"But the government did nothing of this crucial work." - This is not a surprise given the complete lack of preparation for Brexit, not before the referendum, not in the manifesto, not in advance of the negotiations nor in the recruitment of staff for customs, border agency staff etc. There has been no preparation for government by the Government since it was elected!
Even Rwanda's High Commissioner thinks the scheme is, to coin a phrase, batshit. And now Rwanda has extracted a quarter of a billion from the UK taxpayer, they've decided that an illegal scheme is not such a good look.
The Rwandans have pulled a blinder - they've got £250 million from us for nothing, a promise of more money to come in the future, and freedom to sacrifice future money in return for not taking asylum seeker deliveries from the UK. In that context, the noises about "an illegal scheme" are basically just reminding the UK government that the Rwandan government holds all the cards here; either the UK sorts itself out and makes the scheme politically safe for Rwanda, or they pull out and walk away with their money so far.
You can feel the desperation and tension in interviews and press conferences. Feels like they are willing to go through with that in order to leave the failing sunk cost policy in Labour’s lap.
Some may think a light touch doesn't treat the subject seriously enough. On the contrary, it highlights the appalling situation correctly, and yours does exactly that, and sends chills down my spine.
“Disgusting policy.” Well put. Beyond-belief disgusting, in fact, coming from a once reputable political party whose continuation in power is a moral abomination.
I’m a bit confused by the apparent goal to free the U.K. from international laws and judgements. Isn’t any cross country treaty subject to international laws and judgements? If not how can a treaty be binding?
Says it all - populism and ineptness go hand in hand because populists do not believe in rigour
"But the government did nothing of this crucial work." - This is not a surprise given the complete lack of preparation for Brexit, not before the referendum, not in the manifesto, not in advance of the negotiations nor in the recruitment of staff for customs, border agency staff etc. There has been no preparation for government by the Government since it was elected!
Somehow I expected a rather more critical response from you - such measured terms are quite shocking!
Brilliant piece of writing; and I love - or deplore, as awful politics - the 'pantomime policy'...
Even Rwanda's High Commissioner thinks the scheme is, to coin a phrase, batshit. And now Rwanda has extracted a quarter of a billion from the UK taxpayer, they've decided that an illegal scheme is not such a good look.
The Rwandans have pulled a blinder - they've got £250 million from us for nothing, a promise of more money to come in the future, and freedom to sacrifice future money in return for not taking asylum seeker deliveries from the UK. In that context, the noises about "an illegal scheme" are basically just reminding the UK government that the Rwandan government holds all the cards here; either the UK sorts itself out and makes the scheme politically safe for Rwanda, or they pull out and walk away with their money so far.
On the plus side, this whole debacle will keep political scientists and constitutional law lecturers in case studies for years...
Not a deranged genius. A deranged moron could do it.
You can feel the desperation and tension in interviews and press conferences. Feels like they are willing to go through with that in order to leave the failing sunk cost policy in Labour’s lap.
Some may think a light touch doesn't treat the subject seriously enough. On the contrary, it highlights the appalling situation correctly, and yours does exactly that, and sends chills down my spine.
“Disgusting policy.” Well put. Beyond-belief disgusting, in fact, coming from a once reputable political party whose continuation in power is a moral abomination.
Our constitution is clearly not functional any more. What changes can we make to help avoid these kinds of situations?
I’m a bit confused by the apparent goal to free the U.K. from international laws and judgements. Isn’t any cross country treaty subject to international laws and judgements? If not how can a treaty be binding?