torture and other cruel treatment is punishment about an 84 as well as customary laws that might get in their way including from european court of human rights. international law is binding, no case up, they are supposed to adhere to it. that is why they signed update in the first place. it is abject nonsense. the law society of england and wales wrote further, and state quite clearly that domestic legislation cannot immunise the government from the enforcement of international law but up to claim it can is disingenuous. they also state that refusing to comply with an interim measure would be a clear breach of international law. they accuse the uk government further of using a plot to manufacture a reality and it is the time of year where all indulge in christmas magic and imagine reindeer on the roof but this government has asked the entire legal system of the uk to engage in a former dangerous pretence. the uk supreme court sought out the facts for itself and upon that clea
that part. the last time we were below 100,000 people in a month was february of 2021 right after the president took office. the next month in march of 2021 it jumped to 169,000 people. for them to be proud that the numbers are lower than they have been in a while is a joke. it is ridiculous. harris: thank you for the work you and those you lead do. the republican race for president looks like it is taking shape and some candidates are gaining ground. others struggling to make the first debate stage on the republican side. democratic party leaders are putting the pressure on president joe biden and his slow roll of a 2024 campaign. power panel next.
is that the government s now in a real pickle. so the bill s been going quite a while now, and many of us, myself included, have been asking the government, well, where is the impact assessment? and an impact assessment is something you re supposed to have with every bill. and an impact assessment should have shown parliamentarians before we debated on it, before we voted on it, before i voted against it, but before all of that we should have had that to show us what are the consequences of this bill if it goes through. we didn t have that. i do rather wonder now whether that was because they were anticipating that things might go wrong in the courts. i don t know. but we got that report this week and it wasn t great for the government. so they are in a pickle. because one of the things that these impact assessments do is work out the costs and benefits of things. and one of the things we learnt this week was that the average flight to sending a person to rwanda will on average cost £
significant, as they see it, is the scale of the problem. but the interesting thing about this is that the cost of the rwandan scheme, if anything, is said to be higher, so there was debate about this yesterday, one report said it could be as much as £169,000 per person to have them deported to rwanda. now, of course, the government would make savings on the cost of housing people in the uk, and these are contested figures, but they think it would be about £60,000 per year more to deport someone to rwanda. the government has already spent £140 million on the scheme, and no one has gone across yet. so the figures here are huge, but the government argument is that, in the long term, the cost of the deterrent effect of rwanda will discourage people from coming over, and all of the upfront per person cost is higher to rwanda, they say the long term cost to the
particularly of course if we work with the particularly of course if we work with the rwandan government to make sure that with the rwandan government to make sure that any changes which can sensibly sure that any changes which can sensibly be implemented to address the bills sensibly be implemented to address the bills are taken into effect. even the bills are taken into effect. even with the bills are taken into effect. even with permission from the supreme court ministers were forced to admit the rwanda scheme would cost £169,000 per person to implement. how is that something the government should pursue through the courts, does not seem to make financial sense. courts, does not seem to make financial sense. the cost of illegal mi . ration financial sense. the cost of illegal migration bill financial sense. the cost of illegal migration bill is financial sense. the cost of illegal migration bill is enormous, - financial sense. the cost of illegal migration bill is enor