Thread by @KatjaHoltz

live tweeting of any kind is definitely annoying but i'm currently reading through the @ukhomeoffice's new plan for immigration and i'm seriously tempted to tweet some of its choicest phraseology.

alright, i'm gonna do it.

you can't stop me.

#NewPlanForImmigration

okay, we're starting with a real corker.

Global Britain, capital-G capital-B. this is used conspicuously in contrast to the EU, which is interesting. has profoundly colonialist overtones. overall, very negative vibes. 2/10

i don't wanna say i did a spit take at the next one...

'this Government will address that challenge for the first time in over two decades'.

waiting for someone to remind this Government that they've been in power for over half that time. loses points for short memory. 4/10

next up, we've got this howler: 'it is also counter to our moral interest'.

i just have one question, we have a moral interest??!?!!

confusing and obtuse conflation of legal and moral (there's more where that came from). not a fan. 1/10

this one has been debunked and dealt with by those better qualified than i but warrants a mention: 'if you illegally enter the UK via a safe country... you are not seeking refuge from imminent peril.'

this is just crap. utter dung. put the whole pdf in the trash. -17/10

for the purposes of flexing my msc muscles:

'the presence of economic migrants-which these illegal routes introduce into the asylum system-inhibits our ability to properly support others in genuine need...'

this dichotomy is false & does more harm than good. boo. 2/10

oh this one's good.

'the British people are fair and generous.'

i just... what can i say? thank you, for your generosity? this has the same aura as describing the UK as 'tolerant'. like, okay, you're missing the point. 3/10

this one needs some unpacking. alright, here we go:

'...deter illegal entry into the UK, thereby breaking the business model of people smuggling...'

criminalising human movement *increases* the use of smugglers.

actually, that's it. that's all there is to say. 1/10

there's a lot of 'illegally entering the UK' going on, which, you know, is confusing. need more detail on that cause its pretty commonly known that you have to be in the uk to claim asylum here which means... you can't, strictly speaking, enter illegally. right? 4/10

alright, here we go, 'for the first time, whether you enter the uk legally or illegally will have an impact on how your asylum claim progresses.'

this seems illegal... i'm pretty sure you can't penalise asylees for how they enter a country of asylum. shady af. -23107/10

oh fun! the next part involves a lot of coloured charts.

they've got stats on 'illegal attempts' and 'illegal arrivals'; a lot of emphasis on boat people as expected; many bad and confusing graphics of trucks and planes; inflammatory language, 'unnecessary' & 'dangerous'. 3/10

some charts on how inefficient and incompetent the home office is. e.g. growing caseload and cost to the taxpayer. apparently, '73% of these claims have been in the asylum system for over one year.'

seems like a you problem, priti. would advise spending less on your brows. 5/10

this one really makes me gag tbh.

'failed asylum seekers'.

so, these are people who made their way here and faced the uk's violence for causes not deemed worthy of asylum, rendering them deportable by the home office. thanks, i hate it. 1/10

shall we talk about how 'the UK and this Government has a proud record of helping those facing persecution'?

will they get upset if i mention how we turned away jews during the holocaust? children (and adults) from conflict-zones we created these past few decades? no? yes? 0/10

oh, this is great, love this one: 'while we cannot help all the estimated 80 million people displaced worldwide...'

completely irrelevant since no one's asking you to. we're literally asking for the bare minimum but okay. points for strategic hyperbole. 4/10

there is a general and exaggerated emphasis on 'resettlement' in this plan.

ofc this is more palatable to the ho and bigot brigade cause you have to have done your paperwork to be resettled in the uk.

this, i would infer, is what they mean by 'legal' routes. shady bs. 2/10

so far (pg. 15) the plan has extended the home secretary extra discretionary powers 3 times, e.g.: 'give the Home Secretary an ability'/'offer discretionary assistance'/'means to help'.

seems dangerous to give an unelected person the powers listed in this plan. bad priti. 3/10

ookay we've reached the part of the plan where priti subtweets ms begum. apparently people have been abusing 'statelessness provisions', which grant a child uk citizenship if they were born here, have lived here, and have no other nationality.

*jim spiking the lens gif*

0/10

here comes the juicy stuff.

'disrupting criminal networks' - by which they mean smugglers and their lowlife, economic migrant cargo.

and how, ms patel, shall we go about this?

criminalise asylees and those who help them ofc. i cannot roll my eyes any harder. 4/10

this is some interesting sleight of hand:

'rapid removal of inadmissible cases' instead of 'deportation'

i guess deportation failed the vibe check or whatever. still seems pretty gross and inhumane to me. its a no from me. 2/10

i was waiting for the manus island/us border cages part of the plan and guys, we're calling them 'reception centres'.

ok ok so hear me out... imprisoning asylees is bad. i know, i know that sounds crazy but just think about it.

its a downvote from me. 1/10

ok, coming up next we have what we in the biz call, externalisation.

'make it possible for asylum claims to be processed outside the uk.'

make so-called 'failed asylum seekers' someone else's problem! a flawless plan! not at all likely to lead to more smuggling! oh wait. -3/10

more on externalisation:

'move asylum seekers from the UK while their asylum claim, or appeal is pending.' setting the stage for 'offshore asylum processing'.

we're talking about detaining people seeking asylum. like, call it what you will but its utterly deplorable. -100/10

guys, i don't know about you but, i'm tired. i think that's gonna be all for today. i'll be back tomorrow. probably.

i'm on page 21, consider this my bookmark.

peace.

alright, and we're back! with a bang!

classic flowchart opener: 'is the person inadmissible to the UK asylum system?'

so you have to tie yourself up in double negative knots to say someone deserves asylum. very impressive rhetorical work there, priti. good job. 4/10

brace yourselves folks.

'strengthening well-founded fear of persecution test'

like *today* the uk govt announced there's no institutionalised racism in this country?! but we're gonna trust these guys to judge someones fear of persecution. terrible plan. abysmal. 1.3/10

now we've got some stuff on age testing.

they pretend their concerns are about safeguarding kids and giving resources to the 'real' victims but theres no attempt to make it easier to claim asylum as an adult, disincentivising claiming as a child.

whats that about? hmmmm... 2/10

ok ok ok

'legislate so that front-line immigration officers... are able to make reasonable initial assessments of age.'

are we gonna pretend this wont kill brown kids in particular? that we don't *know* people tend to age up pocs and black children??? no? ok, gr8. -2/10

so... i don't know anything about this but 'Good Faith' seems likely to be utterly riddled, right? like there's no way that's a legit standard of behaviour that should impact someones asylum claim...

anyone know the history of so-called Good Faith?

i don't know enough so 5/10

full disclosure, a bunch of the stuff in here i object to mostly because i object to the people in the ho *gasp*

e.g. 'pre-approved experts' for court proceedings seems like a perfectly fine idea until you remember who's doing the pre-approving.

i just have no trust. 3/10

so, during my msc we liked to refer to the 'root causes' of human mobility. wanna know what the ho calls it?

'upstream causes of illegal immigration.'

upstream? as in, somewhere else? illegal immigration? cause legality is good indicator of motivation?

thumbs down. 4/10

france. let's talk about it.

priti likes referring to 'countries with well-functioning asylum systems like france.'

i don't think it's controversial to say the french asylum system leaves a lot to be desired. i recall headlines about inhumane and degrading conditions. 1/10

not to be an abolitionist on main but expanding 'border force powers', increasing the maximum sentence for smuggling, and introducing civil penalties for illegal entry are bad ideas.

criminalisation does not reduce crime.

criminalisation does not reduce crime.

boo. -47/10

to leave you on a high, the plan ends w/ sections on 'removal of failed asylum seekers', 'immigration bail', & 'early removal scheme'. enjoy a fun medley of: these leeches are wasting our resources while being criminal & failing to cooperate w/ us. kick 'em to the curb.

0/10

fin.

~

was i losing hope that was ever gonna end? yes.
am i glad that it's over? yes.
what do i do now? complete the govts consultation on this trash fire ofc

i recommend you do too (even if only based on this thread!!)
newplanforimmigration.com/en/

@threadreaderapp unroll