Thread by @ZoeJardiniere

Oh gahd the @CommonsHomeAffs Home Affairs Committee is taking evidence from Dan O'Mahoney, "Clandestine Channel Threat Commander"

parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d7…

Yvette Cooper notes top nationalities of people attempting to cross the Channel are Iran, Iraq and Syria. Are they all asylum seekers?

Yes, the vast majority if not all apply for asylum (i.e. do not seek to evade enforcement, are not seeking to live undocumented in the UK)

Abi Tierney, Director General, UK Visas and Immigration, says numbers are manageable, in fact the UK has seen a drop in overall figures of people seeking asylum.

Yvette Cooper (you really do have to give the woman credit for how she handles the Committee) asks if it is correct to say the drop in numbers of people seeking asylum in the UK this last quarter is four (4) times the increase in Channel boat crossings seen in the same period.

(it is.)

There's a lot of security & surveillance firms making a packet from selling equipment for the "joint surveillance operations" with France that he is sucking up about right now. Odd for Britain First are less concerned about that tax money.

Diane Abbott's questions showing up at best bluster and at worst outright lies from Chris Philp in parliament yesterday. Suggests the Channel Commander explain the nature of his role to the Immigration Minister who doesn't seem to have it quite right 😂😂😂

Oh wonderful. Dahena Davison says "there's a perception" (not AT ALL fuelled by her own rubbish & lies) that migrants crossing the Channel are "disingenuous" asylum seekers.
Response is that of the asylum claims so far considered in the UK 2/3rds have been granted.

To clarify how I got there, because the figures are not presented v clearly, head of UKVI said:

-98% of Channel-crossers applied for asylum
-of those 50% of applications have been processed
-of those 70% have been determined to not be for UK to examine under Dublin Regulation

-The remaining 30% which have been examined in the UK have break down to 20% accepted, 10% rejected (in the first instance)

What this, rather confusingly, means is that 2/3rds of applicants whose claim has been examined by uk asylum decision makers have had their refugee status confirmed.

... but that by far most are found not to be our responsibility because of the Dublin Regulation.

More figures, omg -

Currently just over 1,000 people we are seeking to return through Dublin processes, most of these to Germany, France, Spain & Italy.

Countries of origin of these are Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, Kuwait & Syria (i.e. they're mainly refugees).

These are the people who make up that 70% of those who we have abdicated responsibility for.

Pass-the-parceling them back, to and fro around Europe instead of stepping up to take responsibility for a thousand bloody people. My God what a circus.

I've got to hand it to the Channel Commander guy, he is having to explain the reality of the legal situation to some Tories here and he's doing it perfectly fine, explaining why there's no basis for migrants to be arrested in France.

Telling stories of migrants forced onto boats

There are many examples he has seen of migrants who have no idea why they are being forced to the UK or even that it is the UK they are going to, they are simply the victims of smuggling gangs who, for their own purposes ship people to one place or another. Very important point.

This has so often been reflected in my experience of speaking to migrants, too. So many do NOT intend to come to the UK, they don't know where on Earth they're being taken and they are completely at the mercy of smugglers.

Once they're here, though, they legitimately expect to be treated with dignity in a fair system to assess their claim for protection. Instead, all too often we detain them and try to pass the buck back to somewhere else in Europe and make these poor people not be "our problem".

Discussion of what kind of legal challenges can halt Dublin removals -

These tend to be a broad range of Human Rights claims including based on fear of falling into the hands of traffickers in poor conditions in reception systems in other European states.

The Home Office is "investing significantly" in a "robust age assessment system" for unaccompanied children arriving in these ways.

75% of these unaccompanied children who are assessed to be children through this system are then granted asylum in the UK.

Some of these Tories really are foaming at the mouth lol.

One of them calling for a "civilised version" of the Australian system... He's very confused.

But luckily we follow them up with utter babes like Stuart McDonald from the SNP who confirms that most of those crossing the Channel - probably around 2/3rds - are in fact refugees, but we are still spending money on sending them off all over Europe - how much does that cost?

I'll be looking forward to the promised figures on how much it costs to charter flights to remove these refugees to other European countries.

There's also figures to come on how many once removed through Dublin do simply come back again.

Home Office guy says people from Sudan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Iran are more likely to speak English than they are to speak French or German and they also are more likely to find a diaspora community that is established here to welcome them.

That was Tyson Hepple, by the way, Head of Immigration Enforcement.

He is, you'll be astounded to learn, a *complete* prat.

People who are set to be removed through the Dublin procedures are given 5 days notice of their removal, this is why so many legal challenges to removals happen "at the last minute".

Hilarious and excruciating silence greets Cooper's question as to what the legal situation will be for returning migrants at the end of December when we will no longer be covered by the Dublin Regulation. They have no idea what the situation is or will be. What a joke. Honestly.

Cooper forcing Home Office to "clarify" that under their current approach, the vast majority of asylum seekers gaining protection in Europe "should" be in Greece, Italy, Malta & Spain.

Currently 6-7% of asylum seekers in Europe come to the UK.

Quite obviously, these countries which already take in far higher proportions of asylum seekers than we do, "should" not have to take on more of the paltry numbers that currently reach our shores.

We can and simply must step up and do our fair share.

Right. I'm going to go rage-eat something enormous for lunch. Peace.

One last note, though. I really do recommend listening in to the Select Committee evidence sessions more than the House of Commons debates. Many more facts are discussed, less grandstanding, know-nothing MPs, although still some.
Just more informative than yesterday, generally.