So here it is. Not a lot to be shocked by in the Nationality and Borders Bill which hasn't already been reported on, but now we have it there are some elements which definitely need addressing. 1/
First and foremost there is a very clear differentiation between refugees, ostensibly based on primarily their manner of entry. Despite the refugee convention prohibiting penalties for manner of entry it seems like they are being imposed across the board. 2/
There's also quite a bit which is seemingly unworkable. Without agreements in place with other countries, which it doesn't currently have, the UK can't remove someone to that country. So this seems liable to just leave asylum seekers stuck in detention and living in limbo. 3/
So far there's nothing new which we hadn't already been told countless times before in the press, but this section raises some very serious issues with once again violating international law, notably by potentially conducting what are commonly referred to as "pushback's". 4/
The UN has already condemned other states for conducting pushback operations, which aren't only illegal but also place asylum seekers lives in even greater jeopardy. 5/
There's a lot of horrendous stuff in the bill, a lot which seems on the surface of it to directly contravene international law. The thing is also a lot which is already covered by existing law, which makes it seem even more like a political stunt than a practical measure. 6/
Some of it, such as Clause 29 here, seems almost deliberately worded to guarantee additional litigation by seemingly creating different standards of proof and relying on a lot of subjectivity on the part of the individual processing the claim. 7/
The bill is a mix of existing law with some added nastiness thrown in and a hefty mix of illegality and unworkability to boot. Overall does nothing to address issues within the system, which are primarily down to Home Office delays and incompetence rather than asylum seekers. 8/
For a better analysis, along with a link to the actual bill, this thread and article by @ColinYeo1 are definitely worth reading. 9/
And another good addition from @BIDdetention on the bill seemingly making it harder for individuals to get bail, which seems an odd decision when if they're looking to increase prosecutions while simultaneously reducing costs to taxpayer of detention. 10/
This is also a good piece putting a human face on the reality of what Patel's bill, and the rhetoric being used to promote it, actually means for people by @AlasdairMack66 11/
I am actually begging @BBCNews to at least attempt a little thing called "journalism" when reporting on people seeking asylum, rather than just being a Home Office stenographer. At least try and include context, rather than just quoting stats. #r4today. 1/ bbc.com/news/articles/…
Here's the thing, small boat crossings tend to follow the same pattern, even if numbers change, due to something called "the weather", shocking I know. Numbers change for small boats though as other policies kick in preventing people using alternative, safer, routes. #r4today 2/
For example, restrictions on visas have forced more people into using irregular routes, and as there is no such thing as a visa to seek asylum they have absolutely no alternative but to use the irregular routes. #r4today 3/
Yesterday four people, including a child, died crossing channel. On Monday at least 48 people died reaching Djiboutian. At least 68,123 people died trying to reach safety in the last decade. We need cooperation to make it safer to seek asylum, not harder. standard.co.uk/news/politics/…
People know the risks they are taking by using irregular routes. Most aren't looking at social media thinking, "I was going to stay here and face almost certain death, persecution or abuse, but now I have seen this TikTok video I'll risk my life on dangerous routes."
We've seen similar policies play out before, e.g. when the previous government tried it with Albania. They just don't work. With asylum, people tend to choose the country they seek it in for highly personal reasons, primarily existing ties. They aren't risking their lives for fun
Setting aside the illegality of the Rwanda Policy, which Germany can't get around by just passing a law to say that an active dictatorship is "safe", and the inhumanity of it, the plan is even more unworkable for the continent than the UK. 1/ #r4today bbc.com/news/articles/…
Okay, first off, the numbers issue. Rwanda, a country of the size of Wales and the most densely populated country in continental Africa, has the capacity to take and process claims of about 200 people per year. Simple maths shows it is pointless. 2/
It has also been tried before. Israel attempted a similar scheme, which led to about 4,000 people being trafficked from Rwanda into Europe within a matter of weeks of them being dumped there, and that scheme was voluntary not forced. 3/
THREAD: Much as I personally believe Nigel Farage is a racist and revels in spreading hate, I have some issues with the way people are saying the far-right riots we are seeing right now are the #FarageRiot. It's too simplistic and ignores decades of hostile rhetoric. 1/
Last time I brought this topic up I was accused of "both siding" things, so let's quickly clarify this. Both siding would be if I was trying to say there are "good people' on the far-right. I am not. Sorry, "legitimate concerns" went out the window when violent attacks started 2/
I am not defending, or deflecting, from what Farage has done, The point here is that when you make him the focus you risk ignoring the decades of hostile, and racist, anti-migrant, rhetoric which have embedded this scapegoating of migrants in public consciousness. 3/
Long thread; A lot of the violence we have seen over the last few days has been stoked by years of misinformation about migration, often from many of the politicians condemning it now. So, let's address some of that misinformation. 1/
Crime: In Britain, there is no correlation between higher levels of immigration and increased violent crime. Migrants are statistically, and proportionally, less likely to report crime though, and more likely to face hate crimes. 2/
Now, I know that people have bought into the whole "grooming gangs" line, but, again, this is a myth. It's the "frequency illusion" in action. The reality is that grooming gangs are far more likely to be white, British, men. 3/
. ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/dec/…
Since I wrote this thread on @UKLabour's Asylum and Immigration policies several things have been depressingly clear. First off, things are going to get worse. Cooper's announcement of increased immigration raids, and the blinkered defence of them by some, shows this. 1/
The second is how much harder it is going to be for organisations and individuals fighting for migrants' rights. A lot of support over the last 14 years wasn't "pro-migrants rights". It was "anti-conservative". Obviously this isn't new though. 2/
We saw shades of it after the Brexit referendum. People who claimed to be progressive pushing a "good/bad migrants" narrative dividing EU and non-EU migrants. I saw first hand a lot of the hypocrisy of those individuals then, and see it repeating on an even larger scale now. 3/