[Politics] BBC coverage of boat migrants

[A1X]

Rwanda is a penal colony?

Essentially as of this week

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

Wow those French police really bust a gut to stop that boat leaving today. FFS. This is where the problem lies.

If the Conservatives didn't change the system so people can only apply for asylum when they're in this country, the number of dingy crossings would not have exponentially increased.

The problem was caused by the Conservatives. The buck stops with them.

As has been mentioned previously, the French have offered solutions to help, but the Conservatives refuse.

 

[nicko31]

Oh Dave, do be quiet we’ve had enough of remoaners like you.

We’ve got Rwanda it’s far safer, we’ve made a law to make it so

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think that sadly, at the moment, we do need to increase defence spending. We just need to avoid all the jingoistic nonsense that goes with it and deploy resources sensibly.

I think the RAF has 10 heavy drones to the USA’s 500. It’s not really a deterrent.

Maybe.

But Sunk's plan is an open chequebook that will enrich the arms industry, with our arms procurement folk a load of boggle eyed push-overs.

Someone who knows what he's talking about, on the radio, just explained how the people in charge of our procurement are clueless oafs who act like schoolboys in a sweet shop whenever mummy gives them any money to spend.

You thought our PPI procurement was bad....

Edit: but luckily none of this will happen and in 3 years time none of us will remember who Sunk was.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It’s our success, not are.
Our country, not are

The reason for the mockery is that Das Reich was thrown off NSC about a year ago, the bell end. But (you can guess the rest, now you have been tolled).

 

[herecomesaregular]

Maybe.

But Sunk's plan is an open chequebook that will enrich the arms industry, with our arms procurement folk a load of boggle eyed push-overs.

Someone who knows what he's talking about, on the radio, just explained how the people in charge of our procurement are clueless oafs who act like schoolboys in a sweet shop whenever mummy gives them any money to spend.

You thought our PPI procurement was bad....

Edit: but luckily none of this will happen and in 3 years time none of us will remember who Sunk was.

A family member works in the building industry and has some contracts with the MOD. Obviously they have signed the OSA but what they have has said is that the absolute wastage of money and lack of oversight (left hand doesn't know what the right is doing) is truly shocking. Everyone knows it and the military even joke about it. Several times they've demolished something recently built or built something that on completion is now no longer needed. British incompetence at it's best MOD spending, apparently.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Reform’s Ben Habib would let them drown, a policy that’s too toxic even for Julia Hartley-Brewer

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

I see no thread on Sunk's new declaration that we are going to spend, spend, spend to become the world's most super-armed nation in Europe. Only we are no longer in Europe. So that's even better. With a Labour government to do the spending, obviously.

Does this man even have straw in his head? My money is on space dust and chewing gum wrappers.

Yes we are.

We are no longer in the EU though.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

A family member works in the building industry and has some contracts with the MOD. Obviously they have signed the OSA but what they have has said is that the absolute wastage of money and lack of oversight (left hand doesn't know what the right is doing) is truly shocking. Everyone knows it and the military even joke about it. Several times they've demolished something recently built or built something that on completion is now no longer needed. British incompetence at it's best MOD spending, apparently.

Welcome to the world of Public Sector procurement.

See Emily Thornberry's statement on Procurement within the Police (Today/Radio 4 this am)

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yes we are.

We are no longer in the EU though.

<sigh>

Maybe I should start typing my little jokes using special green font.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Welcome to the world of Public Sector procurement.

See Emily Thornberry's statement on Procurement within the Police (Today/Radio 4 this am)

Yep, listened to that. To paraphrase, Labour think 700 million (or was it even billion) is currently being wasted by not having a central procurement system and they'd reinvest half of that on local officers to crack down on shoplifting gangs (as well as repealing the 'less than £200 isn't a crime' introduced by May).

My jaw was dropping further and further open at each point in that piece. People worrying about immigrants while shops are literally losing money every day (and their staff being threatened) to organised gangs with a drug habit, taking advantage of bad legislation and wasteful administration.

 

[Change at Barnham]

I saw on the BBC News at large graphic showing that there are 52000 migrants 'eligible' to be moved to Rwanda which gave the distinct impression that that many could potentially go from the UK.
However on a radio interview a couple of hours earlier it was reported that Rwanda are only prepared to accept several hundred, but this wasn't mentioned on the BBC News, only the 52000.

Whether or not you think it should be happening it seemed like very biased reporting to me.

 

[sparkie]

If Sunak is so bothered about small boats, can't he just give out vouchers for Eurotunnel ?

 

[portlock seagull]

Beyond shooting migrants and sinking their boats, what exactly is the government supposed to do? Desperate people and desperate times. If you want to get to this country and live here the bottom line is you can. The entire world is on the move, for numerous reasons no government in the world can stop, so instead of building walls etc we need to build more houses and the like.

 

[Insel affe]

so instead of building walls etc we need to build more houses and the like.

Yeah right'o folks from this country cant get on the housing ladder, never mind build more and house refugees.
Now that comment is in no way meant to mean, do not house them, they are not welcome.
However whoever is in power does not have the money to build new houses, especially near bankrupt councils who have sold off most of their assets/land, never mind big housebuilders who I know are slowing down building and holding onto land until the economy picks up to maximise profit.
Building more houses is a whole different kettle of fish.

I know of a certain labour council that is about to finish a development and some in the council/ government have suggested that new properties be allocated to refugees, the back lash and negative feeling this would cause has put any decision on the back burner due to political ramifications.

 

[nicko31]

Reform’s Ben Habib would let them drown, a policy that’s too toxic even for Julia Hartley-Brewer

Ben clearly isn't familar with the UN convention on the Law of the Sea.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Ben clearly isn't familar with the UN convention on the Law of the Sea.

He doesn’t look like he’s familiar with much, other than hate.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Yep, listened to that. To paraphrase, Labour think 700 million (or was it even billion) is currently being wasted by not having a central procurement system and they'd reinvest half of that on local officers to crack down on shoplifting gangs (as well as repealing the 'less than £200 isn't a crime' introduced by May).

My jaw was dropping further and further open at each point in that piece. People worrying about immigrants while shops are literally losing money every day (and their staff being threatened) to organised gangs with a drug habit, taking advantage of bad legislation and wasteful administration.

Why do politicians always think that making organisations bigger will save money? They've been doing it for decades, and it didn't work in the days before internet and it works even less now. A small organisation has someone in charge of paperclips who buys them at £4 per thousand. A large organisation has a team who negotiate a deal to buy them at £3.90 per thousand and has another team to supervise the invoicing and distribution and payment. The politicians see a 0.01p per paperclip reduction and think they are saving money.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Why do politicians always think that making organisations bigger will save money? They've been doing it for decades, and it didn't work in the days before internet and it works even less now. A small organisation has someone in charge of paperclips who buys them at £4 per thousand. A large organisation has a team who negotiate a deal to buy them at £3.90 per thousand and has another team to supervise the invoicing and distribution and payment. The politicians see a 0.01p per paperclip reduction and think they are saving money.

The real economy of scale - always - is throwing emplyees on the scrapheap

 

[Guinness Boy]

Why do politicians always think that making organisations bigger will save money? They've been doing it for decades, and it didn't work in the days before internet and it works even less now. A small organisation has someone in charge of paperclips who buys them at £4 per thousand. A large organisation has a team who negotiate a deal to buy them at £3.90 per thousand and has another team to supervise the invoicing and distribution and payment. The politicians see a 0.01p per paperclip reduction and think they are saving money.

It’s the police federation’s figures.

Currently a £100 discrepancy in baton costs between forces and literally thousands different for high performance cars.

Police forces 'spending £120 per baton and £630 per helmet', claim Labour

A freedom of information request submitted by Labour found that it costs £100 more to buy a police baton in one area than in other areas.

uk.news.yahoo.com