“Why Amber Rudd Quit”
ITVNews, 29 April 2018:
Rudd has chosen to resign because she felt she could not defend herself against the charge that she took her eye off the immigration ball.
Her excuse, to herself, was that her priority - for obvious reasons - was combating terrorism and improving domestic security.
But of course all ministers are supposed to multi-task, and she knew that excuse would not fly in public.
So she decided to stand down this afternoon, even before the Guardian published a leaked letter from her to the PM from January 2017 - which seemingly showed that far from being unaware there are targets for the expulsion of illegal immigrants, she actually set such a target.
Letters exchanged between Amber Rudd and Theresa May
Amber Rudd’s resignation letter to Theresa May
Amber Rudd signs off her letter say she will continue to work for her constituents of Hastings and Rye.
Theresa May’s response to Amber Rudd’s resignation
Theresa May told Amber Rudd she should be proud of the way she led the Home Office.
My sources tell me that there were other such official papers about targets knocking around. And therefore she decided to quit - because she felt that MPs would simply never give her the benefit of the doubt.
Potential replacements: Hunt, Gove & Javid.
In a way she has been hung out to dry by her own department.
It is extraordinary that her officials told her, before that fateful select committee hearing last week, that there were no targets for the removal of illegal immigrants.
And perhaps less extraordinary is that other officials leaked and briefed against her - since much of Whitehall is detached from ministers.
For the avoidance of doubt, she jumped: “I am told there was no pressure from the PM.”
The point is that Rudd’s exit is arguably the most serious resignation May has suffered in her almost two years as PM. For one thing the Home Secretary is one of the great offices of state.
More damagingly for May, the policy which underlay Rudd’s doom - the hostile environment for immigration which has caused so much unpleasantness for the Windrush migrants - was May’s not Rudd’s.
In other words, Rudd’s departure strips May of her human shield.
Last updated Mon 30 Apr 2018
Posted by Bill Baillie on Wed, 02 May 2018 05:30 | #
The Nation Revisited, May 2018:
Repatriation
The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, was forced to resign for threatening to deport some of the first wave of immigrants from the West Indies; the so-called ‘Windrush Generation’. A passionate speech denouncing the 2014 Immigration Act by David Lammy the black Labour MP for Tottenham was applauded by all parties. He spoke on the eve of the Commonwealth Conference at which an embarrassed Theresa May hoped to strike trade deals with our former colonies.
She will find that there’s no such thing as ‘Free Trade’; trade deals always come with strings attached. To be members of the EU we had to accept its rules and regulations. If we want to trade with America we will have to accept genetically modified crops and chlorine-washed chicken, and if we want to trade with the Commonwealth we must accept their immigrants. There are very few Australians and Canadians wanting to come here but there are millions of Africans and Asians who would be better off under our generous social security system.
The Windrush fiasco shows the desperate need for identity cards and a central population database. The government doesn’t know who is in the country and its various departments are not sharing information. Some of those threatened with deportation had served in the armed forces, paid taxes in this country, and drawn pensions and benefits only to be told that they shouldn’t be here.
Whatever their legal status people from overseas who have lived here for many years consider themselves to be British, as do their children, and grandchildren. We could enforce stricter border controls, deport illegal immigrants, criminals, potential terrorists, and volunteers but the idea of rounding up black and brown people and throwing them out of the country is a fantasy. In 2016 we deported less than 40,000 people from the UK.
When Oswald Mosley proposed the resettlement of West Indians in 1955 there were only 125,000 of them in the UK. He wanted to send them home to decent conditions by revitalising the Sugar industry in Jamaica. In those days Britain had the power to do such things. Between 1968 and 1973 we forcibly deported the entire population of the Indian Ocean Territory of Diego Garcia to make way for an American military and naval base. In return, we received a discount of £14 million on the purchase of American missiles.
The resettlement of Commonwealth immigrants would still have been possible in 1971 when their numbers had risen to 1.5 million but now we have 8 million of them, and despite the Immigration Acts of 1962, 1968,1971, 2014, and 2016, they are still coming.
Opinion polls report that immigration is of great concern to the public but parties like the National Front have consistently failed to get an MP elected. Ukip briefly had two MPs but they only campaigned against East Europeans.
People all over the world have been driven from their homes by war and poverty. Germany took in 13 million refugees after the Second World War and has since accepted 3 million Turkish workers and a million refugees from Syria. In 1888 there were 25,000 Jews in Palestine but there are now 7 million. A million Rohingya refugees have been driven out of Myanmar, and more than 3 million Europeans have fled from Africa. There are enough precedents for repatriation but it’s not likely to happen in Britain. For a start, our newspapers would never stand for it.
...............................
European Outlook, May 2018:
Black Lives Matter
Stephen Lawrence was a young black man who was murdered in South London in 1993. There have been many such cases involving victims and killers of all races but this one was famous for being bungled by a racist police force. But according to local gossip their reluctance to prosecute had more to do with corruption than racism. The father of one of the killers was a notorious drug dealer with plenty of money.
The decision to commemorate Stephen’s death was taken by a dishonest Tory government rocked by the Windrush deportation scandal and desperate to improve its image. But most people will see through their hypocrisy. It was Theresa May as Home Secretary who helped to create the present climate.
Violent crime has increased as a result of police cuts and a ban on ‘Stop and Search’. The police and the courts are crippled by ‘political correctness’ and the government has resorted to patronising gestures, such as ‘Stephen Lawrence Day’. If they were dedicated to law and order they would prosecute all killers regardless of political considerations. All lives matter and we should all be protected by the police from robbers and terrorists.
........
Frank’s Latest Campaign
Veteran patriot Frank Walsh is challenging Wandsworth Council’s decision to grant planning permission for an intrusive block of flats opposite his home. He has displayed a notice on his front door together with a supply of leaflets and started a campaign on Facebook. At the age of 92, most people would be happy to put their feet up but he is still posting his unique blog ‘Our Voice’ - http://www.ab4ps.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. This blog is protected by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19: “We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.”