The banker loving, baby-eating Tory party thread (regenerated)

[HanoiVillan]

One rule for Amber Rudd, another rule for everyone else . . .

If Amber Rudd can’t explain why she defied the courts, she should go

'Amber Rudd confused herself with a 16th-century monarch last week, seemingly believing she has a divine right to rule, irrespective of the law. Three times the courts told her to return Samim Bigzad, a 23-year-old asylum seeker who was cowering in a hotel room in Kabul, threatened with beheading by the Taliban. Three times she refused, thinking she knew best and the courts had got it wrong. It displayed a disdainful arrogance for the courts and the law. Unless she has an explanation, she has to go as home secretary. And the person who has a duty to see that the home secretary operates within the rule of law is the lord chancellor, David Lidington. This is as much a test of him as it is of her.

The story of Samim Bigzad is chilling. He came to the UK from Afghanistan in 2015. His father was already here, and suffers from severe post-traumatic stress disorder. Samim initially entered illegally, but then claimed asylum. He had worked on US construction projects in Kabul, hence the Taliban threat.

The Home Office refused Samim’s application for asylum. It indicated it would remove him on a date to be fixed. Just after 8am last Tuesday Samim was told he would be deported to Kabul via Istanbul by a flight leaving later that morning. His lawyers made further representations to prevent removal. The Home Office rejected them. Samim then started judicial review proceedings including seeking an application to stop his removal pending the hearing for the full judicial review. Although the approach of the Home Office was typically harsh, up to this point it had not acted unlawfully.

It was last Tuesday evening that it crossed the line into unlawfulness. At 9.53pm that night, the lawyers were notified that Mr Justice Morris had granted an injunction ordering the Home Office to take Samim off the flight to Kabul and to return him to London. The Home Office was told of the injunction immediately and had a copy of the order at 10pm that evening. At that point Samim was in transit. The plane had landed at Istanbul, and was due to take off on a connecting flight at 10.30pm for Kabul. The Home Office decided not to remove him from the plane, and Samim was flown on to Kabul.

On the face of it, the Home Office broke the order by not taking him off the plane at Istanbul. Whatever the reason was for not doing so, it should have immediately made arrangements for his return to the UK when he arrived in Kabul later that night, in accordance with the judge’s order. But it did nothing. Any doubts it might have had about what its legal duty was were laid to rest later on Wednesday afternoon when Mr Justice Jay ordered that Samim be returned to the UK as quickly as possible. For good measure, he said that the Home Office was already “prima facie” in contempt, and that any thoughts it had of seeking to vary or discharge the earlier order were not a reason for disobeying it.

Despite the absolute clarity of both orders, the Home Office again refused to obey. A third judge, Mrs Justice Lang, last Thursday, dismissed any attempt to vary the order and ordered the immediate return of Samim. She also made clear that immediate obedience was required.

Still the Home Office thought it knew best. It did nothing, and on Saturday it went to the court of appeal. It said all the orders were wrong. The appeal court gave it short shrift, and finally, the Home Office made arrangements for Samim to be flown back to the UK where he eventually arrived on Sunday night.

We have been here before. In 1991 the Home Office gave an undertaking not to deport an asylum seeker to Zaire because he was in fear for his life. As in this case, he was in transit and the Home Office refused to remove him from the plane he was on, which had stopped in Paris. He flew on to Zaire and was never seen again, almost certainly meeting the fate he had feared. When proceedings were brought against the then home secretary, Kenneth Baker, he argued that ministers of the crown could not be the subject of contempt of contempt proceedings. The House of Lords shot that argument down. They said that if that was right it would mean the executive obeyed the law “as a matter of grace, not as a matter of necessity, a proposition which would reverse the result of the civil war”.

Home secretaries all too often regard the courts as the enemy, standing in the way of what the minister knows to be best for the country. Maybe they do in some cases, but if home secretaries can override the courts, we are lost as a nation. Rudd’s attitude last week was exactly the same as that displayed by the Daily Mail to the Brexit judges – get out of our way, we know best. The horrific difference is that the home secretary actually has the power to send people to their death, whereas the Daily Mail simply shouts from the sidelines.

Rudd has showed a stunning disregard for the law. When asked about the case on The Andrew Marr Show, there was not a hint of explanation or apology.'

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/19/home-secretary-courts-amber-rudd-deport-samim-bigzad?CMP=share_btn_tw

[snowychap]

^There's not any of that that I'm going to take issue with - other than it's written by Charlie Falconer.

[Chindie]

Mentioned the other day in the London attack thread, but a little more on that building narrative to attack the net...

May is to speak to the UN today about net 'giants' doing more, faster, to attack extremism. Cool, we're all down for that on the face of things. Then you start to consider how you'd do that and things start to concern. Add in that we already know what May is like and how long there's been talk about wanting more control of the net.

[magnkarl]

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

Mentioned the other day in the London attack thread, but a little more on that building narrative to attack the net...

May is to speak to the UN today about net 'giants' doing more, faster, to attack extremism. Cool, we're all down for that on the face of things. Then you start to consider how you'd do that and things start to concern. Add in that we already know what May is like and how long there's been talk about wanting more control of the net.

As good a time as any to start a VPN company in a country with liberal personal freedom rules. I wonder if someone has a figure on how much this industry now turns over. It'd be interesting to see.

[tonyh29]

12 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

'Amber Rudd confused herself with a 16th-century monarch last week, seemingly believing she has a divine right to rule, irrespective of the law.

pedant but James was a 17th century king as he didn't become king of England until 1603

[bobzy]

39 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

pedant but James was a 17th century king as he didn't become king of England until 1603

Certainly the most important aspect of that article.  Bloody journos these days.

[Xann]

The Tory response to Corbyn at Glastonbury.

 

[Xann]

[PompeyVillan]

Have the government done anything about rising gas/heating prices yet? They promised to right?

Help the 'just about managing'. 

[bickster]

14 minutes ago, PompeyVillan said:

Have the government done anything about rising gas/heating prices yet? They promised to right?

Help the 'just about managing'. 

It’ll all be ok after Brexit

[chrisp65]

2 hours ago, PompeyVillan said:

Have the government done anything about rising gas/heating prices yet? They promised to right?

Help the 'just about managing'. 

I believe they are loosening the grip of planning officers to allow more fracking on large areas of private land.

If you are just about managing and have a large section of Lancashire fenced off, you should be able to get Cuadrilla to bung you a few quid rent.

Credit where credit's due on this one.

 

 

[bickster]

So Theresa May has basically extolled the virtues of the Free Market today but adding the caviat that when it’s not working we have to step in... so that’s rules and regulations on the free market... erm nurse?

[ml1dch]

There's this weird accepted wisdom that free trade is automatically a good thing. Particularly amongst the "it's all about the trade deals, we're not racist, honest guv" brigade.

Because "free" is a good thing, and everyone likes trade, it must mean that free trade is automatically beneficial.

Universal free trade as espoused by Hannan, Fox et al would destroy what is left of British manufacturing, end UK agriculture and food production and leave the countryside a ravaged wasteland.

On the bright side, a chicken might cost £3.70 rather than £4.20. So there's that.

[bickster]

13 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

There's this weird accepted wisdom that free trade is automatically a good thing. Particularly amongst the "it's all about the trade deals, we're not racist, honest guv" brigade.

Because "free" is a good thing, and everyone likes trade, it must mean that free trade is automatically beneficial.

Universal free trade as espoused by Hannan, Fox et al would destroy what is left of British manufacturing, end UK agriculture and food production and leave the countryside a ravaged wasteland.

On the bright side, a chicken might cost £3.70 rather than £4.20. So there's that.

Free bleach too don’t forget 

[Xann]

31 minutes ago, bickster said:

Free bleach too don’t forget 

Free bleach for the poor!

No need for expensive toilet cleaners.

Clean as you shit.

[dAVe80]

Some bearded Yam Yam tit, just quoted Thatcher (I'm not even sure he realised), on Question Time, and though he was the dogs. Word removed.

[tonyh29]

15 minutes ago, dAVe80 said:

Some bearded Yam Yam tit, just quoted Thatcher (I'm not even sure he realised), on Question Time, and though he was the dogs. Word removed.

Missed that ....but we just had an Asian man demanding immigration control to keep people out and an Asian  woman making sure we don’t forget that a white man killed an MP as some sort of justification as to why we should let immigrants in ....  strange  times 

the geordie labour bloke who looks like he is half asleep missed the subtle anti Semitism dig as well 

 

Edited September 28, 2017 by tonyh29

[dAVe80]

1 minute ago, tonyh29 said:

Missed that ....but we just had an Asian man demanding immigration control to keep people out and a white woman making sure we don’t forget that a white man killed an MP as some sort of justification as to why we should let immigrants in ....  strange  times 

the geordie labour bloke who looks like he is half asleep missed the subtle anti Semitism dig as well 

 

Ian Lavery. I used to like him, till I saw him drinking dark fruit cider at the Durham Gala!

I honestly don't know why I watch Question Time. Especially an episode from Wolverhampton!

[darrenm]

7 hours ago, dAVe80 said:

Ian Lavery. I used to like him, till I saw him drinking dark fruit cider at the Durham Gala!

I honestly don't know why I watch Question Time. Especially an episode from Wolverhampton!

I turned it on, saw Karen Bradley, turned it off.

[Chindie]

Question Time is car crash TV. I've not watched it for at least a year at this point, I found the urge to shout and throw things at the TV too difficult to resist and I can't afford to buy a new one.

It does reveal just how ignorant the UK is though.