Thread by @stand_for_all

Long thread so bear with me. We hear a lot of comments about finding "solutions" for refugee movements, but often those "solutions" are reduced to soundbites by both those who support taking more refugees, and those who oppose it. 1/

The first thing is to recognise that just as those of us who support taking more are not "hell bent on the destruction of the fabric of society", one of the the more interesting accusations levelled against me, those opposed are not always solely motivated by xenophobia. 2/

Taking the UK as the main example, as I live here, the levels of inequality are significant. We have about 14.5 million living in poverty, between 2,500 and 4,500, possibly more, people sleeping rough. 3/
bigissue.com/latest/uk-pove…

bigissue.com/latest/social-….

equalitytrust.org.uk/scale-economic…

It's understandable why some people would say "we should focus on those at home first". When you are struggling to make ends meet it can be hard to understand why someone coming from abroad should receive even the limited assistance, and it is limited, which asylum seekers do. 4/

So what assistance do asylum seekers get? First off, as it is one of the more persistent myths, asylum seekers aren't eligible for council housing. It's an understandable confusion when you hear about local authorities not having "space" though. 5/

housing-rights.info/02_2_Refugees.…

Asylum seekers are also denied the right to work while their application is being processed. Instead they receive an allowance of about £39.63 pw to cover pretty much everything, less by the way than they would receive in France for example. 6/
gov.uk/asylum-support…

In general the public massively overestimate the numbers of all immigrants, including asylum seekers, in the UK, yet ironically have some of the most positive attitudes towards immigration when compared to EU, although not refugees. 7/
odi.org/en/publication…

This plays idea that UK is full. This in turn feeds into a narrative that refugees are "causing a housing crisis". Supply issues in housing are complex, but when you factor in number of vacant properties and building space, it isn't down to refugees. 8/
commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-brief…

Nonetheless, there still remains question as to why refugees come to the UK when they can stay in the "first safe country". Thing is asylum seekers aren't required to seek it in the first country they come to, and there are good reasons why some don't. 10/

https://twitter.com/stand_for_all/status/1413432400135155712?s=20

All of this is background though, it doesn't help those who are struggling or refugees. Let's start with the current situation. We currently spend nearly £400million per year on immigration enforcement and it doesn't stop people trying to reach the UK. 11/
nao.org.uk/wp-content/upl…

One of the great ironies of expenditure used to prevent crossings is it inevitably only benefits the gangs it's meant to tackle. As routes are closed it forces people to take greater risks, and the gangs they are forced to turn to increase prices. 12/

ecre.org/france-as-uk-s…

Asylum seekers are protected under international law from being penalised for manner of entry. Often "irregular routes" are the only ones available to refugees., only 4% of asylum places globally come from "resettlement routes. 13/
unhcr.org/uk/1951-refuge…

unhcr.org/refugee-statis…

The manner of someone's entry doesn't not negate them being a refugee. An easy example of how incorrect the claim that those entering via irregular means are not "genuine refugees" are Atkin's comments that Afghans entering via them won't be settled. 14/
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politi…

It is hard to claim that Afghans cease to be refugees, and thereby deserving of the protection and rights guaranteed to them under international law, because they didn't wait for one of a handful of possible places on a resettlement route which hasn't even been set up yet. 15/

So solutions. Well first of all obviously addressing the causes of displacement would be a great place to start. Equally obviously though is that in a lot of cases that is neither possible, nor fast enough, to prevent displacement. Particularly with cuts to foreign aid. 16/

So we need to look at domestic options. We've established that just throwing money at closing routes solves nothing, but does benefit the gangs we do need to stop, because no-one denies we need stop the smugglers and traffickers who prey on vulnerable people. 17/

A first step is by opening more "safe and legal" routes, not to be confused with "resettlement routes", e.g. process applications in Calais, negating a large need for crossings, or even removing penalties on airlines for transporting asylum seekers. 18/
liberties.eu/en/stories/why…

This then allows the funds used on "border controls" to be used for a more practical purpose, such as developing local communities to benefit refugees and locals. This also helps ensure asylum seekers can be housed in more places, reducing pressure. 19/
theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

Taking more refugees isn't an "either/or" with supporting domestic citizens who are struggling. Rather than inequality and poverty being an excuse to deny others safety, it should be a driver to better use resources to create more opportunities for people and help everyone. 20/