Why isn’t the law being changed to allow deportations?

[Hominim]

Just that really. Can’t understand why successive governments haven’t changed the law to stop deportations being blocked. Why does nobody want to do it? Reform will no doubt. Better to get in there first?

Do you think their is overwhelming will to scrap human rights laws in the UK?

Sorry, there. Weird predictive text!

Totally agree.

If asylum applications could be processed more quickly, and appeals fast-tracked, failed asylum seekers would spend far less time here and the costs of accommodating them would fall.

I'm sure overall it would save money.

Was that when the war in Afghanistan was going on? That might have accounted for a peak around then.

I don’t think there would be popular support for those two changes, which would seriously damage our human rights.

Until recent years, anyone wanting to live in another country had to apply for permission. I never heard anyone question that, and I went through the same process each time I moved to another country. They have the right to choose who they want!

It’s understandable that people living in poverty-stricken, badly governed, war-torn or crime-ridden countries would prefer to live somewhere more comfortable. But Europe and the Anglosphere do not have room for everyone who wants a better life.

And those arriving on small boats are predominantly young and middle-aged men — their home country’s workforce, and the least oppressed sector of any population.

If the boats were full of women fleeing Afghanistan, Iran or Saudi Arabia, I would have a lot more sympathy, and would be fund-raising to support them.

But the present influx of demanding men, often with mediaeval views and without in-demand skills (and refusing to live in France, which is one of the world’s most civilised countries), is a burden many people reasonably think we should not have to bear.

I can assure you that no one is making any money out of legal aid. It's been cut to the bone. The absolute shambles of the criminal justice system - why it takes 2 years for a rape case to get to trial - is because cps lawyers literally won't take the work at rates the gov pay because they'd be making a loss or earning under minimum wage.

I think regrettably many people would prefer a system like that, yes.

Is there any particular reason why you think France should bear the burden for those people but not the UK?

BTW you are naive if you think that meddling with people's human rights will result in the line being drawn exactly where you think it should be drawn. If the UK withdraws from the ECHR, there is no court you can then go to if you believe your own human rights are being infringed. Mess with it at your peril.

So you want to remove people's right to appeal when there's been an error in law? Do you feel the same about that being applied to every area of the justice system? Because it would be.

What confused you?

making money out of legal aid? I can assure you they're not!

The government of the day is not above the law, and if they are one day above the law then they are no longer a government but a dictatorship.

Reform will be subject to the same laws if they were to make it to government, which I hope they don’t because we don’t need another grifter running the country. Boris was bad enough.

Also, us forrins are not people, and we're all criminals: stealing jobs, robbing old people and raping your dogs. Bewaaaaarrrrre! For Halloween this year, I'll just dress as my immigrant self 💅

It is also your fault that mince and other foodstuffs have rocketed in price. I hope you are proud of yourself.😡

As a casual observer (nosey person 😁) at our local Lidl and Aldi, in a diverse city, it often occurs to me that the shopping baskets of many immigrant families are a great deal healthier than those of indigenous citizens. Heavy on the rice, veggies, fruits, fish of all sorts. Hardly any red meat or processed products. Purely anecdotal, obviously.

Obviously the PM doesn’t rule by decree, but if he wants to change the law, he can’t instruct the relevant Cabinet minister to work with their department to prepare legislation.

A huge majority would mean that such legislation should get passed, unless there was a major backbench rebellion… but they haven’t even tried to do this, so yes, this is on Kier Starmer.

And the US President cannot unilaterally make laws… The US Congress does that. Sure Trump (as other Presidents have done before him) issues executive orders, but these need to be in line with the Constitution and legislation…. Judges frequently rule against Trump, much to his annoyance.

I think there’s an overwhelming will to have laws that prevent migrants from turning up unannounced by boat, being housed and fed, and being able to exploit existing laws to be able to remain.

There were. It just wasn’t as widely reported in the media.

But that’s not how it works.

All it would take is one authoritarian government to start stripping the rights of those who don’t agree with them.

Claims were processed much faster. From 2010 and increasingly since then until 2024 asylum claims were allowed to build and build causing a huge backlog.

Well they won’t stay. If they know it’s that indefinitely or leave then they will willingly leave.

Homegrown terrorism. Well it’s contained isn’t it. In these centres. Great.

If you want to know how the government would treat you if necessary to their interests, then look at how they treat the most vulnerable- think Tony Benn said this, though I will have misquoted.
It’s a thin end of a wedge essentially- I want to live in a country where all here are treated equitably.

The Trump Adminisration isn't changing the law, they are ignoring the law pretty much. If they get a lawyer who concedes on a legal point to an unsympathetic judge, US DoJ fires that lawyer. The US Supreme Court is stacked with Judges who go along with Unitary EXecutive theory which basically says President has very huge sweeping powers.

So I imagine that's what Reform want to do: stack the courts with Toady Judges that are directed to ignore precedent. Otherwise ignore what the courts direct & do whatever they please. This is definitely the "Loudmouth in the Pub" perspective of how the world should run. Amazing how much people love Autocrats.

Big difference here is that jerrymandering is much harder to put into effect. That may save British democracy yet.

Reform will "No doubt" PROMISE to do this - along with all their other promises, which will all prove to be as possible as previous governments have found it, if they're elected.

They reckon they'll stop the boats - does anyone genuinely believe that the Tories wouldn't have done that, if they could have done?

Let's not forget, Reform is essentially the same group of people - after three or four name changes - who promised us that if we voted for Brexit we could stop immigration whilst still having full access to the single market because the EU needed us more than we needed them, and that we'd have an extra 350 million a week for the NHS.