It doesn't matter if an asylum seeker is from Afghanistan, Albania or anywhere else. Without making it safer and simpler to access the asylum system, something voted down yesterday multiple times, it remains inevitable "deterrents" will increase exploitation. 1/ #RefugeeBanBill
All this bill does is increase the ability of traffickers to prey upon people, including children. It doesn't offer alternative ways to seek asylum in the UK. It doesn't tackle gangs at source. It doesn't make processing asylum claims faster and more efficient. 2/ #StopTheBill
It's performance politics. Multiple studies, including the @ukhomeoffice' own analysis show that not only do deterrents and harsher asylum policies not reduce people using irregular routes, they actually increase the number, and the number of people who are exploited. 3/
The #illegalimmigrationbill goes even further though, by denying protection for modern slavery victims, and detaining children, it puts people at even more risk of being trafficked, and without the ability to come forward. It's a #TraffickersCharter in all essence. 4/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In 2002 there were nearly 10,000 more asylum applications than in 2022, yet the rate for initial decisions dropped from 99% to 25% over the same period. @ZoeJardiniere is spot on. The current situation is one of the government's own making to create a perpetual scapegoat. 1/
It is also worth noting that this was nothing to do with capacity. The number of caseworkers processing claims actually rose from 260 in the year ending March 2016 to 640 at the same point in 2022. What happened was that the actual processing slowed down. 2/
For example, during the period of March to March 2016 to 2022 the number of people waiting more than 6 months for a decision rose from 8,278 to 72,597. That's a big jump when you have more people processing claims unless something else is going on. 3/
The phrase "internment camps" rightly conjures horrific images, yet, in a purely factual sense, that is exactly what the UK government is proposing to implement. Due to additional factors, they are planning camps to detain individuals indefinitely without criminal charges. 1/
There is nothing illegal about seeking asylum, and, indeed, both international and domestic law recognises that not only may they use irregular means to seek it, they can also cross multiple countries when doing so. 2/
You obviously cannot return people to countries where they face threat to their life, and the mere fact that the vast majority of those seeking asylum in the UK receive it shows that they do. 3/
For roughly £20 million the Home Office could've cleared the asylum backlog it created, reducing associated costs such as hotels. Instead it plans to pay nearly £10 billion on a policy which appears specifically designed to fail. #r4today 1/ thetimes.co.uk/article/4c2cf7…
The #IllegalBill, can only put more people at risk, including tens of thousands of children. It denies modern slavery victims protection, boosting gang control, and removes human rights from the most vulnerable, as well as sees children risk deportation 2/ theguardian.com/world/2023/mar…
The government's own figures show that, despite rhetoric of the likes of Braverman, the vast majority of those seeking asylum in the UK, by any means, receive it because they need it. Data also shows how few comparatively to likes of France etc UK takes 3/
Thread: Let's just take a quick look at some of the points @SuellaBraverman makes in the @ukhomeoffice's latest PR fluff piece about its Rwanda plan shall we? 1/
Refugees will be "protected and supported". Not strictly speaking accurate considering refugees already in Rwanda face significant abuse and abandonment, including being left destitute and starving and facing sexual assaults from the authorities. 2/
Fastest growing does not mean "grown". More than 90% of the population in Rwanda live in poverty, so it was a low starting point, and due to how densely populated the country is, among other limitations, inequality is projected to increase. 3/
Likewise with models of Auschwitz. There are so many things to condemn Braverman about, but faked images, tweets etc just mean she can claim she is being personally targeted. I know how tempting it is to share them, but it undermines actual advocacy. Please don't.
I am not saying you play some middle of the road argument, just that when you amplify things which can then be turned around and spun by the government you make it harder to get actual arguments listened to. It becomes a distraction from the obscenities being carried out.
There is enough vileness in what the government is doing to take them to task on. It doesn't need fakes to make the point. Hit them on what they are doing and don't give them any angle by which to undermine your own arguments.
I regret to inform you that Matt has been at it again, but it is okay because he has ignored the overwhelming evidence which disproves his assertion by conducting his own "polls".
Where Goodwin could, if he didn't on a regular basis seem determined to mislead people with disingenuous "polls", have a case is that people are concerned about the manner which people arrive in the UK, as opposed to actually seeking asylum.
People see splashes with glossy pics in the media and hear the rhetoric from politicians, but reality is when the framing is focused on providing asylum rather than manner of entry, including emphasising "irregular routes", the public supports providing protection for refugees.