Westminstenders: Put Your Faith In The Home Office

[pointythings]

Because there doesn't seem to be a new thread yet. I'm no RTB or any of you other experts, but these threads need to keep going.

Give me a couple weeks and I'll be able to post cat placemarks!

Anyway I am a member of the "Remoaner Elite" now!

Oh, I see. So this wonderful trade deal lets us deport people to Australia?

I thought the quite resented us doing that in the first place...

And here's a helpful little infographic that shows how well de Spaffle is supporting animal welfare standards...

Harriet, don't make assumptions about whether or not I will be or am pleased. You don't know me and have no right to make these assumptions.

Windrush2, the sequel anybody? Coming soon......

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/children-babies-eu-settlement-scheme-home-office-b1864161.html?fbclid=IwAR0Y8Ra47BXh-O8pdAqqlVi4jeVzbArTHswztRzpKPB5Tp1XpHbHRelEI

I'm a charry of posting Guardian links as it is probably well trodden ground for many here so may not add much new. But this bit of political commentary truly deserves to be highlighted.

Excellent from Rafael Behr in The Guardian this week.

This on two definitions of Brexit straining against each other:

"When Johnson’s critics say he must be held accountable for Brexit, they use that word to mean the process and cost of severing ties with Britain’s neighbours and losing frictionless access to their markets. That is the remainer definition, even when used by people who accept there is no remain cause left to fight. When Tories say “Brexit” they mean it in the wider sense of a cultural revolution, sustained by belief and national pride."

This on how the Conservatives are defining the battle lines: "In Downing Street’s strategic conception of the electorate, the prime minister represents a mainstream of commonsense, red-blooded patriots, while the Labour leader stands for nitpicking, naysaying, “woke” scolds and herbivores."

And this description of where we are and pointing to the so-called 'war on woke' among others: "This is the long tail of Brexitism – a political mode that has its genesis in the referendum but has evolved into something much wider. Its defining feature is the flight from complex reality to symbols and fantasy. That is the habit that devotees had to cultivate in themselves to win the 2016-19 liberation struggle."

And here is what a candidate angling to be the Head of the NHS thinks of it.

This is the person in charge of the so-called NHS track and trace system. Of which I have now had a sample and could tell you that I didn't think it fit for purpose. The system which has not helped to avoid lockdowns, has led to the re-opening of England being delayed by another month, has not stopped the India variant getting a hold..... I could go on.

Not that I don't think that the NHS does not need reform - but the way to do that is not to ape the American system,which the Tories appear to want, but for a starter, to have a proper investigation, say a Royal Commission, to investigate the sort of health and social care system that we need, and would be willing to pay for.

Thank you for pointing that out wewereliars, and my deepest apologies to yellowspanner for any misconstruction on my part !

In the light of Mr Cumming’s most recent revelations, here’s a video from Led by Donkeys:

Harriet and wewere, as you know it is not in the spirit of MN to comment on other posters. Please stop or I will report your posts.
I have as much right as everyone else to post on this thread. If you don't like my posts, just ignore them. But if you make personal comments about me then I will report.

yellowspanner do you not realise that your comments speak for you? On these threads you have consistently stated that the most important benefit of Brexit is that the UK can deport people. That leads the rest of us to believe that you do not care as much about animal welfare, jobs or small businesses in the UK. Or about the way the Home Office treats people when it makes mistakes - which it often does. And just as you are allowed to hold the views that you hold and voice them here, so are we permitted to voice our abhorrence of those views. We don't know you as a person, but we do know your views - and we are entitled to have an opinion of those views and voice it here. Isn't freedom great?

Wewere. I have reported your post.

Pointythings. You have no idea what my views are on animal welfare or small businesses. You know my views on the Home Office's immigration policy.
But the comments have not been about my views on immigration policy, they have been about me. That is definitely against MN rules. I have just checked with them and they confirm this.
Posters are not saying they disagree with my views on immigration they are making assumptions about whether I will be pleased or not.
But carry on.
I will report each post about me, rather that posts about the topics on the thread.

Pointy things. I agree that freedom is great. I am free to express my views and you are free to express yours.
However if posters make nasty comments about me then that is not allowed on this site.

Pointy, I have never said that the most important thing about Brexit is that we can deport people. I have said, repeatedly for 5 years that the most important aspect of Brexit for me is getting rid of the ECJ. I have also said that I like the points based immigration system and our ability to deport people who are here illegally.
The ECJ was what swung it for me.

I think your plan to report each post that feels personal to you is a bit childish, but it's up to you.

wewereliars please don't get yourself banned. There are people on these threads I wouldn't mind seeing the back of, but you are not among them. It's a shame that some people would rather hit 'report' than engage with the subject matter, but that's where we're at.

Pointy, the posts don't 'feel' personal they are personal and specifically mention me

Hi there,
We have deleted a few posts in response to several reports that pointed out a member was being singled out by name. We would ask that these threads steer clear of personal attacks, and refer everyone to our guidelines.
Many thanks.

Thanks Pointy but I am not interested in tip toing around morons. I'd rather not bother TBH

Well, I would never say to yellowspanner 'you are [fill in quality of your choice].' However, I will say that 'your posts are [as above]'. I will always feel that someone who fails to acknowledge that the Home Office is wilfully incompetent and uncaring has values that I do not share. But ultimately we all have to live with our own conscience.

I thought that @wewereliars earlier post made a valid point, albeit with a degree of deliberate irony Unless of course, positive statements are no longer allowed because their intent was sarcastic But that then begs the question: do certain posters do not want to stand by particular values, either because the sentiments expressed were/are positive, altruistic ones or are they concerned that such statements were/are not in tune with their previous posting history?

I'm genuinely befuddled.

NB: I have not quoted the post but I do remember what was said in it.