Why so much fuss over Stella Braverman?

[lastminutepanicking]

I’m just wondering who on earth cares? Can’t understand why this is such big news.

“There you are. A clear message to get on and deliver.”

If I hear “deliver” once more from an inept group of people who have “delivered” nothing, I think my head may just explode.

They have delivered.
They have delivered record levels of immigration
They have delievered record levels of corruption.
They have delivered record levels of inflation.
They have delivered record levels of NHS waiting.

I think they have also delivered a record number of changes of PM?

Record number of ministerial pensions?

Btw I don't believe she will! The point here was to say "and it will all be your fault and not mine at the election".

Even if Suella's policies might have an effect, assuming there is an election in 12 months then she is some way off getting figures down to pre Brexit levels and presumably they will just be at the start of the litigation about her detention proposals so precisely nothing will have happened.

I don't quite get the point about civil servants having to fact check Braverman's briefings for Cabinet. Her civil servants will be writing the briefings for all her meetings. Unless you mean they fact check her scribbles on the margins?

Anyway, Sunak had to do a lot of deals to get the PM-ship so he is stuck with Suella till she does something more serious. It is really depressing that there is still a core of loony right wingers baying for anti immigration and other nuts policies that have influence in the party. They always say there are two challenges being Prime Minister - one is ruling the country, the other ruling your own party. And the Tory party is obsessed with all these distractionary policies that have nothing to do with the real issues in the country - poverty, inflation, workforce, education and health. If only they were baying for these kinds of interventions.

Sunak's message to us is basically 'suck it up, you plebs. I don't care how corrupt my ministers are, I just want to stay in power'.

Not unexpected.

I thought it was Sunak demonstrating how weak he is, because he can't sack her, and can't have an inquiry that might show that he should sack her?

Sunak delivering his usual low morals and ethics.
Sunak delivery two fingers to the electorate.
Sunak delivering the message that they can do what the fuck the want without consequences.
Sunak delivering shit as usual.

@Bouledeneige - it's because when she speaks, she makes stuff up which is not in the brief.

To save embarrassment, the Cabinet then ask the Civil Service to verify what she has actually said.

I don't quite get the point about civil servants having to fact check Braverman's briefings for Cabinet. Her civil servants will be writing the briefings for all her meetings. Unless you mean they fact check her scribbles on the margins?

I was confused by that too. It might be that she chooses to say what suits her/just mucks it up so Cabinet Office need to double check now. Or she doesn’t read the civil service briefings.

Just got a sneak peak at the tories next election campaign logo, quiet suits them I'd say.

The great thing about Sunak's announcement is the amount of time he spent dithering about it. If he genuinely thought it was clear that Braverman had done nothing wrong, he would have come straight out and said so within, at most, a few hours of it being referred to him. As things stand, he has clearly signalled that she obviously has done plenty wrong and that he would love to sack her, but for the fact that she has him by the balls whilst he's dependent on the right-wing nut job group of Tory MPs for support.

I would say I'm amazed government ministers would want to be in a cabinet with this lot, it really is showing a lack of morals, however, we've been here before with Johnson. I was right back then, this is just more of the same, and, in the meantime, the country suffers.
They wouldn't know the meaning of public servant if it jumped up and bit them on the bum.

Disgraceful.

She's a nasty piece of work. V nasty. Also incredibly dodgy. She is racist, hates migrants (despite being one herself), a fraudster, lacks human emotions like empathy and kindness, and is part of the 'help myself and my rich friends, sod the country' group of Tories currently running the country.

I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that Suella is a Labour party plant. Surely no one can actually be lacking in self-awareness to be that self destructive?

Where is all your evidence for these rather ott claims?

A fraudster? What or whom has she fraudsted?

Attempting to reduce the illegal and dangerous people trafficking that goes on in perilous journeys does not mean she 'hates migrants'. Not sure how you quantify the 'dodgy' accusations either.

You Labour fans must calm your jets, polls show Sir Beer and Ange will be running the show come the next election. Illegal cake and asking outrageous questions about one to one speeding courses will be the least of your worries then.

"You Labour fans must calm your jets, polls show Sir Beer and Ange will be running the show come the next election"

Yeeehaaaaaa! Whoopee!

I think the Tories are desperate to be in Opposition as the wheels are coming off the wagon.

But we won't forget 13 years.....

Attempting to reduce the illegal and dangerous people trafficking that goes on in perilous journeys does not mean she 'hates migrants'.

It does if you know there are no safe legal routes, and have no plans to implement any.

It does if you do nothing about the enormous backlog of asylum claims by properly staffing the units in charge of this.

If she wants to stop the dangerous cross channel journeys of asylum seekers, that is how you do it. She's done nothing, and she doesn't want to because she is pandering to that part of the electorate who are driven by xenophobia. It gets her party votes and that is all she cares about.

@Roussette I'm with you on yay Labour. The list of positive things they achieved during their last stint in office is lengthy. The current lot on the other hand...

The difference is you think Labour will be a disaster, we know the Conservatives are.

You have totally encapsulated what I wanted to say if I hadn't been typing on a phone!

Just dropping in to see if Mrs Tishell's Cake Shop is thriving. Yup. Dear me.

Attempting to reduce the illegal and dangerous people trafficking that goes on in perilous journeys does not mean she 'hates migrants'. Not sure how you quantify the 'dodgy' accusations either

Removing the right to seek protection from human trafficking/slavery from those seeking asylum (because there’s no way to do that ‘legally’ apparently) doesn’t sound like someone displaying much humanity or empathy.

why would that reduce dangerous entry methods when the gangs know that their victims will have zero protection in this country? Suella doesn’t give a shit about danger or death, she’s just cottoned on to an acceptable tag line to try and justify being such a hideous human.

It’s actually sickening hearing people trot out false empathy when it’s transparently anything but.

CabernetSauvignon
The great thing about Sunak's announcement is the amount of time he spent dithering about it. If he genuinely thought it was clear that Braverman had done nothing wrong, he would have come straight out and said so within, at most, a few hours of it being referred to him

Sunak was still in Japan on Sunday - I expect he had more pressing matters to deal with upon his return. I have already linked to the Guardian's article; Get a grip, Westminster – Suella Braverman speeding is hardly the issue of the day.

I'm not getting your point. It was blatantly obvious that she only chose to bring this hopeless appeal and act as counsel as political point-scoring, and to try to get favourable media headlines.

Your previous post didn't state that at all (and neither did Joshua Rozenberg's blog - despite Rozenberg having clearly read another blog that did) - you simply blamed Braverman's Court of Appeal submission on a "basic lack of understanding of fundamental principles of law..." you didn't consider any other motives, which may have been to raise her political profile, garner public support for government policy (e.g. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill)...

As Rozenberg rightly pointed out, it was disgraceful that she chose to raise the family's hopes with something that was so obviously doomed to fail because her argument was utterly ridiculous

PC Harper's widow had already launched her own petition (later resulting in Harper's Law) - Braverman's Court of Appeal hearing, the resulting publicity and renewed public support will have helped, not hindered Lissie Harper's efforts.