So details of the “Rwanda plan” seem hazy, even to the minister appearing on #r4today, but here are some questions the government would need to answer before it could possibly be viable. 1/
If the intention is to make people ask Rwanda for asylum (as opposed to asking the UK for asylum while physically in Rwanda), what evidence is there that Rwanda has a viable asylum system? Are there expert interviewers, decision-makers, judges? Are there lawyers? Interpreters? 2/
Does Rwanda respect the Refugee Convention in practice, including eg for vulnerable groups like LGBT+ applicants, whose entitlement to asylum was controversial even here until quite recently (and who still face issues of disbelief & discrimination)? 3/
How will people have access to the health care which many of them will need, not only to treat their symptoms but also to help them substantiate their claims (eg if torture victims)? 4/
If the intention is to apply the idea to single men, and if the thinking behind this is that they are less likely to be entitled to refugee status, what is the evidence for that and how is this distinction not irrational and discriminatory? 5/
What evidence is there that Rwanda has measures to protect against trafficking, or re-trafficking for those who’ve already suffered it? 6/
What will stop people attempting to return to the UK illegally, thus opening up more, not less, opportunities for people-smugglers? Why will the measure not result in people simply "going underground", not claiming asylum & being exposed to exploitation? 7/
If the intention is that people should remain in Rwanda long-term, what evidence is there that they would have access to the job market, as well as health care to ensure their long-term recovery? 8/
To be clear, even if all these Qs were satisfactorily answered, this would still be a grotesque plan which is fundamentally disrespectful of people’s basic humanity. But if these Qs (and more) can’t be answered, I’m sceptical that it will ever happen.
The govt's been cooking up these plans for months (at least) & has had ample time to think these issues through. The fewer answers they provide to these obvious Qs (these⬆️ are just what I thought of in 10 mins over breakfast) the more this looks like a stunt & not a serious plan

• • •

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

Keep Current with Alasdair Mackenzie 🧡

Alasdair Mackenzie 🧡 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 @AlasdairMack66

Apr 15
Let me tell you about Wayoka Limbuela. He played a crucial role in UK asylum law & politics in a way he’d never have wanted & I imagine would prefer to forget.

Why? Because in 2003 the New Labour government tried to make him destitute for supposedly claiming asylum too late. 1/
Background: in 1999 New Labour excluded asylum seekers from mainstream benefits & put them on a parallel benefits system known as asylum support. This persists to this day & is the underlying cause of the appalling conditions many people are housed in 2/
theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/j…
The battle over the asylum support system, its underlying causes and the way it was eventually facilitated by certain NGOs is a story for another day.

But the intention – and the effect – was to make asylum seekers’ lives poorer & harsher. 3/
Read 29 tweets
Apr 14
Life's too short to analyse all the arrant lies & nonsense in the government's announcement on sending asylum seekers to Rwanda, but here's a few:
➡️If there are "80 million people displaced in the world" why can't the UK cope with a few 000s in boats? 1/
gov.uk/government/new…
➡️To the extent that "the global approach to asylum and migration is broken", that's because of the refusal of some countries & their political leaders to take responsibility for caring humanely for refugees 2/
➡️Rwanda is not "recognised globally for its record on welcoming and integrating migrants" but has been repeatedly accused of mistreating refugees, including those offshored from Israel 3/
law.ox.ac.uk/research-subje…
Read 5 tweets
Mar 28
The Home Office lies. It lies a lot.

It risks people’s lives. It threatens democracy. 🧵

Let me start by telling you about a time when the Home Office lied and put a man’s life in danger. 1/
David, as we’ll call him, has a serious medical condition, manageable if treated, fatal if not. He also has mental health issues caused in part by struggling with his condition for years while the Home Office tried to send him back to his country of birth 2/
The place David was born was left in a disastrous state by its colonisers & has since been scourged by war, corruption & poverty. Its health system is described by one expert as “among the world’s worst”.

The Home Office wanted him to go back there to get treatment. 3/
Read 23 tweets
Mar 4
Absolutely this - so much of the HO’s approach to Ukrainians precisely reflects its treatment of other people, for decades, with zero adverse consequences for anyone responsible. Unless >
> outrage at its behaviour now translates into outrage at the system generally, *this will keep happening*, including to whoever turns out to be the next set of refugees or other migrants favoured by public opinion. >
> Absolutely people can’t be blamed for not knowing, bc the Home Office’s behaviour is (w a few honourable exceptions) of no interest to politicians or journalists, except ofc when trying to suggest (laughably) it’s too “soft” on refugees & to make political capital from that >
Read 5 tweets
Dec 3, 2021
The Home Office Twitter account here bickering absurdly with @NewStatesman over its article on deprivation of citizenship - how helpful or accurate is this, do you think? Well, Home Office tweet: 2/2 This change is simply about the proceHome Office tweet: 1/2 Removing British citizenship has been
First, it's misleading to claim it’s been possible to deprive people of citizenship for a century without also saying that the powers have been expanded and used much more frequently recently, as pointed out in this @lizziedearden article
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-n…
Second, it’s not true that the powers can’t be used to make people stateless - that can happen to people deemed to have acted against 🇬🇧 “vital interests” and to be able to acquire another citizenship - it’s *exactly* that power which causes concern

Read 6 tweets
Dec 2, 2021
In case of doubt here is Raab in the Times, yet again confirming the reason Tories hate human rights is that foreigners have them, and particularly that they mean “the interests of immigration control” don’t reign supreme.

thetimes.co.uk/article/priti-… Dominic Raab said that his ...
Once more, this means trampling all over people who’ve spent decades here & permanently ruining the lives of kids whose parents don't have that vital parenting tool, a British passport.

I’m too tired to explain this again, so here’s a 🧵 I made earlier
Also, Yvette Cooper, when previously Shadow Home Sec, was fully in favour of the enhanced deportation laws which brought about our current dismal situation, so please spare me the cheers
Read 4 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!

:(