Ding ding ding, "First safe country" brought up in Nationality and Borders Bill Committee, everyone drink. Doesn't exist in international law, never has existed in international law.
Just an fyi folks "the other side were also bad" is not a defence for you breaking the law. Yes, you know what the last Labour government was crap as well and caused untold misery to asylum seekers and migrants. That's not an excuse to violate international law and hurt more now.
Australia's policies didn't act as a deterrent. They did kill people, but they didn't act as a deterrent, and smuggling and trafficking are not the same thing. Trafficking victims can't be "deterred". They don't get a f**king say where they are being taken. 
Yes, statistically more men cross the channel seeking asylum than women. They're not "taking people's place" though. Seeking asylum is dangerous expensive. Reality is there are good reasons for the disparity, as explained here.
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/0…
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/0…
The Bill is contrary to the Refugee Convention @VotePursglove. UNHCR and legal experts have pointed out multiple ways in which the bill as it stands is against international law. How can anyone claim the UK will abide by international law, when the bill breaks it?
"First safe country", DRINK. The "first safe country" principle @VotePursglove isn't recognised anywhere. It doesn't exist. It is not a legal term. It's not even a commonsense term. First safe country if in law would mean a handful of countries taking all asylum seekers.
Safety is subjective @VotePursglove, language, family ties etc. Not only that though, but I would assume most people wouldn't feel safe in a country where they are routinely attacked by the authorities, as in France. hrw.org/europe/central…
Bonus points for "genuine refugees" line. Are we really suggesting that someone fleeing Afghanistan via an irregular route is any less a refugee than someone who managed to get one of the flights out of Kabul? Because this bill will criminalise them.
Exactly how are refugees meant to apply via "legal family resettlement" procedures @VotePursglove when the government's own policy shows that they don't have a means to access them when in Afghanistan?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
