Victoria Atkins admitting that Afghanistan resettlement scheme no closer to be being set up. So how can the government claim that refugees should take "safe and legal routes", as per the Minister's words, when those routes don't exist.
If I hear Atkins respond to concerns about the number of people who have been abandoned in Afghanistan with the verbal equivalent of a shrug I may just lose it.
"First safe country" everybody drink. Someone really needs to sit @VotePursglove down and explain in very small words how it doesn't exist. Not that he will give a damn
FFS. Offshoring is repeatedly and unquestionably shown not to work as a deterrent @VotePursglove. It is shown to cost lives. It is also shown to be a massive waste of money, and you still have no other countries prepared to set up facilities.
Okay, I just counted three direct violations of international refugee and human rights law in @pritipatel's answer there at the very least, not to mention at least one which risks child protection law, both domestic and international.
Oh, add another with pushbacks being mentioned.
Quite narked with @NickTorfaen's focus on channel crossings and "problematisation" of asylum seekers when overall number of applications has been down, but he is right that the #BordersBill fundamentally violates international law.
The UK runs four facilities in France, Two in Coquelles, one in Calais and one in Dunkirk, which are ostensibly, if not in practice, meant to follow UK rules and laws. Bit disingenuous of @pritipatel to say they have no say over what happens in Calais.
Reminder, yet again, that majority of asylum seekers don't know the asylum laws in the countries they travel to. They come for a variety of reasons, including family ties and language. Changing the law to discriminate against them doesn't deter people from seeking safety.
God @Stuart_McDonald is good isn't he? We need more politicians to hold the government to account on its abhorrent, and frankly ridiculous and unlawful, asylum policies.
Oh my fucking GOD. @pritipatel reiterating her complete bollocks line that 70% of those crossing the channel are "economic migrants". It's a lie. 91% of those who cross come from ten refugee producing countries. 98% seek asylum and majority have their claims found to be fair.
Bit rich to claim that the #BordersBill fulfils international obligations straight after @PeterBoneUK asks why the UK can't just violate international law and after UNHCR has already said it is illegal.
@PeterBoneUK UNHCR have said that the #BordersBill is illegal @pritipatel. You can't argue that you have spoken with them to defend the bill when those conversations are them telling you that the bill is illegal.
unhcr.org/uk/news/press/…
unhcr.org/uk/news/press/…
Oh sod it. What's the point? I'm going to switch off and have another cigarette. Got too much other work to do to be bothered listening to this utter bs. It's nothing but lies and obfuscation.
Apologies for the swearing in this thread. Normally try to limit it, but was writing as thought and frankly considering my thoughts during those questions it's amazing there wasn't more swearing in the thread.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
