There is something genuinely sick about this from the @ukhomeoffice Comms team. Using the deaths of 27 people in the channel to push disingenuous bullshit aimed at promoting a policy which has repeatedly been shown will benefit gangs and cause more deaths. 1/
This week 307 MPs voted against an amendment to the bloody bill which had one purpose, to prevent loss of life in the channel, but the @ukhomeoffice comms team keep churning out the same old wildly debunked misinformation, without any concern for people's lives. 2/
The "resettles more" line is a particular master stroke in avoiding recognising just how far fewer asylum seekers the UK actually takes than many countries, but being disingenuous is probably the most consistent thing about @ukhomeoffice Comms. 3/
Talking about disingenuous lines, this one is a good one. This is something which asylum advocates have been pointing out for a long time, problem is @ukhomeoffice leaves off the second line, "which is why policies of pushbacks and deterrence won't make a difference to them". 4/
Gangs care even less about people's lives than @ukhomeoffice appears to. They aren't worried if pushback operations cost lives. They don't care if trafficking survivors get arrested and deported. They are distanced from this and the bill won't make a difference to them. 5/
What the bill does do though, is further criminalise trafficking survivors, making it harder for them to come forward and therefore more likely to remain trapped by gangs, which can use the threat of prosecution against them. 6/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Just so I have this clear, the PM has implemented further restrictions in order to shift the story from one about a party which he says didn't happen, and after apologizing to for the fact that people may have been offended by a clip of people joking about the non-party. 1/
Meanwhile though the real villains are the people wanting to know if Downing Street did break restrictions last year and hold a party, at the exact same time as telling the public that they couldn't see loved ones, because they are "playing politics".
But it is all okay though, because Johnson has appointed someone who may have been at the non-party to investigate if the non-party happened, but only the one non-party, and definitely not the one which people say the PM personally attended.
And the lies have it. The lies have it, by 298 to 231. Every MP who voted in favour of the third reading of the #BordersBill just knowingly voted to put more lives at risk, violate international law, undermine the global refugee regime and benefit trafficking gangs.
For what? What's the point? To placate a dwindling number of bigots and embolden the far-right. Well hats off one and all. The UK just told the rest of the world that it officially has decided the rule of law and human rights do not apply to it. "Global Britain" my arse.
There are going to be a lot of tired and frustrated advocates tonight. More than that though, there are going to be tired and fearful migrants and refugees who have just been put in more uncertainty, at more risk, by a government which seems not to care.
The Right Honourable Dame Eleanor Laing getting seriously annoyed at MPs seemingly delaying casting votes to prevent more debate on the #BordersBill. Highlights that this is an important piece of legislation and they aren't behaving as they should in a democracy.
Do find it hypocritical that Patel is now talking about the behaviour and the "tactics" of the opposition when her department has been churning out misinformation on the Bill for months, and she has seemingly directly lied regarding aspects of it.
Oh and this speech really adds to that. Patel knows that the bill will make things worse. She knows that it violates international law. She knows it will do nothing to combat gangs, and indeed benefit them.
Christ on a bike, there is some weapon's grade tone policing from the Conservative benches here. Seems a bit rich considering some of the statements that the government has made in favour of the #AntiRefugeeBill
I'd sit this one out if I was a Conservative MP claiming that because the #AntiRefugeeBill doesn't specifically say that it is racist that it won't discriminate based upon race, particularly when government's own impact assessment warns of risks it will. gov.uk/government/pub…
Weird how so many of the people who claim "citizenship is a privilege not a right" are the ones who know that they couldn't possibly have it removed without significant issues and violations of international law in the first place isn't it?
THREAD: Okay, time for a fun game of "True, False or Disingenuous nonsense". Sharing the original video so you can all play along at home. Isn't this fun? probably not actually. 1/
Going to call disingenuous nonsense on this one, but I'll allow that it is debatable. You could argue that there is a "global migration crisis", highly debatable though. You can't claim a piece of domestic legislation tackles anything on a global scale though. 2/
Definitely disingenuous. Conflict is just one cause for people migrating. For refugees it is often thought as the only cause, but reality is that persecution is actually the main cause, and that does not require conflict. 3/
There's a growing cross party consensus that the UK needs to stop focusing on inhumane, and illegal, proposals, as set out in the #bordersbill. There's no "silver bullet", but offshoring is just abhorrent. 1/ independent.co.uk/news/uk/politi…
I also have concerns about processing applications in embassies, if it is expected that individuals have to have them processed in the country they are being persecuted in, for obvious reasons, but processing them in any embassy might be a start. 2/
As I said, there is no "silver bullet" and these are complex issues, but more viable alternatives in the immediacy would be to remove carrier liability fines and introduce humanitarian visas so people can be immediately brought to the UK to have their claims processed. 3/