Share this page!

Windrush Lives Profile picture
Twitter logo
Feb 27 • 9 tweets • 6 min read
What @pritipatel and @ukhomeoffice are actually doing:
1. Required visa for Ukrainians trying to join family, therefore refused entry
2. Family’s MP intervened after publicity - did not waive
3. Still need to apply for visa; has taken a PREMIUM PAYMENT for expedited processing
Just going to leave this here before I go and pour my liquefied brain out.

Believe *nothing* that comes out of @pritipatel and @ukhomeoffice about what’s actually happening.

NABB will make this much worse; and oh yeah, they’ve been treating Black, brown and racialised grps, Windrush victims, GRT community, with this lvl of undisguised contempt forever
This still doesn’t contain the key phrase *without a visa*.

If @ukhomeoffice was trustworthy and morally un-repugnant, I’d give them the benefit of the doubt - it’s clearly an announcement, so it *must* signify a change from the status quo…

@joepike could you follow up?
Journos - we need you to step up now and pin down precise responses. The Home Office invented gaslighting; the announcement this eve bears every hallmark of their frequent statements on Windrush which are filled with misinformation, misdirection, and the occasional outright lie.
These are the qs you have to ask: will refugees still need visas? if so, how is this announcement newsworthy? And if so, what was the purpose of making this announcement?
If visas aren’t being waived, why not? Can govt explain why we are now doing demonstrably less than the EU?
The same basic q applies here - it’s the need for any sort of visa at all that’s the problem. Adding a *diff* process doesn’t help that.

They *will* squirrel out of engaging with these points by answering lesser qs they’ve made up for themselves.
Pls don’t let them - nail them to the specifics.

With apologies for bulk tagging: @lizziedearden @maybulman @Nadine_Writes @nadinebh_ @joepike @mckinneytweets @darshnasoni @ameliagentleman @_BvdM @RKWinvisibleman @BBCDomC

• • •

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

Keep Current with Windrush Lives

Windrush Lives Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

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

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @WindrushLives

Windrush Lives Profile picture
Mar 1
From next month, Biometric Residence Permits will no longer be accepted as proof of Right to Work/Rent. The card itself will be useless; you have to do an additional online registration to prove right to rent/work.

This is how the Windrush scandal began. [1/9]
There are a few 'beyond-parallels' here: first, this is unnecessary, as were many of the contortions that led to the Windrush scandal. There is no good reason to scrap use of BRPs. It is entirely possible to phase into a digital world without making *existing* docs useless. [2/9]
They have been told - by other parts of government no less - that a snap-over into digital-only proof to work/rent is likely to prove a nightmare.

But this is @ukhomeoffice! Making up nonsense and doing as it damned well pleases since 1782. [3/9]
Read 9 tweets
Windrush Lives Profile picture
Feb 27
We’re at the Nationality and Borders Bill in front of the @ukhomeoffice with other migrants’ rights and anti-racist groups to 📣Kill the Bill📣 Image
Demonstrators gathering out...
“Great Britain would not be great without the contribution of migrants”
Read 14 tweets
Windrush Lives Profile picture
Feb 16
We are an organisation that benefit from this. We are made up of and represent some of the most marginalised people, whom the Home Office would like to simply paper over, out of existence. Without GLP, we would be light years behind where we are now.
A lot of the noise over the past 24 hours has come from mouths which would neither know Windrush victims existed, nor care to do anything to help them. Advocacy for the marginalised does have to be aggressive at times; the institutions who do the marginalising sure as sh*t are.
So while it may be fun (and maybe useful, but let’s face it) to have the intellectual arguments, do also bear in mind that we, and a lot of groups like us in other sectors, need people like GLP in our corner breathing fire at those that try to stomp us into the ground.
Read 8 tweets
Windrush Lives Profile picture
Feb 14
🌹Roses are red,
This hellscape is the opposite of irie,
The Home Office is expanding the Windrush scandal,
We urgently need an Inquiry.
🧵🚨: docs.google.com/forms/d/1Y6-AE…
1/34
(On account of the amount of swearing and rending-of-garments in this thread - I'm @JaidevRamya. Blame no one but me for what follows.)

Last week, we sent a version of this👇🏽letter, a sign-able version of which is linked above, to many MPs.
2/34 ImageImageImage
@JaidevRamya You may recall that in December, together with @GoodLawProject, we opened the process of seeking judicial review of @ukhomeoffice’s decision to keep control of the Windrush Compensation Scheme.

3/34
Read 34 tweets
Windrush Lives Profile picture
Jan 3
An important correction to part 15 of the thread - chopped out a bit while copy-pasting.
To explain a little futher, i.e. a meta-explainer, those two things remain distinct in statute. The power to basically *make* someone immediately stateless is only for naturalised citizens, where there the HO has rsable grounds to believe they can have citizenship elsewhere.
The confusion in discussion arises because Begum is not naturalised, and yet seems to have been made stateless.

Begum was born in the UK, to Bangladeshi parents. She is (was) in the first bracket, i.e. a UK citizen, therefore can't be made stateless.
Read 11 tweets
Windrush Lives Profile picture
Jan 3
A slightly longer explainer 🧵, breaking all this down step-by-step, because predictably, @ukhomeoffice has flooded the field with mis- and disinformation, and it deserves unpacking:

The power to take citizenship away has existed in some form for a very long time. [1/n]
The version of the citizenship deprivation power currently in use goes back to the 1981 British Nationality Act. Section 40, clause 3 gives the Secretary of State the right take away citizenship from naturalised citizens. Take a look at the conditions in clause 3. [2/n] Screenshot of original Section 40 of the British Nationality
The power was construed in quite a limited way - really, it related to actual treason. And it could not be applied to naturalised citizens if it would make them stateless - see clause 5, and 5(b) in particular. [3/n]
Read 42 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @WindrushLives has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @WindrushLives!

Read all threads by @WindrushLives

:(