-removed-in-2014
    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 6reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 5967
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    straws duly clutched at.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 6reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    Let's not forget that her own spokesperson had to backtrack on her statement today, less than half an hour after she gave it. 

    But yes. Corbyn. Obviously. 

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    quarky said:
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    You're blaming it on him?

    Nope, but he blames it on May, and it back-fired spectacularly. 

    I see what you mean
    The whole thing is a complete deflection. The date on which some slips of paper were destroyed is many years ago. It was the pandering to the right wing press that led to this current scenario. It's also blatantly obvious that it's only now being dealt with because of the massive push back. They've known about the windrush problem since 2015 but done fuck all about it until they had to. 

    So, claiming that it's a bad day for Corbyn, when he's not the one being grilled and slated publicly, has never been in the home office, and is quite rightly asking questions as leader of the opposition. That's his job. Quite how you can follow this course of events and claim *he's* the liability I've no idea. Rose tinted specs or a hard on for Skeletor obviously. 

    LOL. So why was Corbyn so quick to blame May for what happened in 2010 then? That is the real deflection. Firstly, when you come into a country DOES NOT prove right of abode. That much should be obvious, but Corbyn took the tack of blaming May for destroying them *anyway* and by making it a strawman, he set himself up for a fall.

    A smart leader would have got enough mileage out of asking why the HO hasn't resolved this since 2015 (if *that* is actually true), but no, he had to make it personal (didn't he promise a new style of politics?) and it back-fired on him. I think this was *his* attempted deflection get away from all his quisling-like comments over Russia, but he was a little too desperate.
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8435
    quarky said:
    when you come into a country DOES NOT prove right of abode.
    It doesn't, unless it shows that you turned up here on a ship that got you here at the government's invitation and on the assumption that you would stay and work, because that's why you were invited here.
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 10684
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.

    Phil_aka_Pip said:
    @quarky's point would seem to be that Corbyn blamed May for the destruction of the data and then it turns out that the destruction happened under a LABOUR government does make Mr Corbyn look somewhat silly. If the party's leader is made to look silly or says something that eventually makes him look silly, then it's not good for the party hence the liability bit. Whether Theresa May or Amber Rudd come up smelling of roses is a different issue entirely.

    May said:

    "No, the decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 under a Labour government."

    It's a clever little bit of bullshit that suggests it happened because of a ministerial decision from high ie. that it was a governmental decision. It wasn't. 

    As Sky News writes:

    "Number 10 sought to provide clarity after PMQs, saying the destruction of the landing cards was an "operational decision" by the UK Border Agency in 2009, meaning it was not a ministerial decision.

    In a further attempt to clarify the timeline, Downing Street said the business case for disposing of the paper records was approved by Border Agency in June 2009, while the operational decision to actually begin destroying the slips was enacted in October 2010 when the Conservative-led coalition was in power."

    Sadly May's words were jumped upon by the media. It firmly demonstrated how much the BBC don't like Corbyn and the gloating for Osborne's Evening Standard was vile. The question here would be who decided that October 2010 would be the time to start to destroy those landing cards.

    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 10684
    quarky said:
    So it was under a labour government? Another embarrassing day for Corbyn. He is such a liability.
    Ladies and gents, we have a non reader. Please speak slowly
    I'll release a special book version of Today's PMQs with lift-up flaps if it helps. 
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    edited April 18
    *Sigh* 

    Home Secretary makes savage changes to immigration with drastic, hugely stressful and unnecessary consequences for British Citizens, later becomes PM and ignores plight of said citizens in order to keep right wing press happy. Later, when the rest of the world realises the true consequences of her actions, she is forced to apologise and deal with the issues, and when questioned in the Commons about it, is asked a series of questions by the leader of the opposition, he gets one minor detail wrong, but she lies about it to parliament anyway and is then forced to have a spokesperson correct her half an hour later before it turns into another scandal. 

    Conclusion: the leader of the opposition had a bad day.

    Eh? 

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    edited April 18
    Come on @Heartfeltdawn , Corbyn blamed May. The decision (if it was 2009) *clearly*, predates May being in the HO, yet Corbyn said this happened on "her watch". 2009 wasn't her watch. Back-peddling to say "well, it wasn't Labour" isn't the point. No one here (I don't think) has blamed Labour, but Corbyn has (again) made himself look like a clown.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 5967
    t my mind the real issue here is that it is happening, and happening now. There are some who are trying to deflect attention away from this fact and try to change the narrative to what happened in PMQ's today. Obvously tribal tories are desperate to change the narrative away from their team.
    How Corbyn looks is irrelevant. The fact that May does look like a drunk captain in charge of an oil tanker is.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 3reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 10684
    quarky said:
    Come on @Heartfeltdawn , Corbyn blamed May. The decision (if it was 2009) *clearly*, predates May being in the HO, yet Corbyn said this happened on "her watch". 2009 wasn't her watch. Back-peddling to say "well, it wasn't Labour" isn't the point. No one here (I don't think) has blamed Labour, but Corbyn has (again) made himself look like a clown.


    Hansard is our friend. Corbyn asked her if she signed off that decision. She said no, it was under a Labour government. The business case was made by the Home Office in 2009, the plan was put into action in October 2010. 

    https://i.imgur.com/jrbE86V.png

    We can then move a smidge forward and discuss this exchange.

    https://i.imgur.com/ckLM7w2.png

    "The decision to destroy the landing cards was taken in 2009 when, as I seem to recall, a Labour Home Secretary was in position."

    - the Home Office making a business plan in 2009 to present to ministers is not the same as taking the decision to follow that business plan. 

    For once a Labour spokesperson is on the money:

    "First Downing Street claimed the decision to destroy the Windrush-era landing cards was made by the Home Office in 2010 for data protection reasons. Then the Home Office passed the buck to a 2010 decision by the UK Border Agency.

    "At PMQs, the prime minister tried to shift the blame onto the last Labour government but was undermined by her own spokesperson minutes later, who then stated it was an operational decision, which Labour ministers would not have been aware of. Her spokesperson couldn't even say when the cards were destroyed."

    Again, it is important to make the distinction between the creation of the original business plan and the decision to enact it. May's ambiguous response is a tad strange. Had she known specifically which Labour Home Secretary had been in power when the decision was made, don't you think she'd have used it?


    So your accusation that he said that it happened on "her watch" is questionable. As for clowns, that honour falls on some of the ridiculous barracking coming from the Conservative side today. 


      



    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    edited April 18
    Sorry, that is semantics. Yesterday Corbyn tweeted specifically that it happened on May's watch. Today he said "Responsibility for this shameful episode lies firmly with the Prime Minister."

    The decision to destroy the records appears to have been proposed and approved in 2009, even if the cards were only destroyed in 2010 (and *he* made such an issue out of the cards being destroyed). To say that the two are completely separate decisions is crazy.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • LegionreturnsLegionreturns Frets: 4280
    edited April 18
    quarky said:
    Sorry, that is semantics. Yesterday Corbyn tweeted specifically that it happened on May's watch. Today he said "Responsibility for this shameful episode lies firmly with the Prime Minister."

    The decision to destroy the records appears to have been proposed and approved in 2009, even if the cards were only destroyed in 2010 (and *he* made such an issue out of the cards being destroyed). To say that the two are completely separate decisions is crazy.
    Wait...just now it was specifics, and he was a clown...but now, with documented evidence disproving your contention it's suddenly semantics? 

    I think this has run it's course. I get that you don't like Corbyn and think May can do no wrong, but I think you're largely on your own.

    My Trading Feedback    |    You Bring The Band

    Just because you're paranoid, don't mean they're not after you
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 5967
    like a drowning man clings to a lifebelt, tribalists are gonna cling to this.

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 30902
    quarky said:
    Sorry, that is semantics. Yesterday Corbyn tweeted specifically that it happened on May's watch. Today he said "Responsibility for this shameful episode lies firmly with the Prime Minister."

    The decision to destroy the records appears to have been proposed and approved in 2009, even if the cards were only destroyed in 2010 (and *he* made such an issue out of the cards being destroyed). To say that the two are completely separate decisions is crazy.
    It was still carried out nearly six months after she took office, so it *was* 'on her watch', even if the decision had been made earlier. Government ministers can and do reverse the decisions of their predecessors.

    And it was the 2014 Immigration Act which turned it from a potential problem into a real one, so it *is* her direct responsibility. She had a clause from the previous 1999 (Labour) Act deleted, which removed the protection from Commonwealth residents.

    Corbyn is correct.
    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • quarkyquarky Frets: 2046
    I am really not sure what you don't understand @Legionreturns ;

    1) Yesterday, Corbyn tweeted "Responsibility for this shameful episode lies firmly with the Prime Minister."
    2) Today, he tried to attack May in PMQ for destroying the landing cards in 2010, and said all this happened on her watch.
    3) As mentioned before, landing cards don't prove right of abode (and I am sure Corbyn knows that)
    4) The decision to destroy the Windrush records was *actually* taken in 2009, while Labour were in Power

    So, the decision to destroy records cannot have happened on May's watch, and therefore responsibility can't "lie firmly" with her over their destruction. 

    Not sure how to make it any easier.. 

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 2reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • DarnWeightDarnWeight Frets: 794
    So this is the same clown who said this when opposing May's bill in 2014...
    The Immigration Bill has a very dangerous new clause which allows the Home Secretary to remove citizenship and thus create stateless people.
    ...What an idiot, eh?

    It's this, May's piece of legislation, that is getting UK citizens banged up in Yarl's Wood, costing them their jobs, or denying them healthcare.  Who "won" PMQs means nothing.

    New fangled trading feedback link right here!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 5reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • VimFuegoVimFuego Frets: 5967
    well, clearly the responsibility lies firmly with the government cos they're, well, the government and have been for 8 years.

    Not sure how it could be made any easier to understand...

    I'm not locked in here with you, you are locked in here with me.

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.