Saturday 2 April 2016


Well, yes, you probably do.

Because we heard over and over again how they let anyone and everyone in in the hopes that they would all be poor and vote Labour.

Well it seems, according to ex Liberal Democrat Minister David Laws, (as revealed in his book) that the Tories aren't any different. The Foreign Secretary suggested a Schengen visa. And Cameron said he would fire anyone who leaked it. 

But Mr Laws is no longer fireable... and in any case, he is a Liberal Democrat and this can only do the Tories harm, so it's win win for him: sells the book and gives the Tories some grief.
Thinks: "Will I *dob the Tories in to the press, or...will I dob them in by writing a book?"
The Home Office, whose priorities are set by ministers, seem not to be overly interested in migration. No wonder they make such a mess of it.

Not been a good week for the Tories. First we find that while they have been blaming the EU for not standing against Chinese steel imports, the truth of the matter is that they have been blocking German, French and Italian efforts to curb the influx in order not to upset the Chinese. Embarrassing.

Now we find that they didn't make immigration a priority and wanted to be in Schengen, despite making it an election promise to drastically reduce the number of immigrants.

Seems to me you can't much trust them.

* For non-Scots readers, the verb 'to dob in' means 'to inform on'.


  1. Er um. Well.

    The "newspaper" carrying the story will seek to spin it to suit its own agenda. However I think the key word above is "visa".

    There is huge growth in tourism from China in particular. Presently a visitor to the EU would get a single visa for the Schengen area. They need apply for another visa to visit the UK. Chinese visitors are apparently loath to get two visas. So the UK - and London in particular - is losing out market share of the shopping crazy Chinese visitors.

    The suggestion of a schengen visa is creative thinking. The spin in the "newspaper" it is printed in is designed to get the kneejerk anti immigration response in the readers that they want. Cameron - if he suggested it be kept quiet - shows he has political instincts. Immigration is a very big issue in our neighbour.

    There are sure to be people keen on stabbing Cameron in the back. Anything we read in "newspapers" should be treated with suspicion.

    Saor Alba

    1. Fair enough, SA. I realise that the Tories are now at war with the Tories, and although we all think of the Mail as a Tory newspaper, it is more Ukip these days.

      But is Laws lying when he says that the mandarins in Whitehall patiently explained that no one at the Home Office is much interested in immigration? That appears to be a quote from Laws' book.

    2. don't think much of this week's photos. Oh you mean it's not Sunday...

      TBH I don't think much of Laws either - imho he was the Toriest of the LibDems. It's all just tittle tattle but confirms to me that the coalition and the current "Toff"ocracy couldn't organise a party in an alcohol making place...

    3. I dunno. A couple of right monkeys. Not very pretty ones I guess.

      Laws is a prat. The cabinet minister that only lasted a week before he had to be sacked for cheating on his expenses.

      Any yes they will say anything to sell books, but he must be fairly sure they aren't going to sue him!

      It's fun watching them fall apart after they bragged so much about Labour split in two.

    4. PS PP: I promise the photos will be better tomorrow.

  2. I thought 'dob in' was Australian? Jings, crivvens 'n' strewth.

    1. I thought Dobin related to a horse.
      If he is right then it appears that the Daily Mail is running much of the Tory's government policies.

    2. Is it, Conan?

      Oh damn.

      I grew up with it here in Scotland, so I assumed it was Scottish.

      Maybe it arrived with Neighbours?

      Boom Boom, bringiton...

      I think that the Daily Mail and probably the telegraph have a big influence on Tory policies.

      Mind you, they were fairly influential on Brown and Blair too!

  3. Tris

    The Tories are wankers but then so is Laws, he dipped the public purse and his gripe is probably that he got caught and his Tory masters didn't support him.

    The Tories won't back any business and will sell off everything until there is nothing left, when have they ever been different. Immigration is a mess and we do need a system that protects public services etc as the open door policy of the EU is not great, even though immigrants tend to work and not claim benefits, we just don't have the investment in public services to cope with the demands being placed on them. I am still more remain than leave but I think the EU is on the brink of a big disaster but again the EU is for the few and not the many.

    Our relationship with the Chinese is interesting, and it will get more interesting if it starts to irritate the Americans which it will as time goes on.

    However, the Tories are under pressure and the SNP and Labour in England need to be putting more pressure on across the board. Labour s approach to everything is shit and the SNP slow creep approach won't work either, both need to get their finger out and put this government under serious pressure and it might just fall.

    I hate the UK and I'm not in a good mood.


    1. Ah, you don't sound in a good mood.

      Truth is we need immigration. Our population is ageing. We have this huge number of old folk; a massive spike which will last for maybe 30 or 40 years, depending how long people live.

      In fairness the EU immigrants are a net benefit. They have brought some £20 billion into the UK. As for local services... as you say most of them are working, and therefore paying local taxes.

      If the UK gets any kind of deal from the EU after leaving, there will be other countries that will want the same thing, and that could lead to the disintegration of the EU!

      I hope you cheer up tomorrow for Soppy Sunday. :)

    2. I intend to live as long as possible; forty years sounds good...

    3. You mean "another" forty years?