The Conservative Party seems to be allergic to *doing things*, whether that be building houses, securing a cheap and plentiful supply of energy, prosecuting and locking up criminals, or securing our borders.
No, his does not mean that the UK has become “ungovernable” or that it will be “impossible for Ministers to do their job” or that his departure is a victory for “the Remainer blob” or evidence that the public sector is full of “snowflakes”.
They have been introduced in response to backbench pressure – with the Government seeming to accept the argument that the Bill as introduced was vulnerable to litigation. Parliament should accept them, but should be aware that some risks remain.
There is a big difference between accepting that the UK has a responsibility to see she faces justice and arguing that she “needs saving”.
The European Court of Human Rights seems unlikely to block the Rwanda policy outright, but it could try to foul it up until after the next election.
Is the free world prepared to show an ounce of the courage of the people risking their lives to defy the Iranian regime?
The Prime Minister must make up his mind whether or not to see through a policy to stop the small boats – now an issue of profound symbolic importance.
But there are truths in life – for example, that a stich in time saves nine, beggars can’t be choosers…and that you can’t spend more than your earn. His premiership ends with record spending and taxes.
Take the case of a Nigerian national who was sentenced in 2016 to four years in prison for offences including possessing crack cocaine and heroin with the intention to supply. The First-tier Tribunal allowed his appeal against deportation on grounds deportation was irreconcilable with Article 8.
The new leader should review the Government’s current plans and focus limited time and political capital where it counts.
It seems to fall between two stools: neither a tight technical update of the existing system, nor a fundamental overhaul.
Our commitment to the rule of law is undiminished, but the Human Rights Act is a flawed vehicle which needs reform.
The Court has simply made up its jurisdiction to provide interim relief. More specific to this case, it had no proper application before it.
The recent drive, apparently coordinated between Paris and Berlin, to push Ukraine for a compromise settlement must be resisted.
Whether it is foreigners at risk in China from the regime’s injustice – and “hostage diplomacy” – or the threat to our institutions at home, we need to wake up to the dangers of the Beijing dragon.