The Home Secretary is not telling the truth about rioters 'paying the price' ...

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/4/part/II/crossheading/retirement-pensions-categories-a-and-b

At the risk of repeating myself the relevant legislation is the 1992 Act that states that the state pension is a benefit.

No

Does that include the fully grown men pretending to be children laughing there heads of at us?
Coming soon to a school near you, 36 year old bloke sitting next to your 13 year old daughter

You obviously have no understanding of what has been paid in to a pension fund as opposed to a benefit which relies on no payments whatsoever.

It doesn't matter how loudly you shout, a lie is still a lie.

Writing in big doesn't make it true.

😅😂🤣

The 1992 Social Security Contributions and Benefits act is the relevant legislation and is clear that State pensions are a benefit.

There seem to have been a particularly high number of posters today who do not seem to know the law on a variety of areas.

It is.

If you’re right Starmer’s done a 180 turn since 2011. He presided over very tough prosecution of rioters then as DPP.

That's great you've made sufficient NI payments to be able to qualify for a contributions based benefit.

It's still a benefit.

We have made the requisite NI payments and some

THE STATE PENSION IS NOT A BENEFIT

The state pension is a benefit.

https://www.benefitsguide.co.uk/state-pension/

Pension is not a benefit!
It has been paid for over 40-50 years of working and paying contributions towards our pension.
And I still go out to work, albeit part time, because I am not a sponger. But for not much longer as we are clearly going to be penalised. I will pay as little tax as I can from now on.

And where the previous government’s priority lay

Since the Prime Minister unlike his predecessor has not been found to have broken the law whilst in public office he will be soft on crime.

So.. back in 2011 when Starmer was DPP and rioters were sentenced to a totsl of 1,800 years under a Tory government, do tell me why these rioters - under a Labour government - will just get a slap on the wrist?
I'm curious.

It amazes me how often people are surprised that there isn't a trial if someone pleads guilty, which could of course happen in their first court appearance, which will always be in a magistrates court.

Sorry, but this makes me so angry and frustrate but please learn about the judicial system, it is one of the 3 branches of government and so important to our collective daily life… I don’t expect everyone here to be the secret barrister but for goodness sake understand the fundamentals of how parliament and the judiciary works… because I really believe a root cause of a lot of disinformation and idiotic commentary is peoples lack of knowledge around how they are governed and their part in it as an individual and a part of collective society and this why we’re in such a bloody awful mess..

I don’t disagree that services like the police, courts and prisons/probabtion are underfunded, along with other elements such as the NHS, social care and mental health services and therefore the country is struggling.

But… to hang last night pretty much solely on the fault of immigrants (illegal or otherwise) is so reductive an unhelpful, because if it turns out not to be the root cause, stopping it won’t fix anything and the money spent on it will have been wasted not fixing the problem… hanging an issue on a single entity rarely gives a full picture or a comprehensive solution. There is so much more as to why government services are struggling and people feel so frustrated (which comes from a place of fear/worry.)

Also what makes my mind boggle is that the incidents and riots last night are not, in the majority, the fault of the current government who have been in power for 31 days… how the hell are they meant to have fixed anything in that time?

Going back to comments around of guilt of individuals arrested and the parties responsible for deciding their guilt… I really think people need to understand the difference in types of offences that will have been committed last night and how they could be tried once charged…

A magistrates’ court normally handles cases known as ‘summary offences’, for example motoring offences, minor criminal damage, common assault (not causing significant injury) and public order offences, so this will a large proportion of the offences from the disorder last night. Magistrates courts can also deal with some of the more serious offences, such burglary, GBH and possession of a offensive weapon as they are either way offences that can be heard either in a magistrates’ court or a Crown Court.

The most serious of cases, such as manslaughter, murder, robbery and rape are known as indictable offences and can old be tried at crown court where a jury of peers decides guilt and a judge (either a senior circuit judge or a high court judge)

Exactly. And there's not a snowballs chance in hell any of these people will be sentenced to 4 years+.

I can see a few slaps on the wrist dished out, nothing more.

Has there been a change since 18 July?

Prisoners to be released early will include violent offenders serving sentences under four years

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/18/labour-release-prisoners-early/

Hmm, I think you’re being a bit sly here.

The PP (me) who said "There is a cost to house, feed, supervise, process applications and everything else, surely?" was questioning how people who are judged to be illegal immigrants after their application haven’t cost money. If they hadn’t made applications there’d be no reason to house, feed and process them.

After an adverse determination, of course, an illegal immigrant isn’t entitled to anything.

Maybe the simplest way to put it is this: there clearly is a cost in dealing with asylum claims, which we should honour because we’re a decent country; but those who wrongly claim asylum create irrecoverable cost.

I’m not aware that any government has turned its back on international asylum agreements. But there must be an issue in the background or Starmer wouldn’t have promised to “smash the gangs” and speed up deportations.

I’m still waiting for the PP (not you) who claimed that Labour has sent away more illegal immigrants in the last three weeks than the Tories managed in the last year, to come up with a source.

Bullshit. Governments do not changeover with a clean slate. Any idiot who thinks that isn't worthy of an opinion on the matter. What would you have had the Labour government do in 3 weeks to prevent racist rioting? Actual suggestions only please.
JSO are disruptive PIA (and have been dealt some harsh sentences btw) but they stop far short of arson.

ah okay right OP I've got it now

You want the government and police to be psychic and pre-empt all violent crime

You want an end to any kind of lawful protest

cuts in police numbers under the previous government don't matter because, within 4 weeks, the new government should have recruited, trained and sent our 100's of new police officers

I mean none of the responsibility lies with the right wing nut jobs doing all the rioting