[Tubby Isaacs]

Ha ha, that was good.

In other news.

Legal challenge over plan to use East Sussex army camp as asylum housing dismissed
Judge rules that Crowborough residents cannot challenge a decision before it has been formally made

Crowdfunding raised £100k for this waste of everyone's time. This is what the group themselves say.

Kim Bailey, director of Crowborough Shield, said the group would continue to fight the case. “What happened in today’s ruling was a technical issue. It’s just another step in the process. We will be submitting our challenge again in the next few days to the decision to accommodate asylum seekers at Crowborough.”

One of the objections is that the site is too near some rare species. What could that £100k have done for rare species?

[mattomac]

They submitted a challenge even before a decision had been made?

Did they consult Lionel Hutz or something as a lawyer?

Do they claim victory if the decision agrees with them? Like all those "U-turns" we keep hearing about.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Sounds like they were saying that the preparation is showing that the decision has been taken. Or something.

This sounds like a publicity stunt on the back of other people's money.

Actually, they probably didn't spend all the crowdfunding on this case. But I'm guessing that a fair bit could have been done for nature on the back of what they did spend.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Quite an interesting article here.

Shabana Mahmood vows to stick with hardline migration policies after byelection defeat

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... ion-defeat

Looks at first like a standard "nasty Labour doubles down" but it contains an interesting point.

Labour sources have pointed to polling from More In Common showing that a majority of Labour and Green voters supported many of Mahmood’s proposals.

And I think the Labour source is probably right that Muslim voters aren't particularly keen on asylum or illegal immigration.

What might be happening here is like what happened with Michael Howard as Home Secretary. Lots of voters wanted much harsher penal policy (and I think they had a point, when you look at the lenient sentences handed out for ultra violence and very persistent burglary, for instance) but they didn't want it from him.

I can't see how the Green position is politically tenable in the longer term. Perhaps they move to emphasize more international students, care workers etc, and reform the care worker visa- Andrea Egan is right about that. I'm not sure they'll be tearing up everything Shabana does in their manifesto. And there would be a lot to be said for that.

[Tubby Isaacs]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... rdo-yeovil

Rachel Reeves ‘to give go-ahead’ for £1bn military helicopter deal
Reports say chancellor to sign contract with Italy’s Leonardo, saving 3,000 manufacturing jobs at Yeovil factory

Above my pay grade whether this is the right deal. I would guess that most people think that it is. Even our friend is happy.

The Unite general secretary, Sharon Graham, said the contract was “a tremendous victory for Unite members in Yeovil and across the aerospace sector”.

Perhaps there were negotiations about the price? In any other circumstance, she'd be moaning about the people who run Leonardo. being "fat cats". She (on the Unite website) frames Reeves finding this not inconsiderable amount of money thus-

Of course, we are pleased that the Rachel Reeves has now listened to Unite on this issue.

Utterly graceless. Even when they get exactly what they want, what they really care about is that their mates aren't running the show. And anything good only happens because they've made it happen.

And this cracker.

“Hopefully, the Gorton and Denton by-election will be a wake-up call for the government to start being ‘real Labour’ and to deliver for workers and communities. It can start by getting the full Defence Investment Plan published, including Typhoons and military satellites made in Britain.”

Of all the reasons for the Green victory, I've not seen anyone yet say they thought Zack would deliver the goods on Typhoons and military satellites. Could we at least have some acknowledgement that different people, just within the left. disagree fundamentally on what "real Labour" actually is? And if delivering for communities is handing out £1bn defence contracts for every group of 3,000 workers, then that might be an expensive,

[mattomac]

It certainly took just half a day and reaction to Gorton and Denton to do this deal…

And not probably a few weeks.

Anyhow Simons has resigned which is probably a good thing and the timing is good.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Yes, I think we can live without Mr Simons. Shame, he had a background in his ministry brief. But not that much of a shame.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Strange article from Heather Stewart who is usually very fair. She is fair on the substance, but there's a bizarre subtext that Rachel Reeves could be sacked even though she's stabilized the public finances.

As Mujtaba Rahman of the consultancy Eurasia Group put it on Friday: “Like [Keir] Starmer, the chancellor is also fighting for her political life” – whether because the prime minister himself falls, or chooses to move his chancellor in a reset reshuffle.

What is the Eurasia Group? Why do I care what somebody from there says?

Yet each of Reeves’s moments in the spotlight since then has instead sparked drama and controversy. Within weeks of coming to power, she cut the winter fuel allowance for UK pensioners. Then there was the £25bn national insurance rise in her first budget; botched welfare cuts in last year’s spring statement – and a second stonking round of tax rises last November.

Many of these key decisions, made in the Treasury, have subsequently had to be reversed.

Well indeed. I don't want to get all Alan Partridge "what people forget about the Titanic" but this isn't a particularly balanced summary. I agree about political drama, and this does matter, I'm not saying it doesn't. But Heather is the economics editor. Couldn't we reasonably expect more economics here? A modest Keynesian stimulus has been applied and has kept the markets broadly on sign. It's hardly Kwasi Kwarteng or Black Wednesday stuff.

Andrew Wishart is from something called Berenberg. Not sure why we particularly need to hear from him, but he does in fairness make an economic point.

“We’ve all slated the national insurance tax hike but actually it’s doing the business of bringing in more revenue and closing the deficit,” Wishart says. “It was a curse, now it’s a blessing.”

Taxes in Bringing In Revenue Shock. More as we get it. Perhaps that was why hopeless-should-be-sacked-Reeves brought them in.

Anyway, back to typical Guardian territory.

Reeves announced in November that the watchdog would not formally assess her against her fiscal rules, leaving that task to the autumn budget – if she is still in post to announce it.

You just said the public finances are going better.

But as Labour MPs and No 10 strategists digest the results of Thursday’s byelection, it is unclear whether next week’s deliberately dull spring forecast will mark the beginning of the end of Reeves’s time in No 11, even if the nascent economic upturn continues.

Jesus, not again.

[mattomac]

After reading that I would ask…is Rahman in position to benefit financially from instability?

[satnav]

Many of Reeves early decisions were taken to prove to the markets that she was serious about controlling public finances. Many of the decisions were unpopular at the time but in terms of convincing the markets they were successful. If Starmer was to bring in a new chancellor the new chancellor would presumably have to take more tough decisions to keep the markets happy and reassure them that Labour were ging to continue to be tough on public spending. I can't see this being popular with Labour MPs and the public.

[The Weeping Angel]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqj9g11p1ezo

The UK has agreed to a US request to use British military bases for "defensive" strikes on Iranian missile sites, Sir Keir Starmer has said.

But the prime minister said the UK had learned lessons from the "mistakes of Iraq", and was not involved in the initial strikes on Iran and "will not join offensive action now".

Sir Keir said the basis of the decision to accept the US request was the "collective self-defence" of allies and protecting British lives, accusing Iran of pursuing a "scorched-earth strategy".

The US will use the bases for the "specific and limited defensive purpose" of destroying Iran's missiles "at source", he added.

He said the move was in accordance with international law, and the government would publish a summary of its legal advice.

It was reported last month that the British government had not given permission for the US to use UK military bases to support any potential US strikes on Iran.

On Saturday, Sir Keir said UK aircraft were "in the sky" in the Middle East as part of a defensive operation to protect its allies and citizens in the region.

In a statement posted on social media on Sunday evening, Sir Keir said British aircraft had successfully intercepted Iranian strikes, but added: "Our partners in the Gulf have asked us to do more to defend them and it's my duty to protect British lives."

At least 200,000 British citizens are in the region - including residents, those on holidays and passengers in transit, Sir Keir said - and the government "will continue to do all we can to support" them.

British people, including members of the armed forces, as well as allies, were being put at "huge risk" from Iranian strikes, he said, accusing the regime of "becoming even more reckless".

No doubt he will accused of war crimes for this.

[Oboogie]

No doubt he will accused of war crimes for this.

He already was.
Added to which this will be another U-turn, thus proving how weak he is and Farage must take over immediately!

If anyone's interested the legal advice is here.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/summ ... al-attacks

[Samanfur]

The only way that this government would read the room is if THE ROOM was the title of a Reform manifesto. Who thought that putting this out today, after this week, was a good idea?

Refugee status to be temporary as Shabana Mahmood rips up rules on UK asylum

Shabana Mahmood has ripped up the government’s asylum rules so that from Monday every refugee will be told that their status is temporary and will last just 30 months.

In a move that has concerned a refugee charity, the home secretary said that claimants whose countries are deemed to be safe by the UK government will from now on be expected to return.

The announcement comes despite pleas from some Labour MPs, peers and affiliated unions this weekend for Keir Starmer’s government to shift towards progressive policies after the party came third in Thursday’s Gorton and Denton byelection.

The changes include plans to double to 10 years the amount of time some foreign nationals must wait before they can settle in the UK.

In an interview with the Guardian, Mahmood called for Labour MPs to get behind immigration reforms or risk a Nigel Farage-led government deporting refugees “to certain death”.

She has insisted that far from being unpopular with traditional Labour voters, her policies recognise the concerns of people who feel resentment because “public services are under pressure”.

[mattomac]

Incredibly dumb and nasty, it’s the kind of thing I expect led we may have done if reform had won that election.

You can’t out reform reform and the only way to bring numbers down is processing, not this kind of garbage.

Though the irony is it probably plays well with those of 2nd and 3rd generation on from migrants. Though the only people who will notice it will be those it disgusts.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Shabana had been too quiet, in retrospect. Something like this may become standard across Europe, and lots of people who’ve voted Green might even support it, in theory. But as with Michael Howard’s theoretically popular penal policy, they won’t support it from her.

30 months is much too short. And politically dumb because you’ll have the run up to the next election punctuated with blameless people being sent back to places of dubious safety.

[Boiler]

Though the irony is it probably plays well with those of 2nd and 3rd generation on from migrants.

In my part of the world the children of Asian migrants are pretty vocal ladder-pullers.

[Tubby Isaacs]

And quite possibly in Gorton and Denton too. Even if people look like you, that doesn’t mean you have to be nice to them. Despite the “Eurabia” nonsense that Muslims are pursuing a ruthless demographic takeover, I would guess the reaction to a big number of asylum seekers arriving in an area would not be particularly positive.

[Youngian]

If asylum seekers settle down and take root, does it matter to my life or the social fabric? If a country becomes safe many will yearn to return but stop trying to herd cats.
I'd be happy to lower immigration quotas in order to take more refugees. Then train them up to fill labour shortages.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Steve Reed seems to have been tactless in his dealings with Hartlepool councillors. But he did meet them, and find extra money, in fairness to them. He might have found more if £63m hadn’t had to be found for elections, the like of which were cancelled without any fuss in previous years. But the law is the law, even if it’s an ass.

[Tubby Isaacs]

If asylum seekers settle down and take root, does it matter to life or the social fabric? If a country becomes safe many will yearn to return but stop trying to herd cats.
I'd be happy to lower immigration quotas in order to take more refugees. Then train them up to fill labour shortages.

If you see immigration numbers as a constraint, then there’s a logic to doing the opposite- prioritise people already with the skills. At some moral cost, of course.

In terms of filling jobs, you’re not just up against skill shortages but in some communities entrenched attitudes to women working. Hopefully this changes with much better school attainment, but I don’t underestimate the challenge.

There’s the giant irony of course that some white social conservatives want people to live exactly like this, while hating the brown people who do.