Unless this issue is resolved to the
point of being a non-issue anymore,
Nigel Faraji is going to be prime
minister.
So what approach do you want? If you
don't want that outcome, what approach
do you need the Labor government to
take? Do you need, as heret Cooper was
saying, a practical steady approach? Or
do you need the kind of approach that
Jack Straw was talking about? Not that
he had necessarily agreed with it, but
the approach that David Blunkett was
talking about. uh the approach that
you're going to hear uh Lord John
Hartton talk about the former defense
secretary of actually we need something
far more radical. We've got to we've got
to really rip this thing up and start
again. John is in Paris in France. Hi
John.
>> Hi mate. Yeah. So like everybody else in
the country, I'm insensed by this uh
ability for people who have just claimed
uh refugee status, been granted it, and
then to be able to within a day or
within a week to get their families in
without any conditions on salary or
language or anything. But instead of
having a pop IT Cooper, she's actually
trying to do something belatedly, but
she's trying to do it something. You
used to work for the Conservative Party,
and it was you and your Mason
Conservative Party who had this policy
in place. And generally,
>> sorry, which policy was that?
>> This policy of allowing asylum seekers
to be able to once they granted asylum
to bring family members in reunification
very easily without any conditions. It
was you and your mates. It's not
something new that the Labor Party
implemented last year. Yeah. Concept
Party, right?
>> I think it's completely crazy, John.
>> But so why didn't you do anything about
it? Why are you are you not speaking to
your
>> main John? Just to be really clear, I I
wasn't a minister. Do you know what I
mean? Like I I didn't
>> I know I know how the Conservative party
works. I used to work for CH and Q. I
know how ridiculous it is that people
like you. I was only a little bod. Okay.
I was
>> Okay. So, but why didn't you do anything
about it?
>> I was a standard little bud who helped
in campaigns. I was
>> Why didn't you get Why didn't you get it
campaign to get it changed?
>> How can I get a campaign to get get
changed? Tell me.
>> Well, because you're you're a campaigner
inside the system, inside CCHQ, very
important body within the Conservative
Party. Uh why weren't you agitating if
you disagree with this so heavily?
>> I'm a temporary employee. I was not a
fully paid family member who walked into
Downing Street whenever I were like you.
Now maybe if you got you guys you and
your mates stop focusing so much help
yourself second jobs or working for the
conservative friends of Israel group you
might actually get somewhere in this
country.
>> I think I think you genuinely s got the
wrong impression of what was uh what my
role was uh in 10 Downing Street 10
years or so ago. Even even now
>> I wasn't on a second job. I wasn't NP
ministers and you have the WhatsApp
messages
or people you know even know WhatsApp
you know Kelly Bnock or whoever you you
can say I don't have WhatsApp me
WhatsApp number I can hand on I don't
have
>> you have their phone numbers right go
challenge them right instead of you know
having a pop Eva Cooper take some
responsibility because there's usual
mates in the conservative party who have
failed this country truly has failed
this country
>> I don't disagree I I absolutely don't
disagree with you that the uh the
conservatives in government have failed.
I completely agree with you, John.
Anders is in great Yarmouth. Anders,
>> well, here's the thing. Number one,
calling Dr. Mike Jones an expert on
migration policy without pointing out
that he's the head of migration watch
who've been profoundly calling for the
end of the ECR's oversight for a long
time. It's a bit like referring to uh
Hugh Hefner's gynecologist. Listen, this
is what it comes down to, okay? in order
to do what he says you have to do. Okay,
let's go over this and forgive my voice.
The chemotherapy is pretty hard this
>> the um you'd have to basically get rid
of the following and I have it listed
here so we can go through it together.
You'd have to get rid of the core
legislation was the human rights the
human rights act.
>> Okay, you probably have to repeal pay
repeal or replace that right. So that
means that every statute as you remember
when we've had this discussion before
when Britain was so brutally pulled out
of the EU every statute judgment and
precedent which cited HR H articles
especially 2 to 14 would collapse unless
they were transmuted or put into
something else. Then you have the
devolution and constitutional
settlements. Con Scotland, Northern
Ireland, Government of Wales. They all
are bound to act in compliance with ECR.
You then no, I'm going to I'm going to
jump in there because weirdly my name is
still above the door just about. Um on
your No, no, no. On your second point,
very interestingly, uh Jack Straw in the
papers citing a
>> We know why Jack Straw has a problem
with the ECR. We know exactly why. Yes,
of course. So we know we know because of
the fact that Jack Straw was found
culpable for rendition and torture to
CIA black sites by the ECA.
>> So this is this is payback from Jack
Straw
>> been calling for the curbs to this
arrogant court ever since he was a
minister for the fact that they were
investigating the fact that the British
government.
>> Well, here's the thing. It's not about
whether or not you're asking for well
you're asking for a big issue here. Is
it right or is it wrong? Let me put this
into you. Let me put it a little bit
further. In order to I have about by the
way I have about 15 more things you
would have to like completely statutes
that you have to remove, repeal, replace
along with all of the UN treaties that
you would have to leave and you'd also
be leaving the Council of Europe, don't
forget. And that would be a mess in
itself. So you'd have no forum with
which to discuss this with other nations
whatsoever because you'd be withdrawing
from all of that. So my question to you
is this. In order to do this, Tom, in
order to repeal all of these things, in
order to bring in the laws that you want
to do, you would basically need to
disapprove disapply huge swaves of
British law by fiat.
>> Now, that is not democratic. There's not
a liberal democracy. No liberal
democracy can do that.
>> There are laws are repealed via
a democratically elected party who who
choose people to go into government.
That's how the system works. there.
>> Oh, so you want to displace so you want
to disapp from by my account 17.
>> I'm not arguing with you. Sorry. I'm not
arguing with you about what is being
repealed. I'm arguing with you about the
process of doing that. The process of
doing that is wellestablished thoroughly
democratic even if you don't like the
things that are how do you how do you do
how do you how do you pull out of how do
you pull out of 12 UN treaties? How do
you re how do you pull out of the
Council of Europe? How do you discip How
do you disapp all of the uh the
devolution acts? How do you remove the
ECHR and all of the all of the laws and
statutes? Where did
>> As I was trying to I was as I was trying
to suggest one of the things that Jack
Straw was pointing out was that actually
the reliance on the ECR for the Good
Friday Agreement in his view having uh
put his name into a I think it's a
policy exchange uh paper on the matter
is it isn't actually very reliant on the
ECR at all and wouldn't be a problem.
Now, you say that's his view because of
all the uh rendition stuff back in the
day. I maybe I'm more inclined to give
it a give it a hearing. Now, you I'm led
to believe go on these asylum hotel
protests. You sort of do a round the
country tour going on these things. Is
that right?
>> No, I don't go around the country. Um I
I stay in the greater Manchester area.
>> Right. So, how many of these protests
have you been on?
>> Loads. Too many to count.
>> And why' you do it? Because uh like the
guy from the uh home office was just
saying then uh the employee, I cannot
put my hand on my heart and pretend this
is anything other than a massive fraud.
We know we know exactly what it is. It's
a fraud that our political class are
allowing to happen and have allowed to
happen for far too long. And it is
making this country
a poorer and more chaotic place. And I
think doesn't matter where you live in
the country now, you can't escape it.
You can see it around you.
>> What's the fraud being perpetrated?
>> Well, the fact that the vast majority of
these people aren't genuine asylum
seekers.
>> There are 40 odd percent that are
approved. They're asylum claims are
approved.
>> But the problem with that is, have you
ever read one of these claims?
>> I've seen the ones that have been
publicized in the press. Yeah.
>> I've never read one. And and I don't
understand why they're not made made
made made made available to the public.
>> And I personally think Sorry, Mike, but
how do you know they're a fraud then?
>> Well, prove me wrong publicly.
>> No, no, that's not how that's
>> I know you don't have the ability. That
is how it works because they don't
balance afraid of what they say. Mike,
it's not how the No, sir. It's not how
the B you you can't expect people to
prove a negative. You say that this is a
fraud and I've asked you how do you know
that? And you say, I don't know. Prove
me wrong. and put it right.
>> Here's here's an idea. 47% of claims are
approved. There's my evidence that that
at least slightly fewer than half are
deemed acceptable enough to gain uh
asylum.
>> But would you would so would you accept
that if it was um if if that was
burglary cases or theft cases?
>> Would you accept those figures without
seeing the details if that was
burglaries, thefts, robberies? Would you
just accept what you'd want to read the
cases, wouldn't you? And see how people
are being prosecuted. But you but
>> but you don't we don't want to do that.
>> No, but you have seen I've read loads of
criminal cases.
>> Yeah, fine. But you know, even the stuff
that's published in the media, let alone
the stuff that happens uh without being
published in the media. You you said you
didn't read any of it.
>> Well, I tell you, I have read one
actually. I read the Abade family's
case. And you remember that one that
quite
>> f should never have been never been in
this country in the first place. So,
you've got the Southport inquiry coming
up soon. That's going to be published.
So, we'll have to see what lies the the
Ruda Cabana family's asylum claim
contained.
>> Full of the Ruda Cabana family claimed
asylum in this country.
>> If he was born in Cardiff.
>> Yeah, but if his family weren't granted
asylum in the first place, then none of
that would have happened.
>> Yeah, I know. But that's that's that's
arguing with a with a past you can't
return to, unfortunately.
>> Well, yeah, but you can learn you can
learn from your mistakes.
>> Agree. But but in in proving that
they're all fraudulent and 47% of them
are found to uh be given asylum, you it
is on you, sir, if you don't mind me
saying, to show that those 47% are
fraudulently done, are incorrectly
awarded, are unfairly awarded.
>> And how how are we able to do that
without without reading them?
>> Well, that's again that's but that's
your job.
>> Well, so I I how am I supposed to access
asylum claims that aren't made made
available to the public? Well, I'm sure
that that you could go on to Home Office
Judgments's website. You could go to
immigration enforcement websites. You
could go to you can't read the full
document. It's impossible. It's
impossible. You you as a member of the
media are not able to read. You are not
be able to pick out a claim and read it.
Just any at random. You cannot do that.
It's all behind closed doors.
>> Mike, if you say that the reason that
you go to these protests because all
those decisions are fraudulent.
>> Yeah.
>> You have to have some evidence to back
up that claim.
>> That's what I believe. I believe it's a
massive fraud. I know you believe that,
but what what gives you that belief? You
have to have a foundation for that
belief.
>> I I know people that claimed asylum in
this country from Iraq, funnily enough,
like the guy was saying from the home
office. Now, funnily enough, what he
did, so he's fleeing his country, right?
When his when his and this is a guy who
came over, the one I'm thinking about
when it was when it was Lor's, right?
So, when he when his claim was stamped
and he was good to go and he he had all
his paperwork, what did he do? Went back
to his hometown to visit his family.
Right? Does that sound like a man that
is fleeing his country?
>> Of course, it's absurd.
>> And there are plenty. I agree with you.
And there are some absolute genuine
enraging absurdities in this system. I
mentioned the Brazilian pedophile who
can't be deported because uh to send him
to Brazil to go to prison uh where he is
sentenced to be uh would be an
infringement on his human rights not to
be uh beaten up within the prison. Well,
tough. Um don't go raping children then
might be an easy explanation for that
one. So, you're right. There are some
complete absurdities in the system. I
and and Mike, I am as enraged by them as
you, but I'm not sure I want to go and
march on an asylum hotel particularly.
>> Well, I'll just tell you this as well,
right? If they do empty the asylum
hotels, it'll just move on to HMOs and
it'll just move on to wherever they're
put. This is not going to go away.
>> Protesting because it's not the hotels
per se, as you point out. It's not the
hotels per se that you're protesting
about or the damage that's being done to
this country. And the damage is being
done because people see it doesn't work.
>> We're totally skinn. We're being told we
don't have the winter fuel payment. We
don't have this. We don't have that. But
we've got endless amounts of money for
this nonsense.
And on top of that, what have you got 12
billion pounds a year in benefits for
foreign nationals? I mean, the more the
more information that comes out, the
crazier this is. We we do not have the
money for our
>> What do you think is meant by foreign
national?
someone who isn't a British citizen.
>> But that's someone
>> that that's different. I know. I
understand that's different. But I'm
just saying it's still crazy.
>> Why do we only reserve benefits for
people who are born here?
>> Well, when we're skin Yeah.
>> Right. So,
>> if you're going to tell people we've got
no money, then yeah, you know, you've
got to you've got to you've got to pick
and choose and say, well, unfortunately,
we don't have money for that. Um, you
know, if you can come here and support
yourself without benefits, fair enough.
If you're going to rely on our benefit
system, I'm sorry, you're going to have
to go back home. Well, I think Mike, to
your point, Avet Cooper has come to that
conclusion about refugee family members
um visas for whom went from 4,300 in
2022 to now over 20,000 in the year to
March. Um with no requirement to um show
that you have the the funds to be able
to live without universal credit or
housing benefit. Um no demonstration
that there's accommodation. No
demonstration that you can actually
speak English. I think that that is a