Reply to: Theresa May reduces border security budget

[shaunbhoy]

I like CUK forum to be polite, SB, it's really not acceptable to call him an Obnoxious Prat.

How about Odious Plank or Obfuscating Pillock?

[xoggoth]

So, as usual, the OP gets his facts wrong

I like CUK forum to be polite, SB, it's really not acceptable to call him an Obnoxious Prat.

[shaunbhoy]

Border Force resource budget will be £558.1m for 2016/17 – a cut of 0.4% on last year – but the agency gets a capital spending boost

Passport check
Day-to-day funding for the Border Force will be cut by 0.4% in the coming year, Theresa May has announced.

The agency’s resource budget will be £558.1m for 2016/17, a reduction of 0.4% on last year.

The home secretary said spending was protected “to all intents and purposes” because capital spending on Border Force projects is set to rise by more than 40% to £68m.

So, as usual, the OP gets his facts wrong.

Quelle surprise.

[shaunbhoy]

You are now ignoring the direction I attempted to take the thread in. We will have to just agree that I, in tandem with the OP, am a bit of a cock.

ftfy

[northernladyuk]

Only because you chose to omit it though.

Did the OP clearly state what I quoted or did he not?

No point in you disingenuously cherrypicking subsets of the main thrust of his points now, is there?

Makes you look even more silly than normal

You are now ignoring the thread of our conversation and the topic of the thread. We will have to just agree that you are a stupid cock.

[shaunbhoy]

That wasn't in our conversation chain. See above.

Only because you chose to omit it though.

Did the OP clearly state what I quoted or did he not?

No point in you disingenuously cherrypicking subsets of the main thrust of his points now, is there?

Makes you look even more silly than normal

[northernladyuk]

Well let's see what he wrote shall we?......



QED

That wasn't in our conversation chain. See above.

[shaunbhoy]

So... did the OP make the point that the cuts in police numbers had adversely affected security

Well let's see what he wrote shall we?......

What about this one:

This is the reality of Theresa May's record on terror as Home Secretary | The Independent

"According to latest Home Office figures, the number of police in England and Wales fell by 18,991, or 13 per cent, between September 2010 and September 2016, when it stood at 122,859.

Within that, the number of authorised firearms officers dropped from 6,976 in March 2010 to 5,639 in March 2016"

My point is that she's responsible for cuts in security

QED

[northernladyuk]

Because that is what we want:


Border security budget to fall by £2 million, Theresa May confirms

From the 20/4/2016..........................I know you are a bit slow but do at least try and keep within a calendar year of the rest of us!

So you're saying that this was before the Italian-Moroccan terrorist, who was on the EU watchlist, entered the UK, so it doesn't count?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2...-investigation

No, that is not what I am saying as well you know.

The fact that this incident was resolved in 8 minutes points strongly to the fact that our front-line response capability has not been undermined.

HTH BIDI

The OP made the point that the cuts in Police numbers had adversely affected security.

My point was that, the response time being so impressive suggested that the cuts in Police numbers had not really had any material impact on countering these major incidents.

Following the plot is not really one of your strong suits is it?

So... did the OP make the point that the cuts in police numbers had adversely affected security or that the reduction in the border security budget had adversely affected security? The clue is in the thread title.

Following the plot is not really one of your strong suits is it?

[shaunbhoy]

To repeat: What does the speed of response have to do with the fact that the terrorist got through border security when he was on the EU watchlist?

The OP made the point that the cuts in Police numbers had adversely affected security.

My point was that, the response time being so impressive suggested that the cuts in Police numbers had not really had any material impact on countering these major incidents.

Following the plot is not really one of your strong suits is it?

[northernladyuk]

Well as long as we remain in your beloved EU, the ability of the Border Controllers is pretty limited anyway.

But come the Revolution.............

To repeat: What does the speed of response have to do with the fact that the terrorist got through border security when he was on the EU watchlist?

The UK (and Ireland - to cover off the Common Travel Area) has all the powers it needs to stop EU citizens from entering the country if they are on the watchlist.

[shaunbhoy]

What does the speed of response have to do with the fact that the terrorist got through border security when he was on the EU watchlist? Are you utterly thick or simply obfuscating?

Well as long as we remain in your beloved EU, the ability of the Border Controllers is pretty limited anyway.

But come the Revolution.............

[northernladyuk]

Smoking.

Thatcherism.

[WTFH]

...Although if you are in the US, you are twice as likely to be killed by a toddler who has a gun than a terrorist.

[northernladyuk]

No, that is not what I am saying as well you know.

The fact that this incident was resolved in 8 minutes points strongly to the fact that our front-line response capability has not been undermined.

HTH BIDI

What does the speed of response have to do with the fact that the terrorist got through border security when he was on the EU watchlist? Are you utterly thick or simply obfuscating?