Otherwise known as That Was Then but This Is Now, aka “We didn’t know before we took office.” Here’s a very perky, media-friendly Theresa May on March 6th this year.
“We’re delivering all the promises we set out in our manifesto.”
“We are tackling immigration… we’ve introduced the annual cap on non-EU economic migration.”
“We are restoring civil liberties.”
Nothing in there to suggest that UKBA might have felt free to leave our borders open to all-comers. Nothing in there about bringing baton rounds/rubber bullets to mainland Britain.
Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, this would have prompted a resignation. In that land no-one clung on and waited to be sacked; in fact it was a matter of honour to go before they were sacked. Usually, but not always, they tried to make amends by devoting the rest of their lives to charity, eg Profumo, or they just left their clothes in a little heap at the seashore, a la Stonehouse*, and disappeared. However, there’s no honour, no integrity now in politics. If there were, they’d all examine their consciences and resign.
No Minister resigns for the big things these days. The expenses cheats were dragged kicking and squealing to the courts – and then it’s a piffling sentence – but for the big, important stuff, the national security, that they get wrong, no-one ever takes responsibility. Even Fox has said he wants to make a comeback to the Front Bench once his mishaps with Adam Werrity have died down – in what capacity I don’t know, since it’s odds on that EUNavFor, EuroGendFor and EUAirFor will have overtaken us by then and any British Minister of Defence will be superfluous..
They betray us, they smile, and then they come back. We must stop voting for the LibLabCon con. (Keep an eye out for Party funding by the State aka taxpayer – do you want part of your taxes going to fund these misbegotten charlatans?)
Extract from Hansard:
Sheila Gilmore: Will the Minister tell us how many of those 5,200 staff are being cut from the front line of the border force?Damian Green: The hon. Lady will know that later this afternoon my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will make a statement covering the issues that she is interested in. The reductions in staffing are not affecting the front line because we are improving the front line by, for instance, having airline liaison officers overseas. Over the past few years, that has prevented 60,000 people whom we did not want to travel from travelling in the first place. The use of facial recognition technology and e-gates also makes our borders more secure.
Topical Questions also makes interesting reading. What the answer boils down to is that the govt doesn’t have a clue and it loves cctv.
Philip Davies: Of all the people who were arrested and convicted as a result of the riots across the country in the summer, what estimate has the Home Secretary made of the number who were arrested and charged through the police use of CCTV and DNA?Mrs May: My hon. Friend is returning to topics that I know he has pursued for some considerable time. Obviously, there was significant use of CCTV. That is why this Government continue to support its use.
The changes will take effect on 28 November and will reduce the minimum age at which a person may be granted entry clearance or leave as the spouse, civil partner, fiancé(e), proposed civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner of a sponsor, and the minimum age at which a person may sponsor such an application, from 21 to 18 years. It will also delete references to a minimum age of 18 for entry clearance or leave as the spouse, civil partner, fiancé(e), proposed civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner of a HM Forces sponsor, and the minimum age at which a member of HM Forces may sponsor such an application. Guidance for those affected by the judgment will be published on the UK Border Agency website.
You already know what I think: I think we’re well and truly fracked.
* I admit Stonehouse wasn’t the personification of probity – cheat liar, philanderer – but at least he had the good grace to disappear.
UPDATE: On reading the words of Damian Green again – “that has prevented 60,000 people whom we did not want to travel from travelling in the first place.” Leaving aside the “airline liaison officers overseas”, I wonder if any in that figure were people prevented from leaving the country, for football matches, for example.