Nigel's Maiden speech in Parliament

[johnphilip]

Very interesting 

https://www.youtube.com/live/snOIXZrs8fg?si=T4pr5m-LXO0GG5Nn

[ditchman]

Referendum on the ECHR...............bet labour and starmer were clenching their collective buttocks.............a small fire might have been lit !!!

[oowee]

Who? 

[Stonepark]

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Who? 

Your favourite politician who lives in your head and appears to be your specialist subject for Mastermind as you appear to not be able to stop talking about him....... 😜

[B686]

4 minutes ago, Stonepark said:

Your favourite politician who lives in your head and appears to be your specialist subject for Mastermind as you appear to not be able to stop talking about him....... 😜

His secret crush . 🥰

[armsid]

A future PM

[Raja Clavata]

I do wonder where this, amongst other things, leave culture ultimately takes us as a nation and also how it further erodes the perception of us globally.

Illegal immigration was the deciding factor in the 2016 referendum. Worked out a right treat.

I’m no expert but the ECHR is clearly complex, do we really want the general population voting on such a matter. Reform will try to simplify it to a binary choice of wanting to do something about illegal immigration or not.

I wonder if Farage has been asked to clarify, ECHR or not, where exactly do we deport the illegal immigrants to?

Assuming we were able to ascertain origin, does anyone know what the financial impact of repatriating a single immigrant in contradiction to ECHR would be? Also what instruments are available to ECHR or the wider international community in enforcing such financial penalties?

Is it a better value for money alternative to the Rwanda plan whose cost tends to negative infinity (-£700,000,000 spent / 0 deportations).

[Mungler]

1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said:

I do wonder where this, amongst other things, leave culture ultimately takes us as a nation and also how it further erodes the perception of us globally.

Illegal immigration was the deciding factor in the 2016 referendum. Worked out a right treat.

I’m no expert but the ECHR is clearly complex, do we really want the general population voting on such a matter. Reform will try to simplify it to a binary choice of wanting to do something about illegal immigration or not.

I wonder if Farage has been asked to clarify, ECHR or not, where exactly do we deport the illegal immigrants to?

Assuming we were able to ascertain origin, does anyone know what the financial impact of repatriating a single immigrant in contradiction to ECHR would be? Also what instruments are available to ECHR or the wider international community in enforcing such financial penalties?

Is it a better value for money alternative to the Rwanda plan whose cost tends to negative infinity (-£700,000,000 spent / 0 deportations).

Immigration levels remain unsustainable and a massive problem now turned into political football and everyone can see it. 

Rwanda had a chance but it’s been immediately scrapped and all investment into that scheme lost. What a waste of tax payer money.

Part of implementing systems such as Rwanda is the messaging - once established there is a deterrent factor which will take effect. That said, we’ll never know now because Labour have killed it stone dead - let’s hope their plan bear fruit; but they won’t of course. Standby for more wasted tax payer money and record levels of immigration.

[Good shot?]

Are any financial penalties imposed on other European countries that ignore ECHR law?

I think leaving the ECHR will be like Brexit again and we should just replace all EU law that stop us doing what we want into UK law with a law that suits us.

I suspect our biggest problems will from of our own MPs and human rights lawyers.

Edited Thursday at 12:34 by Good shot?

[oowee]

2 minutes ago, Good shot? said:

Are any financial penalties imposed on other European countries that ignore ECHR law?

I think leaving the ECHR will be like Brexit again and we should  replace all law that stops us doing want into UK law with a law that suits us as and when it occurs.

Have we not learnt from the Brexit debacle. Do we not have enough debt and economic decline? Why do you want to add more? Lets start by telling us what part of our human rights you want to give up. 

With Brexit we were too willing to dump without understanding why we want to dump, what difference we want and what the cost will be. Lets start with a plan for what how and why. 

[B686]

What plan . A plan to stop all these so called asylum seekers.

How give them **** all other than a ride back France 

why , because we have enough of our own problems and should look after our own first. 
All in an ideal world of course.

[Lloyd90]

It was quite worrying to see Labour questioned about their immigration plan. 
 

They said they’ll have a system where they process applications. 
 

When pressed what this actually means, they’re going to just rubber stamp the vast majority of applications to approved. 
 

When asked about the claims that are denied they said “they’ll have to go back”. When questions about back to where, they were unable to give any details or answers, if from Afghan etc they said they can’t send them back … but they have to go back … but we can’t send them back … but they have to go … but we can’t … but … 

 

 

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, Mungler said:

Immigration levels remain unsustainable and a massive problem now turned into political football and everyone can see it. 

Rwanda had a chance but it’s been immediately scrapped and all investment into that scheme lost. What a waste of tax payer money.

Part of implementing systems such as Rwanda is the messaging - once established there is a deterrent factor which will take effect. That said, we’ll never know now because Labour have killed it stone dead - let’s hope their plan bear fruit; but they won’t of course. Standby for more wasted tax payer money and record levels of immigration.

Agree with all that except the Rwanda gig, again I’m no expert but perhaps better to clear the legal path before flushing all that cash down the drain.

1 hour ago, Good shot? said:

Are any financial penalties imposed on other European countries that ignore ECHR law?

I think leaving the ECHR will be like Brexit again and we should  replace all EU law that stops us doing want into UK law with a law that suits us as and when it occurs.

I suspect our biggest problems will from of our own MPs and human rights lawyers.

And anyone with a shred of humanist values.

1 hour ago, oowee said:

Have we not learnt from the Brexit debacle. Do we not have enough debt and economic decline? Why do you want to add more? Lets start by telling us what part of our human rights you want to give up. 

With Brexit we were too willing to dump without understanding why we want to dump, what difference we want and what the cost will be. Lets start with a plan for what how and why. 

Well apparently Nigel hasn’t learnt. But I question if he cares enough to learn. The answer is leave, what’s the question?

Edited Thursday at 09:12 by Raja Clavata
typo

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, B686 said:

What plan . A plan to stop all these so called asylum seekers.

How give them **** all other than a ride back France 

why , because we have enough of our own problems and should look after our own first. 
All in an ideal world of course.

What about making us a less attractive final destination? Fix that and we sort our own house out too, far too many free-loaders of our own.

[12gauge82]

4 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

What about making us a less attractive final destination? Fix that and we sort our own house out too, far too many free-loaders of our own.

Very good suggestion, as well as open up some bona fide processing away from our border to give legal routes for genuine refugees. 

[oowee]

12 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Very good suggestion, as well as open up some bona fide processing away from our border to give legal routes for genuine refugees. 

Biggest thing we could do is introduce another language rather than English. 

[Good shot?]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Have we not learnt from the Brexit debacle. Do we not have enough debt and economic decline? Why do you want to add more? Lets start by telling us what part of our human rights you want to give up. 

With Brexit we were too willing to dump without understanding why we want to dump, what difference we want and what the cost will be. Lets start with a plan for what how and why. 

I have told you which EU laws I would ignore in my post, the ones that stop us doing what we want to do. As they occur. I have also questioned what financial penalties other EU countries have incurred if any for ignoring the laws.

Edited Thursday at 09:55 by Good shot?

[12gauge82]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Biggest thing we could do is introduce another language rather than English. 

👍

[janner]

Its better having N.f inside the house throwing his faeces out than before when he was outside throwing them in,

Unless trump wins he's just one of many now,

 

 

 

[oowee]

4 hours ago, Good shot? said:

I have told you which EU laws I would ignore in my post, the ones that stop us doing what we want to do. As they occur. I have also questioned what financial penalties other EU countries have incurred if any for ignoring the laws.

We can ignore them all now. The ECHR is nowt to do with the EU. 

[Good shot?]

So my post applies to all laws other than UK ones?

I am not thinking straight at the moment, when I posted I was coupled up on chemo and trying to stay awake.

 

[oowee]

The UK's Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) incorporates 16 articles from the ECHR into UK domestic law, which protects fundamental human rights such as the right to life, liberty, fair trials, and freedom of speech and assembly. This means that people can use these rights to challenge the actions of the UK government and public bodies in court. 

For example, the UK changed its law to exempt women at risk of domestic violence from housing benefit cuts after the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the previous policy discriminated against women based on their gender. 

In 2019 it ruled the proposed bedroom tax as a form of discrimination.

Its helpful to citizens to have a body that can stop the UK govt abusing it's citizens. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Generative AI is experimental.

 

 

 

 

 

[12gauge82]

28 minutes ago, oowee said:

We can ignore them all now. The ECHR is nowt to do with the EU. 

Not strictly correct. To be a member of the EU, you had to be signed up to the ECHR, therefore while we were EU members, we had no choice other than to accept it. Now we've left the EU, we can also leave the ECHR if we want to, hence "taking back control"

[oowee]

16 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Not strictly correct. To be a member of the EU, you had to be signed up to the ECHR, therefore while we were EU members, we had no choice other than to accept it. Now we've left the EU, we can also leave the ECHR if we want to, hence "taking back control"

We created the ECHR in the first place. The UK govt could of course leave. Leaving would not be taking back control it would be you and me and everyone else giving control of our rights to to whichever govt is in power. There is no way I want my rights in the hands of a govt, there are some right looney tunes out there.

I may not like some of the decisions but I am better off with someone keeping an oversight of the govt that manages the place. 

[12gauge82]

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

We created the ECHR in the first place. The UK govt could of course leave. Leaving would not be taking back control it would be you and me and everyone else giving control of our rights to to whichever govt is in power. There is no way I want my rights in the hands of a govt, there are some right looney tunes out there.

I may not like some of the decisions but I am better off with someone keeping an oversight of the govt that manages the place. 

My point was, while we were in the EU we couldn't leave the ECHR, now we're out of the EU we can. 

As for someone keeping an eye on government, I'd rather it was the people, which is what happens via the ballot box, rather than a bunch of unelected nobody's, with allegiance to countries other than the UK.