- Joined
- Jul 8, 2021
- Messages
- 26,163
- Reaction score
- 53,287
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-66989669
The home secretary's speech was big on room-rousing rhetoric but considerably lighter on new policy.
She drew cheers for announcing the government would soon start closing asylum hotels.
For most of her speech though, she appeared to relish her self-proclaimed role as someone who tells it as she sees it.
At times, her language seemed deliberately designed to provoke those she referred to as her "politically correct critics" who hold "luxury beliefs".
Her description of potential migration as a coming "hurricane" is likely to draw particular criticism.
Braverman will have known that when she said it. It's a fight she is clearly happy to pick.
---
But the reality is, the Conservative government doesn't actually achieve anything relating to the migrant scare stories
----
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...nk-that-immigration-is-still-their-trump-card
Seeking something, anything, to cheer themselves up, some Tories believe that they still have a few trump cards in their hand. Dog-eared political playbooks from past elections suggest to them that immigration can be weaponised to their advantage. So do memories of how the Leave crew in the Brexit referendum campaign exploited the issue with such toxic potency. There’s a belief that making immigration one of the defining dividing lines of the contest could serve the Conservatives and hurt Sir Keir’s party. Some in Labour’s high command turn a bit queasy at the thought.
Are they right to believe this, though? It is true that immigration has historically been regarded as a “Tory issue” because voters who wanted a restrictive approach outnumbered those who preferred a permissive regime. The perception, though often not the reality, has been that a Conservative government means less immigration. At the 2010 election, the Tories enjoyed a whopping advantage of around 40 points over Labour when voters were asked which party was “best” on asylum and immigration. This was far from the only reason why Gordon Brown lost that contest, but it didn’t help. This long period of Conservative rule began with David Cameron coming to office on a promise that he would limit net migration to the UK to “tens of thousands” a year.
He didn’t. He came nowhere close to meeting his target and nor have any of his successors as Tory leader.
---
Let's hope that British voters - and not just British voters, but Conservative voters throughout the world - stop getting fooled by the constant rhetoric of "hurricanes" of immigration, or "floods" of illegals crossing borders.
How many times are people going to vote in a right wing party only to see the problem rumble on at the next election, then the next, then the next, before realizing they're being duped into an easy vote based on a basic fear?
"We will solve this" Sunak and Braverman will roar, right before they pay lip service to a 'major problem' that was so urgent directly before you voted.
The home secretary's speech was big on room-rousing rhetoric but considerably lighter on new policy.
She drew cheers for announcing the government would soon start closing asylum hotels.
For most of her speech though, she appeared to relish her self-proclaimed role as someone who tells it as she sees it.
At times, her language seemed deliberately designed to provoke those she referred to as her "politically correct critics" who hold "luxury beliefs".
Her description of potential migration as a coming "hurricane" is likely to draw particular criticism.
Braverman will have known that when she said it. It's a fight she is clearly happy to pick.
---
But the reality is, the Conservative government doesn't actually achieve anything relating to the migrant scare stories
----
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...nk-that-immigration-is-still-their-trump-card
Seeking something, anything, to cheer themselves up, some Tories believe that they still have a few trump cards in their hand. Dog-eared political playbooks from past elections suggest to them that immigration can be weaponised to their advantage. So do memories of how the Leave crew in the Brexit referendum campaign exploited the issue with such toxic potency. There’s a belief that making immigration one of the defining dividing lines of the contest could serve the Conservatives and hurt Sir Keir’s party. Some in Labour’s high command turn a bit queasy at the thought.
Are they right to believe this, though? It is true that immigration has historically been regarded as a “Tory issue” because voters who wanted a restrictive approach outnumbered those who preferred a permissive regime. The perception, though often not the reality, has been that a Conservative government means less immigration. At the 2010 election, the Tories enjoyed a whopping advantage of around 40 points over Labour when voters were asked which party was “best” on asylum and immigration. This was far from the only reason why Gordon Brown lost that contest, but it didn’t help. This long period of Conservative rule began with David Cameron coming to office on a promise that he would limit net migration to the UK to “tens of thousands” a year.
He didn’t. He came nowhere close to meeting his target and nor have any of his successors as Tory leader.
---
Let's hope that British voters - and not just British voters, but Conservative voters throughout the world - stop getting fooled by the constant rhetoric of "hurricanes" of immigration, or "floods" of illegals crossing borders.
How many times are people going to vote in a right wing party only to see the problem rumble on at the next election, then the next, then the next, before realizing they're being duped into an easy vote based on a basic fear?
"We will solve this" Sunak and Braverman will roar, right before they pay lip service to a 'major problem' that was so urgent directly before you voted.
