To the horror of many on her own benches, the Home Secretary certainly piled on the toughest of rhetoric this week, as she promised to grip a migration crisis that's wildly out of control.
A bad-cop routine that doubled down on the shock factor, with an expletive-laden put-down of those who challenged the morality of her proposals.
And as is often the case, it was mainly middle-class white parliamentarians trying to mansplain to a second-generation British Asian about the dangers of being too tough on those abusing our migration and asylum laws.
Personally, I have no doubt that Shabana Mahmood is sincere in her desire to rein in such abuses.
What the well-meaning mansplainers on the liberal left often forget is that many second or third-generation British Asians, like the current Home Secretary, have a particular aversion to those who try to run roughshod over the UK's generous immigration laws.
Their parents and grandparents came to this country legally and have made a valuable contribution to their adopted country.
But these communities suffer more than most when years of migration abuses turn many in this country increasingly hostile towards immigrants as a whole.
And that's why I don't doubt Shabana Mahmood's sincerity when she says asylum should not be seen as a pathway to permanent residency.
The circumstances of asylum seekers should be regularly reviewed, and if it's safe to return them to their home nations, then they should go.
But judging by the early reaction from her own back benches, I'm convinced that at least some of what she's proposing will never live long enough to be tried.
Shabana Mahmood's latest asylum crackdown is no match for Mother Nature
|Getty Images
While Reform and now the Conservatives want a divorce from the troublesome European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Labour is planning to tinker with the treaty.
Ms Mahmood wants alterations to the likes of Article 8, which allows migrants to appeal against their deportation on the grounds that they're entitled to a family life.
But even if Labour get those changes through parliament, we'll still have the same judges, human rights lawyers, refugee charities, and other activist groups who have become so expert in finding loopholes in the law to ensure those earmarked for removal can effectively resist those efforts.
We'll still have human rights laws, and those who provide asylum seekers with wrap-around legal advice won't just go away. They'll continue to challenge those removal decisions.
On the issue of legal migration, still considered to be at unacceptably high levels, the Home Secretary wants to crack down on the growing number of migrants claiming benefits.
Her answer is to make migrants who claim benefits wait far longer for settled status and a pathway to citizenship.
I'm very sceptical that this will lead to a reduction in the roughly 500 new migrants every day who are signing on for benefits.
While migrants still have the ability to work, to benefit from healthcare and education services, will all that many care that they don't have permanent residency or citizenship?
I'm not sure they will, especially those who only ever want to come here to work and send money back to their home countries.
I also think the proposed changes around illegal immigration and asylum laws are likely to be watered down by many within her own party.
My other big reservation when it comes to Ms Mahmood's ambitious proposals is whether the chronically underachieving Home Office can make them work.
The department is being asked to carry out many additional checks and implement more complex processes.
But this is a department which has a tentative grip, at best, on the UK's migrant population.
Many who enter the country, both legally and illegally, often disappear into the illegal economy.
Those caught working here illegally are often released on immigration bail, only to disappear again.
And the complex processes around trying to deport anyone from the UK mean those earmarked for removal can still be here years later.
Is the Home Office, branded "unfit for purpose" by a previous Labour Home Secretary two decades ago, suddenly going to find its mojo? I doubt it.
Before I leave you for another week, worth updating you on movements in the Channel, or more accurately, the lack of movement.
Mother Nature is doing the hard yards again when it comes to keeping the boats at bay.
The last arrivals were on November 14, when 217 migrants made the illegal crossing in three boats.
Our producer in Kent tells us there's a small chance of some arrivals later on Friday.
But the weather window isn't even half a day before the winds pick up again and the waves make the crossing impassable.
We're already at 39,300+ for the year so far. So, even with very unpredictable weather conditions, we'll be well over 40,000 arrivals by the end of the year.
That compares with 38,816 for the whole of 2024.
At the time of writing this, I'm unaware of any more so-called 'hokey cokey' migrants coming back across the Channel from France.
The first of those to return, after having been sent to France, is now back there again.
But just days after that Iranian national was flown back to Paris, the Home Office confirmed another migrant sent to
France under Sir Keir Starmer's returns deal had also caught another small boat back across the Channel.
Almost a fortnight later, that man is still here, while Home Office officials work to remove him for a second time.
More From GB News