Peter Hutchinson

He wouldn't believe them. Quite clearly his "brain" disregards anything that doesn't fit his "thinking". He doesn't read or understand much and believes everything he dislikes is a lie

Accompanied only by his butler, Farage

I would prefer a referendum to deport Trump to Heard Island

Yep, speaking as a Geordie from an ex-mining family.....WTF?

I agree about the need and value of immigration. Just spent years getting old waiting for an answer to "What would your immigration policy be, and how would you make it work?"

Glad to hear from an insider who knows the motivation of the government so well....

Oddly, I do understand the history. I wouldn't comment otherwise

Not sure which bit of "I disagree with elements of the policy" confuses you

Those suggesting a Safe Routes solution would resolve the problems are so far as they are clear, suggesting people applying elsewhere. So other countries house people who want to apply here, until we make a decision? Or do people fly here, then we house them till asylum granted & deport "failures"?

The question about extrapolation? The one I answered an hour ago? Ok, having nice chats with people in Cambridge academic drawing rooms in the sixties, who became assimilated & played an important role in society cannot be extrapolated to form a policy for hundreds of thousands fleeing war zones

That certainly doesn't surprise me

Probably not

Are you planning to publish your monologue "Projection, and what it means to me"?

Careful, you won't get invited to coffee with the academics....

How hard is it to understand that extrapolating from a few people Paul met in acadaemia in Cambridge in the 60s to tens of thousands of asylum seekers in 2025 may not be rational ?

Mate?

I didn't dismiss your experiences, which are similar to mine. I said they are not necessarily a good basis for solving a huge global problem

Not sure where I have advocated hatred, unless suggesting there are no easy answers is the new definition of hatred

I'm not the one saying that meeting people in academic Cambridge is the same as dealing with tens of thousands of refugees. Sorry for punching upwards and hurting your feelings

In the real world people can disagree with parts of policies without saying "It's easy just meet people over coffee, they'll soon assimilate, no need to worry". I have said repeatedly that I'm unhappy with some of the government approach, but I don't say there are easy solutions, unlike some on here

Someone accused me a few sneers ago of "projection". It must be catching.

I agree that once asylum is granted people should be able to stay. How should people get here to claim asylum without a visa?

Many, is that 6, or 2 dozen or 50,000? I like extrapolation, but that seems a little.....heady

I'm not sure whether that's irrelevant or just illogical

1) I'm not a Blue Labour supporter
2) I worked in industry in the UK and around the world for 50 years
3) No, you probably couldn't argue with me

No, but explain how the safe routes system works when there are millions of people leaving unsafe countries. Where do they apply for a visa? What happens if they fail? Do you expect Turkey to house them? Sorry, I have no answers, but I don't pretend to.

If that means I get a little tired of people saying there's an easy answer, then yes.

Absolutely fine, but perhaps less aggression attacking the government for not using your experiences as a foundation for solving a vastly different & more complex problem. I had similar experiences, but didn't extrapolate from them to "The Home Secretary is missing the obvious"

I find this a disappointingly patronising approach. Interesting ("educated") friends settling in academic Cambridge somewhat different to literally millions of poor people driven from their homes by war or famine. Equally deserving but a different scale & requiring a different solution

"Daddy, what are you leaving us in your will?"
"47 years of looming mortgage payments"
"Fantastic, thank you"