• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/24/labour-could-keep-sunaks-rwanda-policy-successful/

    Baroness Jenny Chapman, a frontbencher who was Sir Keir’s political secretary, was asked whether Labour would axe the scheme if 10,000 migrants had been flown to Rwanda by the time of the election.

    The peer, who was a member of the shadow cabinet, replied: “If it did, as a major major leap with a thought experiment, then we might be having a different conversation but there is absolutely no evidence this is going to work.”

    • Carlo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Pretty big stretch to call that any kind of endorsement, don’t you think?

        • Carlo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It was explicitly a hypothetical thought experiment. Starmer has already said they wouldn’t go through with the Rwanda plan, even if it did somehow prove effective. That’s all stated plainly in the article you linked (from the Telegraph!). It really seems like you’re just doubling down in the face of the evidence, rather than admitting to having made an incorrect statement.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It was explicitly a hypothetical thought experiment

            By the presumed future minister in charge. If boat crossings to the UK fall following implementation of Rwanda deportations (more a gamble than a hypothetical) they’ll continue the program.

            Starmer has already said they wouldn’t go through with the Rwanda plan

            Starmer’s shadow cabinet - including Yvette Cooper, shadow home secretary - have simply asserted the program is “too expensive”. That’s their sole opposition to the new rule. Not that they won’t go through with it, but that they don’t want to pay for it.