And minute UK did carry out pushbacks it would be bogged down in never ending litigation. Even Immigration Services Union admits tactics are "unusable". Just PR meat to the base while waiting for numbers to drop, as they always do around this time of year. thetimes.co.uk/article/f16895…
Here's the thing, yes they've been up on previous years, mainly due to other routes still being more limited, but Channel crossings are basically seasonal. They always increase around this point as people try and make journey before weather turns and it become far too dangerous.
Home Office aren't stupid, they know there is about to be the annual winter drop in crossings. They also know minute they conduct illegal pushbacks they open a can of worms they really don't want to. Hopefully they're playing for time until asylum seekers leave the front pages.
How much do you want to lay money that the nanosecond the numbers start their seasonal drop the Home Office puts out press releases boasting about how its plans have "deterred" them from crossing? It will have nothing to do with it of course, but they have timed it carefully.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Deep breath, self DX for autism is entirely valid, and often necessary. I was technically first diagnosed at 6, but was never told until last year, so I ended up self diagnosing, which led to a long road to getting, another, formal diagnosis at 27. 1/
Even when someone is formally diagnosed though, if we present as too "normal" we will have idiots claiming we aren't autistic, or demanding we publish our diagnosis online. Now, my diagnosis statement is long and personal. Guess what, I am not sharing it with random people. 2/
For the most part, in my own personal experience, autistic individuals want to be left alone and just accepted. Unfortunately as that isn't happening it means some of us feel the need to step forward and put ourselves out there. You know what, it sucks. 3/
Thread: Something I've been thinking a lot about this week is just how "good", for want of a better word, Home Office comms are. I mean, they're hideous, but they are also effective in their intended outcome, which isn't really to "communicate" so much as undermine opposition. 1/
The "activist lawyers" line was a masterstroke, because despite it being objectively wrong and misleading, there is no way to demonstrate that without them being able to reinforce the message to their target audience. 2/
It also provides them with the perfect cover for their claims that the asylum system is "overwhelmed" despite actual numbers of asylum seekers being down on previous years. "Don't look at us guv. Look at those activist lawyers holding up the process". 3/
Oh FFS @MigrationWatch, sound out the words slowly and run your finger a bit further down the page. Pushbacks are highly illegal for multiple reasons, under various international laws, and vessels have a legal duty to protect life at sea, not cause people to drown.
98% of those who cross the channel seek asylum and vast majority of people who do so are granted it on either first instance or appeal. So this one is at best a highly disingenuous reading of data, at worst a flat out lie designed to stoke hatred.
Interesting that they quote the Mayor of Calais who has made it illegal of asylum seekers to be provided with food and water by NGOs, wonder if that may have something to do with it. Also France actually has higher "benefits" for asylum seekers, so again this is bollocks.
Noticeable how already there is a slow decline of attention regarding Afghanistan, as with Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and every refugee situation in the world. No wonder the government always feels so comfortable demonising asylum seekers. They know everyone forgets about them.
I mean, in a purely practical sense I get it. People have only so much attention span and as the news roles on they focus on the next story. Combine that with that hideous phrase "compassion fatigue", and it's not remotely surprising people forget.
Refugees don't forget about their situations though. When the cameras stop filming and the public stops caring they are still living in those situations. That's why legislation has to defend all refugees, no matter where from or how they reach the UK.
Cannot stress how not only inhumane this is, but also massively illegal. "Pushbacks" violate international law, not to mention place people's lives in more danger. They also don't deter people trying to seek safety. 1/ bbc.co.uk/news/uk-584959…
This isn't some hazy grey area of law either. While it is perfectly legal for someone to cross the channel and seek asylum, it is fundamentally illegal to penalize an asylum seeker for their manner of entry or conduct pushback operations at sea. 2/
Right now @pritipatel has singlehandedly destroyed any last shred of credibility the UK had that it may care about the rule of law, and has further undermined the international refugee regime, placing yet more lives at risk. 3/ #r4today
No amount of money will prevent crossings. End of the day, smugglers and traffickers just move further down the coast, making journeys longer and more dangerous. It isn't illegal to cross the channel, but it is illegal to penalise them for doing so. #r4today
There are a multitude of reasons people may feel safer in UK than France, language, family connections, not being routinely attacked by police officers. For many asylum seekers though they don't know where they will end up, and making crossings more dangerous doesn't change that.
The UK spends close to £400 million on immigration enforcement, liable to continue to rise. At a time when we are talking about "social care cost" and more that money would be better served being invested into the country, rather than into trying to keep people out.