Forum Topic

It seems Suella Braverman really is stupid...

An exchange in parliament today shows up Braverman's utter cluelessness.  She was asked how a 16-year-old orphaned refugee from Africa who was not eligible under existing schemes could legally reach the UK to claim asylum.  Braverman could not provide an option and suggested that he could claim asylum in the UK once he arrived.  It took Conservative MP Tim Loughton to ask her the obvious (to all except her) question: "How could I arrive in the UK if I didn’t have permission to get on to an aircraft legally to arrive in the UK?"The Home Office Catch 22 made plain for all to see.

Richard Carter ● 1167d21 Comments

"The question is Michael will the next government change policy?"But weren't such policies resoundingly rejected at the last election?

David Ainsworth ● 1166d

"amused it was highlighted by someone in the party that devised and supports"That may be so but until recently most refugees came from countries that he supported military action against. But give him credit unlike many other MP's who voted for foreign intervention, he did consistently vote for an enquiry.I'm not sure how much the heroin trade from Afghanistan during the 20 years war has contributed to the recent influx from countries not directly impacted by UK foreign policy. There may or may not be a link.The question is Michael will the next government change policy?Be it central or regional and even now local many will simply continue the previous administration's' policy. The last Labour party was also into demonising asylum seekers let's not forget!The link between foreign policy & home office policy should not be ignored.The Home Office has to deal with the consequences of poor Foreign Office policy decisions, no matter which party is in power. This is a fundamental point missing from the UK liberals' views unfortunately.Let's reduce their cities to rubble and give them a few tents and let a few thousand in does not balance against the horrendous human loss millions have suffered. Not to mention the millions of refugees in neighbouring countries that are under UK sanctions!But yes let's call out Braverman' performance - that incidentally was far better than one of our former Prime Minister's.On a cross topic note - I bet those countries on the receiving end of amagendon wished we just bought a few condominiums and left them empty! (No disrespect to the Chagos Islands & other places intended).Policy matters not politicians!

Ed Robinson ● 1166d

Good point, Ed, but I suppose I'm pleased that this showed up how ridiculous, unfair and unworkable these policies are, and amused it was highlighted by someone in the party that devised and supports them.I doubt this government will change the policy because they're playing to an audience that doesn't want immigration whether it's illegal or legal, or refugees or IT consultants. I expect the whips are trying to dig out any dirt they can on Loughton in an attempt to avoid a repeat.Anyway, Braverman has already admitted her parties policy has failed as the numbers of both legal and illegal immigrants are rising. Why didn't she just say there was no legal path in answer to the question and brazen it out; she's not giving anything away, we know the government doesn't care about refugees having a way to get o the UK. Yes, Ed, it would be good to change the policy but I'm too cynical to believe this government will do that irrespective of who's in the Home Office.

Michael Ixer ● 1166d

Yes Michael,as mentioned many other politician have performed poorly when trying to defend a policy that does not stand up to scrutiny."It's very surprising she wasn't briefed on how to answer that one!"How would a more competent person answer that question?With lies, spin or other such means I assume.The policy is wrong. Swapping her for a more competent liar will not change the policy.Calling out the policy might.

Ed Robinson ● 1166d

Ed. But she was taken to pieces by one of her own party about a policy she supported and should have had an answer for. It's common knowledge that over the past decade the government has changed immigration and asylum policies to (1) block anyone except from a few countries who hasn't got visa accessing transport to get to the UK, (2) make visa application by making one have to travel to a UK embassy (or possum UK consulate) for an interview to get a visa and (3) only allow a asylum to be applied for once in the UK (I think with a few exceptions: Ukraine, Afghanistan?) It's very surprising she wasn't briefed on how to answer that one! It's not as though she was stitched up by someone leaking a new policy document ...

Michael Ixer ● 1166d

Richard,I have watched it again and still hold the same view.She can't answer because there is no legal route.By making personal attacks on the politician you divert attention away from the policy.It is the policy that needs to change.Here appearance did not seem particularly bad or different compared to a number of politicians when confronted with a direct question which proves their policy incorrect.

Ed Robinson ● 1166d

Loughton was excellent, and relentless. When Bravermann got flustered and said others could answer him, I presume her officials, it was embarrassing. But also alarming. Someone of her calibre in one of the great offices of state. Someone responsible for our safety.  If she had an ounce of commonsense and decency, she'd resign

Elizabeth Balsom ● 1166d

And if you've any doubts what Suella Braverman is about - she's quite clear here:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2022/jul/07/greatest-honour-suella-braverman-says-would-like-next-prime-minister-video

Philippa Bond ● 1166d

I am not surprised Gove did not flounder when questioned.  He is such a slimy character!  He can answer anything without batting an eyelid.While the Common Agricultural Policy may not have been the best option, it could have been changed.However, British farmers have certainly been short changed!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1166d

Safe Passage have posted a link to Braverman's performance, which really was dreadful in the face of Loughton's excellent questioning:https://m.facebook.com/watch/?v=4906347119467710&ref=sharing

Richard Carter ● 1166d

Just wondering, re Braverman, how many on this Forum share my view that if a person looks ineffectual, you can be pretty sure they are. I had that feeling about DoorMatt. Re Raab, my initial impression was: This guy looks impatient and short tempered. Sounds as though he was/is. Then there is Pritti Patel: My reaction was: stuck-up, inflexible and arrogant. As for Johnson: over-ambitious lounge lizard. If this can be discovered with the naked eye of an ordinary person, how come they get appointed to important posts? Any thoughts?

Alexander MacLeod ● 1166d

Yes, and the Tim Loughton's questioning came from HER side of the House.  It should have been uncomfortable.

Philippa Bond ● 1167d

Yes, she was floored by the questioning; of course the position is indefensible but if she can't answer the questions she should either go or change the policy.I'm no fan of Michael Gove, but when challenged by Nick Robinson on R4's Today programme this morning to explain what Brexit had done to help businessess he managed to pick on the Common Agricultural Policy, or getting rid of it. Very clever, as it's one part of the EU that everyone would agree needs reforming, but totally irrelevant to the UK's high-tech businesses or hospitality venues whose real problems are lack of staff and rising energy costs - and however poor CAP was farmers don't seem too enamored with the UK's replacement funding post Brexit. I didn't believe a word of what he said but at least Gove was properly briefed and prepared to put a case. He didn't flounder like Braverman did!

Michael Ixer ● 1167d

Not so: try watching her appearance: if you do, you'll see for yourself that this wasn't dissimulating but rather dim incompetence.

Richard Carter ● 1167d

Yes, Cruella has law degree from Cambridge and the Masters from the Sorbonne.She benefitted from: - the Erasmus exchange programme during her undergraduate years in Cambridge; and-  the Entente Cordial Scholar programme to obtain her Masters in European and French Law at the Sorbonne.She then voted to stop the Erasmus and other exchange programmes during the Brexit negotiations.Cruella through and through.

Ivonne Holliday ● 1167d

True Cruella style - horrible!

Ivonne Holliday ● 1167d

I disagree, it is not stupidity or being clueless that is the problem.The real issue is honesty. Of course someone could argue it's just the next level of government spinning.But whatever you want to call it, misrepresenting government policy is undemocratic.We have gotten to the stage where ministers would rather look like idiots than tell the truth.

Ed Robinson ● 1167d

That was great questioning by Tim Loughton MP.

Philippa Bond ● 1167d

I believe Braverman has law degrees from Cambridge and the Sorbonne. Did she waste her time and money?

Elizabeth Balsom ● 1167d

Makes one embarrassed to be British; in the same category as Raab not not understanding the importance of the Dover-Calais link, and Rees Mogg wanting to go back a century with imperial units. No wonder the UK's in a mess. Makes one wonder who would vote for those who are so incompetent and incapable :-(

Michael Ixer ● 1167d

I was listening to it on LBC News live and it was toe-curling cringeworthy.  I despair over this Government.

Sue Hammond ● 1167d