This stat from the video is correct but out of context, bc a) most refugees in Europe don’t arrive via resettlement programmes but “spontaneously” ie independently of govt measures & b) the number taken by 🇬🇧 is a pinprick next to over 26 million refugees in the world in 2019>
But this is the real problem: the UK’s focus *isn’t* currently on resettlement - the 5600 accepted under that route compares to more than 13k accepted after arriving independently. So why does the Home Office want you to think this? >
What the Home Office is doing is trying to make out that resettlement programmes are the only proper route for refugees & to delegitimise people who seek asylum after arriving spontaneously- which is the majority - in order to justify attacks on their rights
So what seems just like a silly and clunky little propaganda video which wastes your money and mine is actually something deeply sinister.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Of course we don’t yet know whether to take the Home Office’s latest idea any more seriously than wave machines or Ascension Island, but what seems likely it involves performative viciousness against some of the world’s most vulnerable people 1/
Inhuman & degrading treatment is banned by Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which also bans torture, but the controversial aspect (for the Tories) is the way it prevents people being expelled to die or suffer intensely from physical/ mental illness 2/
The principle that it’s inhuman to send seriously ill people to die or suffer great anguish was upheld recently by our Supreme Court, following a decision of the European Court of Human Rights called Paposhvili 3/ supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-201…
Seems reasonable to assume that if @uklabour’s stated reasons for supporting the CHIS (“Spycops”) Bill are as evasive as this piece by @ConorMcGinn (shadow security minister), either they’ve got no proper reasons or don’t want to admit what they are > labourlist.org/2020/10/voting…
Ok, so starting with this, the behaviour of the security services is already subject to the Human Rights Act, as are all actions by public authorities. The CHIS Bill won’t affect that at all. >
Does this mean undercover sources will cease to be in the shadows? If so, they’re not really undercover, are they? Is that really what the CHIS Bill is trying to achieve? What does Conor McGinn even think he means by this?
Remarkable how this crisis has brought out people whose confidence in commenting isn’t obviously matched by any expertise
This guy for e.g has got 100s of likes & RTs for a vast thread mixing sympathetic on-the-ground reporting with obnoxious generalisations & flat-out untruths
It is just not true that most people can claim asylum in the UK from abroad (Afghan British Army interpreters had a v specific programme which didn’t even help all of them). That fact (& the difficulty in solving it) is part of the problem
So here’s what happened to my client (let’s call her S) when the Home Office accused her of lying and put her through four years of hell.
S came to the UK to be with her husband. She isn’t a native English speaker & had to do an English language test, which she passed. 1/
A huge row arose in 2014 when the BBC broadcast allegations of fraud in English language testing centres. It seems likely that fraud was happening, but it’s the Home Office’s panicky response which has been criticised & which forms the background to S’s troubles. 2/
In 2012 S took an English test as part of an application to extend her stay. The people at the test centre tried to persuade her they’d do the test for her & she cd pass it off as her own. She refused & did the test properly. In 2015 after the scandal blew up… 3/
So, Home Office fees. Labour have announced👇that they’ll reduce the fees for applying to the Home Office to the actual cost of processing the application. Just a quick thread to explain why that’s important, even life-changing, for many people, including kids born in the UK. 1/
2/ In the case @DLPubliclaw tweeted about earlier, we represent a family of 5 (parents + 3 children btw 5 & 9 born in UK). They face a bill of £7665 to stay in the UK (£1033 fee + £500 NHS surcharge per person).
1/13 So, a quick(ish) thread on what Labour have announced on asylum and immigration. Short version: there’s some really good and important stuff in the manifesto. But a bit woolly on detail and some unfortunate omissions.
2/13 Labour will scrap the 2014 Act - that’s the one bringing in the worst parts of the Hostile Environment, including checks by landlords or banks. This is course good and important. They make sure to remind us that the LibDems were responsible for it as well as the Tories
3/13 There’s talk abt strengthening borders & criticisms of Tory staffing cuts - will be controversial to many - but IMHO it’s vital to realise how far the Hostile Environment was a way of outsourcing immigration control, to substitute for a properly resourced system