Tweet

Daniel Sohege 🧡

10 Oct, 9 tweets, 3 min read

https://twitter.com/stand_for_all/status/1446477804174970881

There is a discussion in the replies to this tweet which I think it is worth exploring in more depth, can the Home Office be changed from within, and as such should we be nicer about some of the people who work there, or not. I fall on the "not" side of the argument. 1/

https://twitter.com/stand_for_all/status/1446477804174970881

Nothing in life is as simple as saying "if you don't like your job just quit". People have responsibilities, needs etc etc. Just quitting isn't practical for a lot of people. There are times though when it is necessary, otherwise you become complicit in some hideous things. 2/

It's not on the scale of Home Office abuses, but I've been there myself and had to leave a position because I knew what was happening at the place of business was fundamentally wrong and I couldn't be part of it. 3/

As this whistleblower piece shows, there are fundamental issues with the way Home Office works, from top to bottom. Yes, caseworkers aren't involved in policy, and yes, some are good people, but when whole system is broken there's little they can do. 4/

amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/…

Issues in the Home Office aren't new either, and aren't limited to being carried out under any specific party for that matter. At some point you have to say enough is enough. 5/

amp.theguardian.com/uk/2010/aug/08…

It's not good enough to say, "good people should remain to change it from within" when there's no change happening and they get steamrollered. This all feeds into a wider debate of whether you push for small, incremental, changes or wholesale reform. 6/

Again, I am in the "go big or go home" camp. I can see the arguments for "working with the Home Office to get changes", but it isn't working and the longer it goes on the more people's lives are destroyed. 7/

You can claim that saying people should walk out of a job comes from a place of privilege, but I have had to do it when up to my eyeballs in debt and with a very real risk of eviction, and that job didn't involve deliberately sending people back to places they are at risk. 8/

My personal belief is that the Home Office is beyond saving and needs to be totally abolished, with its functions hived off and restructured. I don't think saying that there are "some good people" in it, or that they "don't make policy" is good enough anymore. 9/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @stand_for_all

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

11 Oct

THREAD: With both Labour and the Conservatives yet again trotting out the idea that the only way to tackle trafficking is to make it harder for people to come to the UK it's worth looking at the whole issue of "safe routes". 1/

I use "safe routes" a lot, but even I will admit it is a hazy, fluffy term which needs fleshing out. As it stands it sounds like we are advocating for more "resettlement routes", and yes we do need more, but they still only account for a tiny fraction of asylum seekers. 2/

This is not a simple issue with a simple solution though, and boiling it down to two words probably doesn't help the majority of people understand that. First off you need to look at a bit of background. 3/

Read 18 tweets

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

9 Oct

"A facilitator of illegal immigration". Look, this isn't complex #r4today. Yes, they are both run by gangs, but there is a difference between "trafficking" and "smuggling", which might not be important to some, but damn sure is to those affected. 1/

Smugglers tend to take an upfront fee and facilitate entry. Traffickers often exploit people after they have transported them. The changes of trafficked victims not knowing where they are heading is also far higher. 2/

In no way defending either, both prey on vulnerable asylum seekers, but conflating the two confuses an already layered and complex issue. It also won't be tackled by closing routes, penalising victims or picking up individuals. 3/

Read 6 tweets

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

7 Oct

Thread: Okay, there is a very clear principle in international law called "non-refoulement", which is in theory meant to prevent people being sent back to unsafe countries, you know, like Afghanistan. 1/ independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…

https://twitter.com/RefugeesinLibya/status/1445808009511374849?s=20

Here's the thing, principle and practice in international law don't always marry up as nicely as may be hoped, which is why EU tends to get away with sending asylum seekers back to Libya, where it's well documented they risk being killed or tortured. 2/

https://twitter.com/RefugeesinLibya/status/1445808009511374849?s=20

So in reality government is unlikely to face substantial legal interference beyond what they are already used to, hence why Patel is happy to keep pushing the "activist lawyers" line, because any legal challenge strengthens their case with their base. 3/ dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8…

Read 16 tweets

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

7 Oct

Less than a week ago French authorities were shooting asylum seekers in a dinghy with rubber bullets. HRW has now released further degrading treatment against refugees by them. Croatian authorities are beating them and throwing them back across the border. 1/

Greece is conducting pushback operations putting their lives at risk. Italy just prosecuted one of its own mayor's for providing assistance to refugees. Spain forces many to sleep rough. Germany had more than 1,600 attacks against them last year. 2/

And on and on it goes, and on top of all this the EU sends refugees back to Libya where they are known to be kidnapped, sold into slavery, tortured and murdered. You know what, I'm thinking there's some good reasons why asylum seekers may not stay in these "safe countries". 3/

Read 5 tweets

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

5 Oct

@Conservatives

It is genuinely hard to see how some of the @Conservatives defending things coming out of #cpc21 can claim to have any semblance of a commitment to "conservativism". Funnily enough, this isn't a "get" at Conservatives though. Some of the biggest issues are apolitical. 1/

When you see the language and attacks from likes of Raab and Patel though, and the cheers which they received, you have to wonder what happened to some of the old school, small state, individual liberties, Conservatives. 2/

I grew up in a household of them. My mum used to collect Margaret Thatcher memorabilia. Pretty much my first memories are of sitting watching her in Council Meetings, where she was a Conservative Councillor. Before she died she was about to run for Parliament. 3/

Read 25 tweets

Daniel Sohege 🧡

@stand_for_all

5 Oct

This is just one unhinged draconian soundbite after another. Ending freedom to protest. Increasing prohibition on drugs, because that's worked so well. None of what she is suggesting is going to make Britain "safer" #CPC21

@pritipatel

Jesus, the smirk when saying "ended free movement". Not sure I'd boast about "building back better" and recruiting "skilled migrants" right now to tbh @pritipatel

"Where there is a door there must be a doorkeeper". Give me strength. 98% of those crossing the channel seek asylum so the "majority are economic migrants" line is pure bs

Read 20 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Share this page!

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @stand_for_all

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?