UK Politics Thread part II

[Jimbuna]

[Moonlight]

Suella Braverman breaks cover as Tories demand Home Secretary is sacked after accusing police of 'playing favourites'... with Rishi Sunak bunkered down in No10 deciding whether to stage reshuffle

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...armistice.html

Sunak or Suella Braverman?, if Sunak fires Suella there's going to be an almighty showdown between them after the General Election next year. She's the only outstanding MP in Westminster at the moment and if a high noon does materialize between them she'll shoot the little currant full of holes.

So, Sunak's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, firing her will bring a split between the left and right of the Tory Party, a Civil War will break out and Sunak wont want that.
Me thinks he'll just have a quiet word with her to not be so outspoken in future, and there will be your answer to, has Sunak got any cojones or not. If he fires her he'll show that he has some cojones "small that they might be" a quiet word in her shell like and some Tory propaganda to go with it will show that he's bereft of any.

A win win for Suella me thinks.

[Jimbuna]

This was as far as the head of the Met could probably go under the current circumstances so the weekend may yet turn out to be most entertaining but hopefully not on the Sunday.

On a personal level I'm well happy to be retired but if the far-right turn up I'll probably be regretting the fact.

The Metropolitan Police has imposed an exclusion zone around the Cenotaph ahead of planned demonstrations in London this weekend.

The force said any Pro-Palestinian protesters who try to assemble close to the war memorial would be arrested.

Rishi Sunak has urged protesters to be "mindful of the fear and distress in Jewish and Muslim communities" when they gather on Saturday.

He repeated his view the timing of the Armistice Day march is "disrespectful".

Tens of thousands are expected to take part in a pro-Palestinian demonstration in London on Saturday, which coincides with Remembrance events.

There are concerns about pro-Palestinian splinter groups that the Met says have caused violence and disorder on previous demonstrations, as well as the potential for clashes with far-right counter-protests.

The Met has set out how it intends to police demonstrations across the weekend, and will deploy 1,850 public order officers on duty on Saturday, and another 1,375 on Sunday.

An exclusion zone will be in place around the Cenotaph and a large swathe of Whitehall, which the Met says will "in effect" ban protesters from these locations and goes further than the security measures usually deployed around the key Remembrance site.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67383065

[Jimbuna]

Could this be the beginning of the madness?

[Moonlight]

It was always going to happen, if those Hamas supporting demonstrators had been banned this weekend it wouldn't have been an issue. Soft touch policing by Mark Rowley and a Prime Minister second to everyone must be held responsible for it.
Rishi Sunak had the power to stop the demonstrations but allowed them to go ahead, you are reaping what you sow, this lot in charge have turned this country into a basket case, Well Done.

[Jimbuna]

Police say they have arrested more than 90 counter-protesters.

[Moonlight]

Suella Braverman was right about biased, woke policing. I should know - I'm an officer on the front line
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...icer-line.html

We've known for a long time, now go and tell your superiors that, after you've finished telling them, give them a smack in the mouth from the British public.

[Jimbuna]

The Met Police has condemned "extreme violence from right-wing protesters" who it says set out to confront Saturday's pro-Palestinian march.

Nine officers were injured and 145 people arrested - the "vast majority" of whom were counter-protesters.

Police added while the march itself did not see such physical violence, serious offences relating to antisemitic hate crimes were being investigated.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67390514

I'm surprised the numbers are so low.

[Jimbuna]

You really couldn't make this up

David Cameron appointed foreign secretary and made peer in shock cabinet reshuffle move.

David Cameron has been appointed as foreign secretary as a cabinet reshuffle kicks off in Downing Street.

The former prime minister was seen entering Number 10 this morning, shortly after Rishi Sunak began changing his top team.

Mr Cameron is no longer an elected politician as he stood down as an MP in 2016, having called the Brexit referendum and his campaign to Remain losing the vote.

But the government has confirmed he will now enter the House of Lords as a life peer, giving him the opportunity to serve as a minister once more.

The shock announcement came after the sacking of Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who provoked widespread condemnation for an article she wrote in The Times, accusing the police of "playing favourites" with left-wing groups over right-wing and national activists.

It was the latest in a string of controversial remarks by the Tory MP, who is a popular member on the right of the party, including her claiming being homeless was a "lifestyle choice".
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...4d99727c&ei=11

There will be more instalments in this farcical comedy show as the day goes on.

[Moonlight]

I think the Red Wall seats are going to take a battering next year, Cameron is a step backwards and Cleverly as Home Secretary makes it two, Sunak has made some poor decisions recently, but the biggest one of all is the sideways step to the left by the Tories, it's not what the Tory voters wanted Sunak.
Cameron gave the rich a 5p in the £1 tax reduction but gained it back by bringing in the Bedroom Tax, people have long memories Sunak and they'll remember Cameron throwing his Teddy out of the pram when he lost the Brexit referendum too.
Sunak only needs to bring back George Osbourne and we're right back to the days of the Tory Toffs of 2010, the Tories screwed up everything they got their hands on then and they're still screwing up today.

Don't you just want to kick them in the head?, me first, I choose Cameron.

[Jimbuna]

Looking forward to Wednesday when she is expected to fire her broadside from the back benches.

[Moonlight]

Rishi Sunak gathers 'new-look' Cabinet... but it's a bit familiar: PM vows 'change' as he hails David Cameron's return (alongside half-a-dozen of his former ministers and three ex-aides) - but critics say it's like 'failing United bringing back Ronaldo'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-revolt.html

A sign of desperation me thinks, when you're in the last chance saloon the odds for success just keep getting longer and longer, Cameron, Mitchell and McVey?, dear me, if these are the UK's saviours then we really are in dire straights.

[Jimbuna]

As you said, we are in dire straights

I'm surprised Cameron has the nerve to come back having earlier spat out his dummy when he couldn't get his own way over the UK staying in the EU but of course the financial trappings of a peerage are hard to turn your nose up to.

These people have absolutely no shame.

[Jimbuna]

Well, Suella certainly didn't pull any punches in her letter to Rishi.

Dear Prime Minister

Thank you for your phone call yesterday morning in which you asked me to leave government. While disappointing, this is for the best.

It has been my privilege to serve as home secretary and deliver on what the British people have sent us to Westminster to do.

I want to thank all of those civil servants, police, Border Force officers and security professionals with whom I have worked and whose dedication to public safety is exemplary.

I am proud of what we achieved together: delivering on our manifesto pledge to recruit 20,000 new police officers and enacting new laws such as the Public Order Act 2023 and the National Security Act 2023.

I also led a programme of reform: on anti-social behaviour, police dismissals and standards, reasonable lines of enquiry, grooming gangs, knife crime, non-crime hate incidents and rape and serious sexual offences.

And I am proud of the strategic changes that I was delivering to Prevent, Contest, serious organised crime and fraud. I am sure that this work will continue with the new ministerial team.

As you know, I accepted your offer to serve as home secretary in October 2022 on certain conditions.

Despite you having been rejected by a majority of party members during the summer leadership contest and thus having no personal mandate to be prime minister, I agreed to support you because of the firm assurances you gave me on key policy priorities. These were, among other things:

This was a document with clear terms to which you agreed in October 2022 during your second leadership campaign. I trusted you. It is generally agreed that my support was a pivotal factor in winning the leadership contest and thus enabling you to become prime minister.

For a year, as home secretary I have sent numerous letters to you on the key subjects contained in our agreement, made requests to discuss them with you and your team, and put forward proposals on how we might deliver these goals.

I worked up the legal advice, policy detail and action to take on these issues. This was often met with equivocation, disregard and a lack of interest.

You have manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver on every single one of these key policies. Either your distinctive style of government means you are incapable of doing so. Or, as I must surely conclude now, you never had any intention of keeping your promises.

These are not just pet interests of mine. They are what we promised the British people in our 2019 manifesto which led to a landslide victory. They are what people voted for in the 2016 Brexit Referendum.

Our deal was no mere promise over dinner, to be discarded when convenient and denied when challenged.

I was clear from day one that if you did not wish to leave the ECHR, the way to securely and swiftly deliver our Rwanda partnership would be to block off the ECHR, the HRA and any other obligations which inhibit our ability to remove those with no right to be in the UK. Our deal expressly referenced "notwithstanding clauses" to that effect.

Your rejection of this path was not merely a betrayal of our agreement, but a betrayal of your promise to the nation that you would do "whatever it takes" to stop the boats.

At every stage of litigation I cautioned you and your team against assuming we would win. I repeatedly urged you to take legislative measures that would better secure us against the possibility of defeat. You ignored these arguments. You opted instead for wishful thinking as a comfort blanket to avoid having to make hard choices. This irresponsibility has wasted time and left the country in an impossible position.

If we lose in the Supreme Court, an outcome that I have consistently argued we must he prepared for, you will have wasted a year and an Act of Parliament, only to arrive back at square one.

Worse than this, your magical thinking - believing that you can will your way through this without upsetting polite opinion - has meant you have failed to prepare any sort of credible Plan B.

I wrote to you on multiple occasions setting out what a credible Plan B would entail, and making clear that unless you pursue these proposals, in the event of defeat, there is no hope of flights this side of an election. I received no reply from you.

I can only surmise that this is because you have no appetite for doing what is necessary, and therefore no real intention of fulfilling your pledge to the British people.

If, on the other hand, we win in the Supreme Court, because of the compromises that you insisted on in the Illegal Migration Act, the government will struggle to deliver our Rwanda partnership in the way that the public expects.

The Act is far from secure against legal challenge. People will not be removed as swiftly as I originally proposed. The average claimant will be entitled to months of process, challenge, and appeal. Your insistence that Rule 39 indications are binding in international law - against the views of leading lawyers, as set out in the House of Lords - will leave us vulnerable to being thwarted yet again by the Strasbourg Court.

Another cause for disappointment - and the context for my recent article in The Times - has been your failure to rise to the challenge posed by the increasingly vicious antisemitism and extremism displayed on our streets since Hamas's terrorist atrocities of 7 October.

I have become hoarse urging you to consider legislation to ban the hate marches and help stem the rising tide of racism, intimidation and terrorist glorification threatening community cohesion.

Britain is at a turning point in our history and faces a threat of radicalisation and extremism in a way not seen for 20 years.

I regret to say that your response has been uncertain, weak, and lacking in the qualities of leadership that this country needs. Rather than fully acknowledge the severity of this threat, your team disagreed with me for weeks that the law needed changing.

As on so many other issues, you sought to put off tough decisions in order to minimise political risk to yourself. In doing so, you have increased the very real risk these marches present to everyone else.

In October of last year you were given an opportunity to lead our country. It is a privilege to serve and one we should not take for granted. Service requires bravery and thinking of the common good.

It is not about occupying the office as an end in itself.

Someone needs to be honest: your plan is not working, we have endured record election defeats, your resets have failed and we are running out of time. You need to change course urgently.

I may not have always found the right words, but I have always striven to give voice to the quiet majority that supported us in 2019. I have endeavoured to be honest and true to the people who put us in these privileged positions.

I will, of course, continue to support the government in pursuit of policies which align with an authentic conservative agenda.

Sincerely

Suella Braverman

[Jimbuna]

So what are you going to do now Rishi after the Supreme Court have ruled your asylum seeker plan is unlawful?

Rishi Sunak says the government is working on a new treaty with Rwanda, after the government's asylum seeker plan was ruled unlawful.

Sunak also says he is "prepared to change our laws" if necessary.

He was speaking after the Supreme Court rule against the plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, saying it's unlawful.

The government had said the plan would deter people crossing in small boats across the Channel.

Once in Rwanda, people could claim asylum there, return home, or seek asylum in a third country - but not the UK

But Lord Reed, president of the Supreme Court, said there was a "real risk" asylum seekers could be sent from Rwanda to the places they fled from.

Labour's Keir Starmer says the Rwanda proposals have been a "ridiculous, pathetic spectacle"

What a mess