Organgrinder

It has already been made perfectly clear, by the government, that the vast majority of them will NOT end up in Rwanda, but only a very limited few. The rest, we will still have to deal with, so we should make a start on dealing with them instead of playing games.

You have now quoted the very argument that the Tories have followed, which has got them into the mess they are in now, There is NO REASON why, having legal channels to apply for asylum in France would increase the numbers any more. We need proper policies for asylum and immigration and to ensure they work, we need national identity cards so that NO ONE can live in this country unknown. If would be asylum seekers applied in Calais or Paris and were turned down, they would have no reason to smuggle themselves over the channel, knowing that they would NOT be allowed to stay I won't even bother discussing the "Rwanda Plan" because it's so obviously not going to work anyway and was just a play for time by the Tories.

With political parties, it's not what they tell you on their literature that's so important but the things they don't tell you. It may be a long time ago, but we all know that Hitler didn't get elected by saying he was going to exterminate a large chunk of the Jewish people. Look closely at what they say about immigration for instance, and not just that they would deal with it, but HOW ?

In that case, there are other parties for you to vote for instead. Any Labour leader who let you choose his policies would never get voted into power anyway.

On the same basis, nobody can say that it WILL be a deterrent either, although that's not stopping Sunak from saying it. Rather a lot of money and effort to put in place for something which may, or may not, work. It would be far more productive to spend that money on improving our immigration system, make better legal channels of application from France, and processing the ones already here.

Not to worry - we wouldn't have expected anything different. They'll make it quite comfortably without your vote anyway.

Tell that to the people who are struggling - who can't wait to vote. So they keep telling us but what they say, and what they manage to do, are two different things.

It would if it actually was a deterrent. Only the Tories think that is the case. I think it won't make a blind bit of difference, except to waste us lot's more money. Pointless anyway because for every one of the boat people, the government will let in 15 times as many quite legally. We don't have the housing, medics, schools, roads etc. for that increase in population every year.

We all know that we're going to get a drip feed of news ;like that right from now to the election. That really means that prices are still rising at 3.4% as if they are not high enough already. When so many people are struggling, how can price rises be good news ? It also means that the Tories are still going to be kicked out when the time comes.

My bold: In that case, there can be no reason to worry so much about it then. It's just the same as describing people as "lefty's" as I've often been described on this forum. People can think for themselves anyway so there's no harm in describing Reform, who are to the right of right wing Conservatives, as a far right party. How else could you quickly slot them into the correct left / right place on the political scale ? It will surprise me if they make enough inroads to be worth discussing and, whatever converts they do attract, will be almost entirely from right wing Tory voters anyway. It's basically just another vote splitter party.

One day, we all will. What's in our hearts and minds, towards our fellow humans is most likely to be what we are judged on, and not the secrets we let slip. Somehow, I don't think somebody who snitched to the guardian will have most to fear. Getting carried away now.

My bold: Your opinion seems to be different from everyone else's then because we are all debating whether he was Racist or not, rather than his intentions which is a ploy to exonerate him. What I was asking you is, do you think that Sunak is wrong when he he says that Hester's remarks were "racist and wrong". I have already told you that Hester HAS NOT apologised for making racist and misogynist remarks - he has simply apologised for making RUDE remarks - a big difference. It's not important to me whether Sunak is right or wrong. I had made my decision that Hester was being racist and misogynist, long before Sunak was forced to declare his view.

The argument is NOT about whether Hester "intended" to be racist. It's about whether his remarks, WERE or WERE NOT racist. I take it that you don't agree with the official Tory view, as stated by Sunak, when he said that what Hester said was racist and wrong. As I said, it's hard to tie you down to a honest straight forward answer. I say that Sunak was right for once in his life and Hester was being racist.

I'm don't mind at all that you have a different opinion but if yours is opposite to most, then it would seem to be the wrong one.

But they cannot both be right so, Is the Tory party right, remembering that Sunak said that Hester was "racist and wrong" or Ms Swaine is right and the Tories are wrong.

Why does the official Westminster view, including that of Sunak's, not coincide with yours then ?

My bold: that's exactly what the papers said ( untruthfully ) and you have just admitted that Yes, you thought the same. Corbyn NEVER had terrorist sympathies but met them in an effort to get a peace dialogue, EXACTLY THE SAME AS TONY BLAIR DID WITH THE IRA IN NORTHERN IRELEND. It's just that you only believe the pares when they are kind to the Tories.. Best to forget the papers anyway and have a mind of your own.

Very true - of course it works that way, and that is exactly what I have already said in my post - and I quote "You can carry on in your happy bubble, not carrying or using cash and others can do the opposite - that kind of thing leads to a contented world". I don't mind at all what you do, so why should you mind about me and other cash users ? You just don't need to "get it". just carry on doing what makes you happy.

You don't have to "Get it", you just have to accept that other people have different views from you. You can carry on in your happy bubble, not carrying or using cash and others can do the opposite - that kind of thing leads to a contented world.

Of course he has - he's mentioned her colour and her sex. He could have just said that he doesn't like her personally but he went further than that. Whether you agree or not is immaterial because the majority of people obviously don't agree with you.

Everyone on the forum knows your thoughts of Corbyn and of the Labour party as a whole. Strange that you used to agree with the newspapers until It was the Tories under fire. The papers know it, the people know it, and only people with their heads in the sand, fail to see that the Tories are finished, no matter when he holds the election. That's simply because things need to get better and for 14 years, they've been getting worse instead.

You were quite happy to go along with them when they were calling Corbyn. Just another indication that you can be, and are, as biased as everybody else who's rooting for their own side.

On Sunday Morning with Trevor Philips on Sky News, they seem to think it makes no difference because he's done for whatever he chooses.

That would work fine if things were going to get better but they are not, and every political commentator seems to agree on that.

So they should, and some people spend more time than that sat in the boozer thinking they are being useful.