Iron Lady News

08/12/2023

Wow! If Osborne - one of the people who helped propel Rishi's ascendancy to power - has given up on him, that's serious bad news for the PM . . .

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/12/07/rishi-sunak-latest-news-tories-rwanda-jenrick-resignation/?WT.mc_id=e_DM245946&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_Nhl_New&utmsource=email&utm_medium=Edi_Nhl_New20231208&utm_campaign=DM245946

Rishi Sunak can no longer claim to represent stability, says George Osborne
7 December 2023 • 9:34pm

Rishi Sunak can no longer claim he has “stabilised things”, George Osborne has warned amid growing disquiet over his Rwanda plan.

Speaking on the latest episode of his Political Currency podcast, Mr Osborne, a former Tory chancellor, said: “Well, the Tory civil wars have completely reopened. Rishi Sunak’s big claim was, ‘I’ve come after the chaos of Boris Johnson and the chaos of Liz Truss….I’ve stabilised things.’

“He can’t now claim anymore to have stabilised things. His government is fragmenting around this immigration issue. And Rob Jenrick is a very particular loss for him because Jenrick was - alongside Oliver Dowden, and Rishi Sunak - one of the three musketeers.”

The Prime Minister is under fire from both ‘One Nation’ Tories and the Right of the party, with MPs concerned about the effectiveness and potential consequences of his emergency legislation.

Robert Jenrick quit as Mr Sunak’s immigration minister over the proposals on Wednesday night, prompting speculation that fresh letters of no confidence had been submitted and fresh concerns about the stability of the Government.

Mr Sunak held a press conference earlier on Thursday in which he urged his own MPs to help him “finish the job” and suggested critics of his proposals “cleary don’t” want to stop the boats.

He told reporters: “I’m determined to actually fix this problem and the people who want to do something else clearly don’t. Because I’m confident this will work. There’s no point having a piece of legislation with no one to send anyone to at the end of it.”

Rishi Sunak can no longer claim he has “stabilised things”, George Osborne has warned amid growing disquiet over his Rwanda plan.

07/12/2023

07/12/2023

Nigel has a few minutes about Brexit on ITVs dire and inane Celeb: watch this for two mins so you don’t have to watch the rest of it:

06/12/2023

It’s good to understand what the “conservative democratic organisation” is all about:

Who are we and what do we bring to the party? Over the next few days we will be bringing forth some of the key players in the so that you can meet them and understand their motivations and values in being the 'movers and shakers' of the . Today it's the turn of our CEO, Claire Bullivant.

06/12/2023

Suella Braverman will be delivering her resignation statement in the house after PMQ.

05/12/2023

BREXIT *I’ve got news for those who say Brexit is a disaster: it isn’t. That’s why rejoining is just a pipe dream*
*writes Larry Elliott, The Guardian Economics Editor*
Tue 5 Dec 2023 07.00 GMT

*_Many still hanker for how things were: but looking across the Channel, it’s completely illogical to do that_*

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/05/brexit-disaster-rejoining-channel-europe-economy

_*Brexit is a dead issue at Westminster.* There are any number of issues where it is hard to separate Labour and the Conservatives, and the reluctance to reopen the 2016 referendum debate is one of them. As with tax and spending, Keir Starmer is broadly offering continuity Rishi Sunak._

_*That doesn’t mean the debate about leaving is over.* Plenty of people still nurture the hope that the decision will be reversed and are working to that end. But any successful campaign would need to do two things: convince voters that the UK economy had become a basket case since the Brexit vote and that life for those still in the club was so much better._

_*Neither criterion has been met.* Britain’s economic performance in the seven years since 2016 has been mediocre but not the full-on horror show that was prophesied by the remain camp during the weeks leading up to the referendum. The doomsday scenario – crashing house prices (falls of up to 18% could result, warned then chancellor George Osborne) and mass unemployment – never happened._

_*What’s more, after the inevitable disruption caused by leaving, there have been signs of the economy adjusting*. Nissan’s decision to invest more than £1bn in its Sunderland plant with the intention of building three new electric car models is an example of that. Microsoft’s £2.5bn investment in the growing UK AI sector is another._

_*That’s not to say that the process is complete*. _Brexit provided opportunities to do things differently but those opportunities have so far not been exploited. It is a lot easier for a giant Japanese car company to make the Brexit transition than it is for a small food and drink exporting company faced with loads more red tape. But while it is convenient for those who have never quite got over being on the losing side in the referendum to brand Brexit a disaster, the reality is that it hasn’t been. Covid-19 scarred the economy deeply and the long-term costs of ill health and children missing out on school will grow over time. Even so, Brexit Britain has recovered more strongly than either France or Germany from the pandemic. Relative performance matters. The rejoin camp tends not to focus on what is happening on the other side of the Channel, and it is not hard to see why._

_*Brexit is a dead issue at Westminster.* _There are any number of issues where it is hard to separate Labour and the Conservatives, and the reluctance to reopen the 2016 referendum debate is one of them. As with tax and spending, Keir Starmer is broadly offering continuity Rishi Sunak_.

_*That doesn’t mean the debate about leaving is over*. _Plenty of people still nurture the hope that the decision will be reversed and are working to that end. But any successful campaign would need to do two things: convince voters that the UK economy had become a basket case since the Brexit vote and that life for those still in the club was so much better._

_*Neither criterion has been met.* Britain’s economic performance in the seven years since 2016 has been mediocre but not the full-on horror show that was prophesied by the remain camp during the weeks leading up to the referendum. The doomsday scenario – crashing house prices (falls of up to 18% could result, warned then chancellor George Osborne) and mass unemployment – never happened_.

_*What’s more, after the inevitable disruption caused by leaving, there have been signs of the economy adjusting*. Nissan’s decision to invest more than £1bn in its Sunderland plant with the intention of building three new electric car models is an example of that. Microsoft’s £2.5bn investment in the growing UK AI sector is another._

_*That’s not to say that the process is complete*. Brexit provided opportunities to do things differently but those opportunities have so far not been exploited. It is a lot easier for a giant Japanese car company to make the Brexit transition than it is for a small food and drink exporting company faced with loads more red tape. But while it is convenient for those who have never quite got over being on the losing side in the referendum to brand Brexit a disaster, the reality is that it hasn’t been. Covid-19 scarred the economy deeply and the long-term costs of ill health and children missing out on school will grow over time. Even so, Brexit Britain has recovered more strongly than either France or Germany from the pandemic. Relative performance matters. The rejoin camp tends not to focus on what is happening on the other side of the Channel, and it is not hard to see why._

Many still hanker for how things were: but looking across the Channel, it’s completely illogical to do that, says Guardian columnist Larry Elliott

03/12/2023

*FOTBOT Statement on the reports that the UK Government will not hand over the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius:*

We have lobbied MPs and campaigned tirelessly in favour of the UK ceasing negotiations to hand over the British Indian Ocean Territory to Mauritius.

We are delighted by these reports that negotiations will cease.

Diego Garcia has been a guarantor of safety and security for the Western world. Giving an inch away plays into the hands of our adversaries.

https://x.com/BritishOverseas/status/1730904167210729845

30/11/2023

Another EU military angle from the Express:

EXCLUSIVE: Former British army officer Frederick Chedham fears Ms von der Leyen wants to "entrap UK defence technology and industry under Brussels control".

30/11/2023

Toe-curling moment Lee Anderson proves Home Office boss ‘doesn't have clue' about migrants

Home Office permanent secretary left speechless when asked a very simple question by the Tory deputy chairman

27/11/2023

TINO coup ● *Guy Verhofstadt hails David Cameron and issues fresh demand for UK to rejoin EU* apparently Verhofstadt is tired nurturing his massive Vineyard, and bored racing his collection of Vintage cars ... James Bond villain lifestyle is waning.

The hardcore federalist, who dreams of a United States of Europe, reacted to the Foreign Secretary's new comments on Brussels.
By KATIE HARRIS, Political Reporter
12:35, Sun, Nov 26, 2023 | UPDATED: 12:41, Sun, Nov 26, 2023

The new Foreign Sec. said the UK should engage more closely with Brussels on foreign, defence and security policy in comments which have angered Brexiteer Tory MPs

The Belgian MEP said: "The UK and EU should work together to defend democracy and freedom against Putin's imperialism.

"Why not rejoin?! The best reply to the autocrats and their pundits in the West who want to divide us and destroy liberal democracy."

*_Strange how the above Verhofstadt Cameron and the WEF alumni, justify their power grab [Putin imperialism] same Putin that shares their goals in the WEF. No one buying the bad cop good cop act. Cameron is making the case for UK to be the primary funders for Ukraine, prolong a war send £billions to Ukraine 'redistribution of wealth_*

23/11/2023

How We’re Being Gaslit on Immigration and Climate by Ian Price

Another month and another set of immigration figures. 672,000 net immigration for the year to June 2023. At least that’s not quite as many people as at first feared.

After all, the Mail earlier this week reported that it “understood” from internal Home Office forecasts that the number could be as high as 700,000. “The figure for the year to June is expected to top 700,000, beating the high of 606,000 for 2022, sources said.”

Of course, as the piece went on to point out, the final figure from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) is likely to differ from that of the Home Office due to differences in methodology.

What are we supposed to make of the final figure of 672,000? Thank heavens it was only 672,000 and not 700,000 because that would have been disastrous? It seems that is indeed the purpose of the briefing of these pre-official numbers. It is a form of crude psychological manipulation that the Nudge Unit would barely get out of bed for, residing as it does at the more elementary end of behavioural science.

Anchoring is a technique that has been used by retailers for years and is why the expensive bottle of wine in Waitrose makes £14.95 seem reasonable. This crude trick has been played in previous announcement cycles this year and will probably be played again by the Government although for it to work, it would help if the anchor number were a good deal higher than the actual one. It appears that more Government creativity is being put into managing our perception of immigration growth than into actually reducing it.

A second stream of gaslighting activity is being performed in parallel by the Left with enthusiastic participation on the part of the BBC. This is more subtle and can be summarised as the ‘Britain-has-always-been-a-nation-of-immigrants’ narrative. The lesson to be drawn from this narrative is that from the dawn of this country’s history, immigrants – black people in particular – have always played a big part and that any suggestion of a recent influx, wave or surge in immigration indicates racism, xenophobia and being self-evidently far-Right.

The latest contribution to the narrative was reported in the Daily Telegraph this week. A study by the Museum of London alleges “structural racism” in 14th century England as being behind a disproportionate mortality rate among London’s black population during the Black Death. This was, it is claimed, particularly the case for women who are described as victims of “misogynoir” (sic).

The study does not appear to offer an estimate of what percentage of London’s population during the Black Death was black but the higher death rate is based on comparing the skulls of a sample of plague victims with those of a sample that died from other causes. As the Telegraph points out, this method of identifying ethnicity has a shaky track record. The Roman-era remains known as the Beachy Head Lady were claimed as those of a woman from sub-Saharan Africa but it later turned out that she was from Cyprus.

The BBC hit the news last month for including content material in its 2023 Black History Month programme containing the assertion that Roman emperor Septimius Severus was black. He was born in what is now Libya but was of Italian and Carthaginian parentage.

African yes, black no. Like, say, Elon Musk. While this programming has been withdrawn, this and similar claims have been made for a while by the BBC, most memorably in its ‘Been Here From the Start’ video for CBBC’s Horrible Black History dating from 2021. It is still available to watch here. Every claim on the video from Cheddar Man to the Tudors was recently debunked expertly by historian Tom Rowsell.

The BBC, the Museum of London and others would all have us believe that Britain has ‘always’ been a country of immigrants. While it is true to state that immigration has always played a role, it has been pretty modest since the arrival of the Angles, Saxons and subsequently, the Normans. Modest, for century upon century – until this one. Because in the 21st century, as David Goodhart pointed out in his 2013 book The British Dream: Success and Failures of Post-War Immigration, New Labour drastically increased the levels of immigration.

From 1066 until 1950 immigration was almost non-existent – about 50,000 Huguenots in the 16th and 17th centuries, about 200,000 Jews in two waves, and perhaps one million or more Irish over 200 years during most of which time they were internal migrants within one state.

As Goodhart goes on to point out, since 2004:

More people arrive on these shores as immigrants in a single year than in the entire period 1066 to 1950 (excluding the Irish and wartime flows). [italics in original]

So, the latest immigration figures tell us that net migration in the year to June 2023 was almost three times the total immigration from 1066 to 1950. This extraordinary fact gives the lie to the idea of immigration being a continuous and ancient trend. There really has been a dramatic and gargantuan increase. The numbers bear this out.

The Left inverts reality across a number of dimensions in order to mask the truth. As a closing observation, reflect upon how it does the opposite with climate change, which really has been with us from the beginning. However, rather than accept that we live in one of a number of inter-glacial periods across history during which cooling and warming has occurred naturally, climate alarmists have to confect an ever more dramatic narrative of a sudden surge in man-made warming – the term ‘global boiling’ comes to mind. Perhaps we will come to think of this as the reverse gaslight.

Ian Price is a Business Psychologist and author of the Anti-Human Substack. Find him on X.

Britain has not 'always' been a country of immigrants – since 2004 more people have arrived each year than in the entire period 1066-1950. It's just one example of where the Left inverts the truth.

23/11/2023

HOLLAND - A BIG RIGHT WING VICTORY
The anti-globalist PVV party just won a landslide victory in the Netherlands.

This shock landslide has now put Geert Wilders on track to be the next PM.

21/11/2023

Well this evening I am “taking one for the team” and venturing into the Lion’s Den at the Leicester Square Theatre at a Remoaner organised full on moan featuring Gina Miller, Alex Salmond and Berk Bercow as Chair.
It’s painful, and the audience is against our team of Brexiteers: Mike Graham, Clair Fox and David Davis.

21/11/2023

Afterword – Of Foreign Ministers And Deckchairs

David Cameron is by no means the first ex-prime minister to return to the government as foreign secretary.

Lord John Russel served as foreign secretary under Viscount Palmerston during 1859-65, having been prime minister from 1846 to 1852. He then returned as prime minister for a brief second term, serving from 1865-66.

Arthur Balfour, having served as prime minister from 1902 to 1905, became foreign secretary in Lloyd George’s wartime coalition government in 1916. During his three-year tenure he issued the famous Balfour Declaration (1917) on the future of Palestine, the consequences of which are still reverberating.

Lastly, Sir Alec Douglas-Home served as foreign secretary in Edward Heath’s 1970-74 government. He had been prime minister between 1963 and 1964. He had previously been foreign secretary under Harold Macmillan from 1960 to 1963 when still a member of the House of Lords. He had renounced his earldom in 1963 in order to become prime minister and was elected to the Commons, where he remained until October 1974.

These three grandees were all regarded as successful and blameless statesmen who had nonetheless lost office at a general election. They were safe pairs of hands. In contrast, David Cameron’s premiership was controversial, with a legacy of austerity and underinvestment; and he resigned the morning after defeat in a referendum he had called unnecessarily, and which has left irreconcilable fissures. Out of office, he was implicated in the collapse of Greensill Capital and may have been an advisor to certain questionable Chinese interests.

It was David Cameron who hollowed out the Tory Party with his tendentious candidate selection process. A party which once had talent and flair – if also its fair share of aristocratic eccentricity – is now largely populated with people who are not dissimilar to their Labour analogues. He inaugurated a colossal but poorly administered foreign aid budget even as he cut spending on courts and schools and indeed on the foreign office itself.

David Cameron’s record on foreign policy when Prime Minister can be summarised as follows. He supported the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, believing that democracy could be imposed by force. He bombed Libya, in collaboration with the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy. Libya is now a failed state where warlords and people smugglers hold sway, thus aggravating illegal migration across the Mediterranean. He presided over a “golden age” in relations with China, just as China was subverting the Sino-British treaty which guaranteed democracy in Hong Kong. He lost a parliamentary vote to intervene in Syria after Al-Assad used biological weapons because not even his own MPs trusted his judgment. He failed to influence the European agenda and seemed to have nil traction with Angela Merkel who controlled it. He called the Brexit referendum as a tactic to pull the rug from underneath UKIP – and lost it with a lacklustre campaign. Then he ran away – and made no effort to influence the final form that Brexit took.

In fact, Sir John Major would have been a better choice for foreign secretary. At least he successfully negotiated the Maastricht treaty in which the UK won an opt-out from monetary union, while remaining a full member of the EU. He also piloted the country through the First Gulf War (1991) with aplomb.

In the past turbulent and dangerous seven years Britain has had seven foreign secretaries. All told, this appointment looks like an act of desperation. Even if voters feel a bit better off one year hence, that will be too late to save the Tories. No wonder people have been mouthing that old trope about re-arranging the deckchairs on the sinking Titanic.

https://masterinvestor.co.uk/economics/europes-growth-problem/?

Why are the EU and the UK growing much more slowly than the USA?, asks Victor Hill.

20/11/2023

SIR – I am saddened to say that I resigned my Conservative Party membership on Wednesday.

I have been thoroughly disheartened by Rishi Sunak’s failure to fulfil promises he made in his pitch for the leadership of the party. Suella Braverman said it all perfectly in her letter to him, and many of her claims were confirmed by the Supreme Court ruling on Rwanda.

For me, however, the return of David Cameron has been the nail in the coffin. Far from possessing much-needed gravitas, he is the former prime minister who threw his toys out of the pram when he didn’t like the result of a democratic referendum that he had called.

This Government is now a sinking ship. I am a lifelong Thatcherite Tory, but as there is no prospect of a leader I can vote for, I have no reason to stay in the party.

I will not be supporting a Government made up of multi-millionaire chancers at the next election just because it describes itself as Conservative. I hope that the Tories, in their current form, are wiped out, so that a party with genuine Conservative values, designed to best serve the interests of the people of this country, can rise from the ashes of this complete disaster.

Lynda Howe
Chichester, West Sussex

19/11/2023

Are you tuned in?

19/11/2023

HAS NO INTENTION OF IMPLEMENT RWANDA POLICY .... *James Cleverly 'was opposed to the Rwanda scheme and said it was a waste of money' before he became Home Secretary. Remarks risk undermining his position as role to get removal flights of ground*

*_At RAF Wethersfield, Essex, 's constituency, ~ 500 asylum seekers are housed. About 40 demonstrated at the "prison-like" conditions, moaning it's "too cold, no internet, access to doctors & unable to speak to their families._*

By DAVID BARRETT
PUBLISHED: 01:23, 18 November 2023
UPDATED: 12:12, 18 November 2023

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12764165/James-Cleverly-opposed-Rwanda-scheme-said-waste-money-Home-Secretary.html?ico=related-replace

James Cleverly opposed the Rwanda scheme before his move to the Home Office, saying it was a ‘waste of money’ that ‘won’t work’, it was claimed yesterday.

The new Home Secretary was also accused of failing to progress negotiations with other countries to set up Rwanda-style schemes while he was at the Foreign Office.

Mr Cleverly’s remarks – said to have been made in a ministerial meeting just two months ago – risk undermining his position as the Cabinet minister now tasked by Rishi Sunak to get removal flights off the ground by the spring.

His alleged comments also risk angering the Tory Right, amid increasing pressure from Mr Cleverly’s predecessor, Suella Braverman, to take Britain out of European human rights laws.

Home Office insider told the Mail: ‘Cleverly said words to effect of, “This Rwanda plan won’t work and it’s a waste of money. We should focus on other measures.”

‘Also, as foreign secretary, he failed to progress any negotiations with other third countries. He hates the Rwanda scheme and thinks it’s a basket case.’ Earlier this week, Mr Cleverly said he did not recognise claims that he had described the Rwanda policy as ‘bat****’.

In his previous role as foreign secretary, Mr Cleverly was partly responsible for overseeing negotiations with countries potentially willing to accept asylum seekers from Britain. But sources claimed his opposition to the scheme stymied progress in securing deals.

Earlier this week, the PM set out a new plan to get the Rwanda scheme working after it was deemed unlawful by the Supreme Court.

A new treaty with Rwanda – expected to be published on Monday – will seek to iron out judges’ main objection to the scheme and will be binding under international law. In addition, ‘extraordinary’ new emergency legislation will see Parliament assert that Rwanda is a safe country to which migrants can be removed.

But in a new intervention yesterday, former home secretary Mrs Braverman, who was sacked by the PM on Monday, said the new plan did not go far enough.

She warned the Rwanda scheme was doomed to fail unless the UK excluded it from all human rights laws.

Branding Mr Sunak’s proposals a ‘tweaked version’ of the failed Plan A rather than an effective Plan B, Mrs Braverman called for emergency legislation to block ‘all avenues of legal challenge’.

The Home Office did not respond to requests for comment about Mr Cleverly’s alleged remarks.

James Cleverly was accused of failing to progress negotiations with other countries to set up Rwanda-style schemes while he was at the Foreign Office.

16/11/2023

In the last twenty-four hours, Suella Braverman has released a truly remarkable and utterly scathing critique of prime minister Rishi Sunak.

In a stunning three-page letter, the former Home Secretary and darling of the Tory Right accuses the prime minister of reneging on a deal to do whatever is necessary to regain control of Britain’s broken borders, lower immigration and deliver on the promises made to British voters in 2019:

“You have manifestly and repeatedly failed to deliver on every single one of these key policies”, she writes. “Either your distinctive style of government means you are incapable of doing so. Or, as I must surely conclude now, you never had any intention of keeping your promises”.

Sunak, argues Braverman, is now leading the Tories into electoral oblivion.

As I said on Twitter —and the popular YouTube show Triggernometry last night— this is not just a pitch for the leadership of the Conservative Party.

Nope. This is a rallying cry to build a completely different brand of conservatism —and one that is far more in tune with the mood out there in the country.

What we are now rapidly heading into is not just a general election but a protracted philosophical and ideological war for the very soul of British conservatism.

And while there are several distinct tribes within the Tory family, at its core this ideological war is mainly between two sides.

On one side are Establishment Tories who are basically accepting of the status-quo, who dominate the upper echelons of the party, including much of the parliamentary party, its central office and donor class.

On the other is a new generation of National Conservatives who want to chart a completely different path for the party and the country —who think the current status-quo is broken, who think the post-Brexit Tories have lost touch with the rest of the country, including the millions of voters who rallied behind them only four years ago, and who today want to push their party in a very different direction.

But what actually divides the two sides? And what will shape this unfolding battle in the weeks, months, and years to come? I’ve discussed these issues with members of the current cabinet, Tory pollsters, and more. Here are the 10 big dividing lines.

1. Immigration. Unlike Establishment Tories, National Conservatives argue that while immigration does make a contribution to British society, today’s policy of mass, uncontrolled, and unassimilated immigration is now rapidly weakening and undermining our national community –-its shared identity, sense of history, culture, values, and ways of life.

These problems have been exacerbated by Establishment Tories, whose post-Brexit immigration policy has further increased rates of immigration, has encouraged migration from more culturally and religiously distinct nations, and low-skill migrants who are a net fiscal cost, rather than benefit, to the economy.

National conservatives firmly oppose these changes and see them as a betrayal of conservative principles. National conservatives want a sharp and sustained reduction in legal immigration and, ideally, a five-year freeze on immigration so that Britain can fully absorb and better manage the mass migration of the last twenty years. A referendum on stopping migration for five-years would be advocated.

2. National Security. Unlike Established Tories, National Conservatives argue Britain should withdraw from any judicial and legal arrangements which prohibit the country from controlling its own national borders and responding to security threats.

Unlike Establishment Tories, they acknowledge Western nations like Britain are now in the grip of rapidly escalating migration, refugee, and security crises which threaten their social cohesion and sustainability. The first priority of any government is to ensure the security and safety of the national community.

National conservatives are firmly opposed to the transfer of political and legal power to legal and supranational bodies which undermine or erode the ability of the country to control its own borders and deport foreign nationals who commit crime and/or glorify terrorism.

3. The State. Unlike Establishment Tories who have consistently diluted the power of the nation-state by passing power and influence to supranational, technocratic and amorphous ‘governance’ structures, National Conservatives believe that a strong, independent, self-governing nation-state represents the best means of organising and sustaining society.

But they also believe in a limited state --where the powers of an ever-expanding administrative state and policy-making judiciary are dramatically reduced, where the organs of the state remain free from ideological bias, and where democratic powers and influence are sent down to the people, not hoarded at the centre by self-serving, insular elites.

National Conservatives believe the nation-state works best when it is working in the interests of the national community, is directly accountable to them, and sends power and influence down, not up, when it is respectful of the principle of popular sovereignty.

The 10 Big Dividing Lines