Yet more judicial activism
We might elect politicians promising to tackle asylum abuses. They may even get around to trying to do something about it.
But then today the judiciary steps to say fast-track deportation is illegal.
Even if an elected government were to pass a law to make the fast-track removal of those who have entered our country illegally explicitly legal, I suspect that the judges would still rule that it was illegal.
Which raises the question who actually now makes the law? Those we vote for or the activist judges? And why bother with party manifestos or elections if judges get to decide things on the basis of human rights law?