We have government of the lawyers by the lawyers for the lawyers . Could they please get better at the law? Could they get onto the side of the British people instead of so often siding with questionable interpretations of foreign treaties and courts?
Why did our government lawyers not point out that the International Court of Justice who advised we should give the Chagos away has no power to judge a UK case involving a Commonwealth member?
Why did they not remind us the US accepts no judgements of the International Court of Justice?
Why did they not point out under our Treaty opting into the Court we have the right to unilaterally amend the terms of membership?
When advising on the human rights of illegal migrants, why do they not point out that France under the same human rights laws comes to a very different view over what they have to offer them?
Why don’t our government lawyers find a way to strengthen or enforce the law against illegal boat trips, money laundering , people trafficking and dangerous voyages to stop the small boats.?
Why don’t they want to enforce and strengthen environmental and fishing law against plundering 100 metre plus industrial trawlers in our waters?
Most of us want to live under the rule of law, but we want one that’s fair to taxpayers and voters legally settled in our country. The government lawyers are out of touch with the public mood.
June 17, 2025
On several occasions over the years, when discussing medical options with Doctors, I have been reminded that only I can decide whether to accept a particular treatment and that I must endeavour to get myself informed about it before deciding. However, in recent years we have seen the concept of mandated treatments with the possible sanction of job loss or similar should an individual exercise their legal right to refuse. The silence of the lawyers on this issue is shameful, yet the propaganda regarding dubious medical interventions still appears across the media.
June 17, 2025
All silent on the human rights front, during the time you reference.
June 17, 2025
‘ The government lawyers are out of touch with the public mood.’
It is more an issue of lawyers enjoying their power to overrule parliament.
Also factor in partisan interpretations of law. We now have ‘lawfare’ like the USA.
June 17, 2025
No lawyer has ever overruled Parliament. It is not possible.
June 17, 2025
G,
Just one example –
A remarkable moment in British history. A unanimous judgment by the Supreme Court, handed down by Lady Hale while wearing a flesh-eating camel spider brooch, declaring that the prorogation of Parliament was unlawful. In her words: “Parliament has not been prorogued.”
June 18, 2025
100% correct. Peter, Lady Hale ruled that the government had acted illegally. Parliament, by definition, cannot act illegally as a matter of UK law
June 18, 2025
Except the supreme Court under Lady Spider. Well, not exactly over-ruled but ruled where it had no jurisdiction: in Parliament.
June 18, 2025
It certainly has been possible. That was the whole point of the primacy of EU law. National Parliaments in the EU have to accept ECJ case law whether they like it or not and all regulations and directives issued by the unelected officials of the EU commission, many of whom were lawyers themselves and all such issuances were approved by lawyers. That was the main reason Brits voted for Brexit, to re-assert the primacy of laws made in a parliament accountable only to them.
June 18, 2025
Former lawyers (some now judges) have overuled Parliament on numerous occasions
eg
Supreme Court
High Court/ Appeals Court
Immigration Tibunals
Industrial Tribunals
International Court of Justice
European Court of Human Rights
Lawfare is growing and there is a battle developing between Parliament and lawyers both nationally and internationally.
June 17, 2025
When you accept that 2TK and his buddy Hermer hate Britain and the British people, you will understand their mindset.
Everything foreign is good and everything about us is bad. 2TK doesn’t care about outr fishermen or farmers, h is more interested in what Von lies alot thinks and the rest of the EU leaders.
We have now needlessly given Spain a toe hold on Gibraltar, this has only one direction if travel. Watch the Falklands next on his trashing list.
This government is a disgrace much like thevone before.
June 17, 2025
It almost feels like a state of occupation, with a vichy government answerable to another union
June 17, 2025
more than ‘feels like’ glen, you might reach my state which is knowledge that we ‘are in’ a state of malacious occupation.
June 18, 2025
Foreign is good only if it, too, hates Britain and the British. Truymp, for example is doubly bad because he directly and openly but rightly criticises Starmer’s Gang.
June 17, 2025
Worse than that if you do go for second medical opinion you’re likely to be fobbed off – word within the fraternity is nobody wants to stick their necks out. A few years ago I had a fall and ended up in A&E but when I got out after a few days I discovered the hospiral medics had overlooked a more serious injury and went to my GP who didn’t want to know,q wouldn’t even put hands on, and advised me to return to hospital.
June 17, 2025
This is criminal negligence.
Accountants and surveyors similarly don’t accept responsibility for their audits or surveys, of houses for instance. If it falls down the day after they say it’s fine, not their fault apparently.
Professionals need to understand that they earn so much for taking responsibility. If they deny responsibility then their earnings must reflect that fact.
June 17, 2025
a short step up from witchdoctors!
June 17, 2025
Good morning.
If you really want to show the level of unfairness in law, you can look much closer to home where, a mother made an in appropriate tweet, which she soon deleted, and was imprisoned for it. Whereas, around the same time, various individuals were deliberately and with ill intent, inciting violence. Yet those some persons are still at liberty.
I care less about the ownership of a bunch of islands in the middle of nowhere that I am NOT allowed to visit, than I do about people who were expressing views because of some ‘Welsh Choirboy’ (copyright UK Government) chopping up defenceless little girls at a dance class.
Etc ed
June 17, 2025
Pity we can’t read the ‘etc’
June 17, 2025
Replace the lawyers with sensible constituency candidates for better MPs and proper governance of ourselves.
June 17, 2025
Well, the title is incorrect, should be: Government of the PEOPLE by the Lawyers for the Lawyers.
If it were only the lawyers being governed we be better off!
2TK uses the law for the benefit of himself and his party. He is not far short of despotic behaviour, and it seems there are only the honest lawyers who can contain him – for now.
June 17, 2025
+1 Peter. if it was just the lawyers they were governing we would all be happy to let them destroy themselves. Sadly we, the people, are the victims of their malign actions/intentions.
June 17, 2025
Indeed Government of the lawyers, by the lawyers for the lawyers, of the blob, by the blob for the blob, also for vested interests like the renewables racket. Nearly always against the bill payers, voters and those actually productive.
This on top of net zero and endless market rigging – energy, schools, healthcare, housing, transport, banking… is a recipe for disaster. On housing see the recent “Spectator Out Loud” podcast on gaming the social housing system!
June 17, 2025
Throw more money at it, or bring in another law, does appear to be the government’s default position.
June 17, 2025
Indeed do not bother enforcing existing laws but spend a years bringing in some more new ones to pretend you are doing something.
So Sir Enoch Starmer has joined another “far right bandwagon” perhaps following what Lucy Powell called a dog whistle! Cooper Balls talks of failures of “institutions” actually there must surely have been many thousands of “individuals” who failed and should at least be being investigated for “malfeasance in public office”. These individuals in the police, the LEA, counsellors, the education service and schools, social services, some people serving under the Director of Public Prosecutions including the Kier Starmer period etc.
June 17, 2025
Nobody ever thinks about enforcement. Not even the Courts. You can get a favourable judgement but enforcement is a whole different matter.
June 17, 2025
quite we have plenty of appropriate laws but they are either ignored or not enforced.
June 17, 2025
The Police have books of them, but few used and then only when ‘higher authority’ provide the go ahead.
June 17, 2025
Lawyers don’t make money on enforcement
June 17, 2025
+1
June 17, 2025
The law and parliamentary lawyers are an ass. We suffer an excess of both. A major challenge of an incoming Reform government will be the removal of residual EU law and detatchment from its arms of application. It is also time for a written constitution as neither the legal profession nor the police can be trusted to apply what we historically supposedly have for the benefit of society. If you cannot see this, look no further than that which, the law in its widest sense, no longer takes interest in. Shoplifting, mugging, burglary, drugs, rape of children and illegal immigration are all shunned as the so called legal profession reaches for low hanging fruit. Through all of which, respect for the law is lost. Emphasised by a PM who roams the world with a shopping bag for that which is never put before Parliament. Dissent is everywhere and society is broken. All down to inadequate politiical lawyers.
June 17, 2025
++++ A very good summary.
June 17, 2025
Only those with nothing (who can claim legal aid) or the very wealthy (who don’t need legal aid) can afford the Law. I cannot use the Law because I cannot afford to lose my case. I learned this many years ago when an insurance company paid into Court less than half (of the lowest builders quote) what I needed to repair my newly purchased house. Being young, fit (and poor) I spent two years doing the work myself at weekends…
June 17, 2025
An expensive lesson about insurance and value for money – an oxymoron?
June 18, 2025
The claim was against my Surveyors professional Indemnity insurance after he failed to note a major structural issue. The Insurance company messed us around for nearly three yers before I lost patience and told my Solicitors to go to Court. They paid in less than half the claim two days later. They could afford to take this gamble but I couldn’t.
June 17, 2025
So who has done most damage to the UK? Lefty lawyers, lefty economists, lefty politicians (like Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, May, Boris, Sunak…), PPE graduates, the Net Zero loons… remoaners…?
June 17, 2025
All of the above
June 17, 2025
So you support scrapping our 800 year old constitution – every inch fought for, and getting who? To write a new one?
What an opportunity for them to write into it that we are subject to international institutions including the EU, and laws and MUSt allow freedom of all religions, even if one religion demands the death of all others.
That’s what the Liberal Democrat’s have been lobbying for for years.
Properly bound and gagged we would just have to opt for suicide.
Brilliant!
June 18, 2025
Is that the constitution whicb is a mess of laws, conventions, and practices that govern the UK, one that requires lawyers to make or tail of it? How very convenient
… for lawyers.
June 18, 2025
No actually. Any sentient person understand the Constitutional Statutes.
June 17, 2025
Good words
June 17, 2025
We were inculcated into having too much uncritical respect for “the law” and its professional interpreters.
We thought of it lightly stepping in, and by consent benevolently keeping society on an even path. It worked for us. We find it has now got legs of its own, and is an unpredictable thug that attacks us and causes mayhem.
Most of us want to live under the rule of Law, but not under the rule of lawyers.
June 17, 2025
@Wanderer +1
Our Legislators have created a rotten system, where they now have the respect they show everyone else – it is in their image and the Minions pay
June 17, 2025
The Government is working for the Globalists. They only pay attention to lawyers who support the Globalist Agenda …. rather like they only pay attention to the $cientists who support Globalist aims.
We have to start with a Government which supports the interests of the BRITISH people and will reverse as muc of Blair’s Constitutional destruction as possible (as recommended by Dr David Starkey).
We won’t find one of them in the Westminster Uni-Party.
June 17, 2025
@Donna +1
Exactly they fight the People daily to impose the will of the unaccountable in far away lands that never have to pay the bills
June 17, 2025
They don’t even acknowledge that there is a ‘British’ people.
Farage said ‘anyone can become British’, which means that nobody is British.
June 17, 2025
I agree with him in principle Lynn but of course it is much more than just having the passport. You need to speak our language, obey our laws and be willing to join our (larger) community and culture.
June 17, 2025
By 2050, 100% of the British population will still be British. Well done Farage.
June 17, 2025
He’s not wrong ….. all those illegal immigrants will soon be british nationals (that will get the numbers down)
June 18, 2025
Problem is that ‘they will not view ‘us’ as British. We will not be Mozlem, we will be chattles – the Supreme Leader of Iran has said all virgin chattles must be raped before being killed so that they don’t go ‘to heaven’.
Seems most of the new Britains did not need to be told. And some of the ‘old Britains’ agreed that at raped 10 year old ‘was a prostitute’ rather than a victim.
June 17, 2025
I suppose it comes down to the fact that the lawyer class in government, and their advisers of the law, are all sipping from the same cup.
It seems crystal clear to me that those in charge do not recognise Britain as a distinct nation, they certainly do not recognise the rights of the people to remain so. They haven’t for a long time, which is why we are where we are.
Governing this country seems to be just a launch pad for those with eyes to making a name for themselves on the world stage. They have the Union Jack waving behind them it’s true, but it’s just an empty symbol to them and would, I’m sure, prefer a more global banner.
It would be apt, as they are working for everyone else it seems, other than those who they are duty bound to put first.
June 17, 2025
I sympathise with the points you make Sir John but need I remind you, lawyers have no interest in the public mood. That is not part of their decision making remit. The lawyers or more precisely the judges only see life through the lens/laws they are given to work with. Their interpretation of those laws is a problem. Laws often twisted and tortured by lawyers beyond any semblance of what was originally intended when the law was enacted by Parliament.
Worse than that, many of the laws that now form the core of the boundaries of society are international, not national. The laws we are forced to follow are constructed by foreign agencies unelected by us and unelected by anyone. That brings it back to your point.
Suppression of the people, by the unelected for the untouchable.
June 17, 2025
@Rod Evans – there was a time, or maybe just an aspiration that Laws were created, amended and repealed by the People through their democratically elected representatives. If a law was out of kilter, not working as intended is was changed by the will of the people.
These alternative laws have isolated themselves from humanity and responsibility to those they are imposed on, they are just a commercial feeding trough of a few that chase the money – a Globalist Cabal of getting rich by fighting the People.
Our Parliament, our Legislators are all feeding from the same swamp by bowing to things that have no legitimacy, its just another religious cult seeking to profit by oppression of others
June 17, 2025
‘The government’ long ago sold out to billionaire globalist interests so that senior politicians could get rich quick. So obviously ‘government’ lawyers do what the billionaires want.
June 17, 2025
Anyone who has ever had to deal with Solicitors, Lawyers, or QC’s will know that you rarely ever get a straight answer to a question, you will never get a fixed timescale, you will never get a fixed cost, mistakes made on letters written are commonplace, corrections of mistakes are more often than not charged for, and their rates are sky high.
From experience anything to do with the law is best avoided if you can, as the only interest they serve is themselves first. If you do have to use them, then always be prepared to challenge their costs, amazing how the bill comes down when you point out their failures.
June 17, 2025
I challenged the costs of a QC and took it to court, I had got a ‘quote’ before appointing him.
He made errors in his Opinion 3 times which I pointed out and he amended. He charged me for 4 Opinions.
The Judge at the Costs Hearing actually said ‘money is not the issue here, you have plenty of money (assuming I was married to a different Mr R Atkinson) and made me pay.
I thought of appealing, and was going to get a transcript, but discovered at that point that Judges have the right to amend transcripts!
June 17, 2025
Lynn
Like you I have also challenged Solicitors over their costs for taking a sub contractor to Court, originally quoted £2,300 to trail, ended up with a Bill for £11,000 after being charged for rectification of multiple mistakes, which they said I would need to pay if I wanted my QC in Court.
Paid it then challenged it with the Law Society after I won the case, and got the figure reduced to the original quoted price with a refund.
Another family member challenged a Solicitors executors bill for £18,000 with evidence of mistakes and inefficiency, and got an £8,000 reduction.
In my experience, avoid dealing with the legal system like the plague.
June 17, 2025
the best advice I ever got from a solicitor concerning should I sue, was ‘is he a man of straw’ – in other words could you expect to win and get damages (or not).
June 18, 2025
oh…and I won but his insurance paid the bill. Call that justice?
June 17, 2025
Sir John
Well said..
How about Government for the People by the People
How about the Human Rights of the Majority
How about treating everyone as equal
How about removing 2 Tier Justice and 2 Tier Laws
The again if we had a Legislator a Parliament with its 650 MPs & approx 800 appointed unaccountable Lords working ‘with’ not fighting against the People who empower and pay them, that would be a good starting place.
June 17, 2025
Democracy is maybe a flawed system of Governance but it is much, much safer than this terrorist bunch of ideologues that are ruling by decree.
June 17, 2025
Bad as government by elected lawyers (accountable at the next election) for lawyers is, even worse is what lawyers do when not elected and not accountable. They have formulated a doctrine of ‘the rule of law’ which has become ‘the rule of lawyers’ to nowadays impose upon a supposed democracy their predominantly left wing ideology whether most people like it or not.
The imposition of ‘the rule of lawyers’ needs to be challenged. A way of doing this so as to curb ‘an elected dictatorship’ and to firm up democratic rights is to create a ‘right to a Referendum’ at the demand of sufficient parliamentarians or by sufficient people via Petition (similar to what happens in Switzerland).
June 17, 2025
The Rule of Law refers to the laws enacted by our elected representatives, which all bodies must abide by – even the legal system. It is fundamental to our constitution.
Laws must be carefully drafted so that they can’t be subject to malign interpretation.
So a law which states ‘grievous bodily harm is a criminal offence’ is nearly impossible to corrupt. If you add ‘on Tuesdays by men against LGBTQ’ then the lawyers have loads of scope to argue for days.
Was it Tuesday? What was the time? Was that clock right? Is this a man? Is that LGTBQ or is it XYZ?
Politicians can’t micromanage. They need simple laws which we all understand and which are quickly and easily prosecuted.
June 17, 2025
grievous …..whose definition?
June 18, 2025
Lynn
Agree, theft is theft however you try to dress it up and complicate matters.
June 17, 2025
Successive governments have presided over the infiltration of the legal proffession by traitors.
Why? Because both Whitehall and Downing Street itself is infiltrated by traitors (whatever the shade of government).
Sooner or later MPs who are loyal to the country (I am sure that’s most of them) will cross the floor of the House in order to isolate the traitors.
June 17, 2025
Certainly, the government lawyers do not interpret the law in our favour — So who are their clients, who are they really working for? It is not us!
Why so often do we equate lawyers with socialism and why do lawyers so often make the law work in their favour rather than in honest justice?
Even the complexity and loopholes of law favour the lawyer — if it were not so complex we wouldn’t need all of these so-called ‘professionals’.
The answer is to have laws and treaties that are simple to read without any double-speak, that don’t require argument by an expensive class. It’s time we lived up to that famous motto; K I S S — Keep it simple stupid.
June 17, 2025
I’m beginning to wonder more and more who they are working for. There seems to be an underlying influence somewhere that is ruling our government, especially when it comes to illegal migration, they are encouraging it. Who in their right mind wouldn’t want to come here from a third world country? It would appear that they and us are being controlled.
June 17, 2025
essentially civil wars created barbarism, peaceful people started to try to escape….Merkel invited everybody, no consultation…..The EU to share the load and have millions tramp across what were borders. The best and well known soft touch being UK so many head here, legally or illegally.
June 17, 2025
@Chickpea +1
June 17, 2025
Why don’t they put a stop to slavery and punish and deport the slave owners?
We are told that slavery in the days before we abolished it, was bad. How bad is it to allow slavery to flourish in the 21st Century in the U.K.?
June 17, 2025
Spot on SJR and it explains many crazy, stupid decisions by Starmer & Co.
“Chambers thinking” , the right thing to do etc.
They are risk averse individuals who cover their bottoms and stick to the status quo and gravitate to the polar opposite of commercial lifeblood of the country which is the Private Sector, golden geese of economic growth.
One side of our brains is creative and understands risk and reward to grow.
The other side of our brains values rules and regulations and plays safe.
Balanced thinking is swayed by emotions aka the heart.
Unfortunately the lawyers and bureaucrats have become so powerful and full of themselves they fail to understand basic common sense from nonsense.
Ordinary people are now getting to realise this but not the government.
June 17, 2025
Private Sector is the real Golden Goose (that Labour think it’s a Cash Cow!).
June 17, 2025
You need a Lawyer or Doctor occasionally, you need a Farmer three times a day!
The point is, Lawyers have become part of our daily lives, because successive governments have allowed it. They need to be reined in.
However, this government, led by Starmer and Harmer, is a lawyer’s paradise to the detriment of the people of the UK.
June 18, 2025
Starmer thinks we need EU farmers, not ours.
June 17, 2025
“The government lawyers are out of touch with the public mood.”
HR legislation was specifically designed and introduced to subvert democracy and give minorities, the Civil Service, quangos and institutions power over the majority. A perfect illustration of how the “mood” (will) of the majority is subverted and our democracy is upended is the invasion of unidentifiable young men of fighting age and alien cultures who instead of being locked up and deported are given free 4 star hotel accomodation (and now a house with squatters’ rights), free healthcare, free entertainment, £40/week pocket money and the freedom to roam our streets, including around schools and to take black market jobs. An incoming administration that wishes to restore democracy will not only need to cancel HR legislation but also introduce ways in which the population can demand referendums to overcome the anti-democratic activists in the judiciary and elsewhere.
June 17, 2025
100% correct.
June 17, 2025
Interestingly, there’s an article in Daily Sceptics today, by a legal academic, Nick McBride about the Rule of Law.
He refers to how during the COVID lockdowns the rule of law became very muddled by govt, to the point where it was uncertain what was law and what was guidance.
McBride references Lord Bingham’s lecture in 2006 – The Rule of Law. Lord Bingham stated, “the law must be accessible, clear and predictable.” and “the laws of the land should apply equally to all……”
Our rule of law ideal has been somewhat hijacked by bad actors and abused.
June 17, 2025
I give you for illustration – public meeting banned at COVID. Two females decided to travel separately to a park, to walk and chat ….Police decided this was breaking ‘the law’.
Breathtaking ? – or foolhardy criminal?
June 17, 2025
All good points.
But we have only had a Labour government for a few months.
Why did we get in this state under 14 years of Tory rule?
June 17, 2025
Why don’t they follow the law of the sea and return any recued people to ‘any’ safe habour (ie France ….not your home port)
June 17, 2025
gc :
Surely from whence they came, especially if only a few miles (or even yards) away?
June 17, 2025
Yes …..its not like we don’t know where they’re from …FRANCE
June 17, 2025
Why doesn’t the government do this, why doesn’t the government do that?
I’m afraid there’s always a simple answer – because the ‘government’ doesn’t run the country. Who does? It’s in the title of your piece, Sir John.
June 17, 2025
Why is it that in virtually ALL institutions the second rate and least capable rise to the top.
This government and our democracy (what’s left of it) is a shinning example of that theory!
June 17, 2025
More nonsense from the Media(Telegraph), although with hindsight and his recent record of double speak very close to the truth…
“PM could meet Nato’s target of investing 5pc of GDP without committing more public money.
Broadband and Heathrow’s third runway are to be counted as defence spending under Sir Keir Starmer’s plans to redraw the definition of national security.”
“The Government’s national security review, due to be published before a Nato summit next week, will expand the definition to include economic stability, food prices, supply chains, crime and the internet.”
“It could allow the UK to hit Nato’s new defence spending target of five per cent of GDP without committing any further public money.”
I am pleased to see as they (the Media) state it will be the PM, 2TK, actually doing the funding – presumably not the ‘taxpayer’ then. The other bit was announced by his master in the EU a week or so ago is that all infrastructure spending should be seen as defence spending. So obeying rules from Foreign Powers and ignoring the needs of the UK.
There is a need to spend on our safety and security and what does this WEF Crowd want? A fudge leaving us all at risk
June 17, 2025
more…
How Starmer could reach Nato targets
Broadband Project Gigabit – £5 billion
Local policing – £17.4 billion
Heathrow third runway – £42 billion
Bridge strengthening and Lower Thames Crossing – £1 billion
Upgrading blast furnaces in Port Talbot – £500 million
Offshore wind grants – £300 million
Cyber security training grants – £1.8 million
HS2 – £80 billion
Armed forces and equipment next to nothing
June 17, 2025
Why? Because they are absolutely hopeless and utterly incompetent.
And we have to endure their gross ineptitude for another four years, while they continue to give away OUR country to foreigners.WHY?
June 17, 2025
In a truly democratic country, one should be able to rid ourselves of this ship of fools, why can’t we? After this debacle, when (if) common sense returns, the law needs to be updated enabling an unpopular government to be removed through a democratic process. I live in hope.
June 17, 2025
“Why did our government lawyers not point out that the International Court of Justice who advised we should give the Chagos away has no power to judge a UK case involving a Commonwealth member?”
So why is this not being thrown out by our judiciary? Or, if not under this administration, then it certainly makes the case for tearing up any agreement as being unlawful when we have a change of administration.
June 17, 2025
Because Starmer and Harmer are following international law and have instructed civil servants to follow it. They don’t care what is inthe interest of the UK if it means disagreement with the UN.
June 17, 2025
In a similar vein of the hypocrisy that surrounds us, there is an interesting and similar take from Daniel Johnson in the Telegraph
“Some of the postwar bureaucracies (such as the EU) fell prey to institutional overreach, leading to a malaise of which Brexit is only the most obvious example. A new elite of international lawyers and judges, empowered by international courts such as the ECHR, unleashed “lawfare” in the name of “human rights” against the very nation states that had created these rights.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/17/calgary-witnessed-total-demise-of-european-power-canada/
The comments section is equally on message with reality
June 17, 2025
Why does our Civil Service want us to become a failed third world country?
Massive debts with high taxation driving business away
Massive third world immigration
Net Zero sabotaging our energy and economy driving industry away
Lawyers using HR laws to subvert the majority democratic will.
June 18, 2025
Is it that they hide behind laws as an excuse to avoid making bold decisions?
June 23, 2025
“Why don’t our government lawyers find a way to strengthen or enforce the law against illegal boat trips, money laundering , people trafficking and dangerous voyages to stop the small boats.?” An excellent question Sir, could the answer be, ‘because they are making big money out of it’?