Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Home Office and UK government policy concerning asylum seekers/Rwanda deportations

I wrote my MP about Braverman's disgusting comments. I'm going to post his reply. It is long and predictable. But it's the thought words of an actual Tory, for your edification and amusement.

I got your email about the recent exchange between the Home Secretary and Ms Salter about migrants, and thought I ought to write back to reassure you that there was no attempt to silence her (I’d like to see anyone try – they’d be very unlikely to succeed I think!). the Home Office asked a pro-migration campaign group to take down a heavily-edited film of the exchange, because they felt it was unfairly one-sided, but that’s all, and I’m happy to say there are plenty of unedited versions circulating too, with comments and reporting from reputable news outlets (for example this one from Sky News Holocaust survivor says home secretary's words on migrants are similar to those of Nazi Germany) so people can see what really happened.
Click to expand...


More broadly, I hope we’d both agree the problem of organised criminals sending people across the channel in dinghies is a serious and (sadly) often-deadly problem that we’ve got to stop. The people-smugglers tell the migrants to shred their papers and refuse to comment on which countries they have crossed before they arrive here (although, by definition, they will have crossed multiple safe European countries, including France, before they arrive here) to make returning them harder, and to slow the application and appeal process down for as long as possible in the hope of being able to disappear into British society and stay indefinitely. As you will appreciate, that isn’t fair on any migrants who are applying through the proper channels, and having no valid ID also makes them extremely vulnerable to organised criminals who can threaten to expose them to the authorities unless they assist in criminal acts, modern slavery or the sex trade instead. It isn’t as if there aren’t much safer and wholly-legal alternatives to the degrading and exploitative people-smugglers either.
Click to expand...

For anyone with time to plan their move there’s the new points-based immigration system, which now allows the best and the brightest from around the world to become fully British citizens: the results are that our legal migrants come from a far wider and more internationally-varied range of countries than before, when there were far more Europeans. And for people who have to flee at short notice, Britain is already one of the world’s leading refugee resettlement states: since 2015 we have offered homes to over 100,000 people from Hong Kong, 20,000 from Syria, 13,000 from Afghanistan and (so far) 50,000 from Ukraine. I should also add that there’s a review of the Modern Slavery Act underway, which will include a section on Independent Child Trafficking Advocates (ICTAs) specifically for helping to reunite trafficked children with their families wherever it’s safely possible. But all these legal routes haven’t reduced the activities of the people smugglers one jot, because the international criminals make huge amounts of money from shipping and exploiting their clients. The only way to stop this awful trade is to make it clear that no-one who uses their services (rather than the legal alternatives I’ve outlined above) will be allowed to stay, so the new Nationality and Borders Act says that anyone who arrives illegally can’t apply for asylum in the UK.
Click to expand...

Of course, we will still get plenty of refugees applying to come to the UK (for example from the countries I’ve outlined above), but only through legal routes, so the people-smugglers will be out of business and the misery, degradation and death which they cause will end. Finally, I worry that the various pro-migration commentators and campaigners aren't offering much in the way of practically-workable alternative approaches to controlling our borders instead. The danger is that – no matter how genuine their concerns may be – this important omission leaves them exposed to counter-accusations that they are really trying to prevent any kind of effective restrictions on migration at all, no matter who the migrants may be or how many they are, and that they are turning a blind eye to criminality, exploitation and death in the process.
Click to expand...
 
social media firms and search engines have a duty to protect children from harmful content such as material promoting self-harm and eating disorders.
Click to expand...

I look forward to the banning of pretty much every major Instagram lifestyle influencer on that basis. I am a bit baffled by the "positive light" bit though, can we only show migrants crossing the Channel if we're mumbling "what a shower of bastards" over the top?
 
Hostile environment which never actually really went away is getting a reheat:

www.theguardian.com

New hostile environment policies show Windrush lessons ‘not been learned’

Immigration experts scathing about Home Office plans to tighten access to services for people without legal status
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

And Robert Jenrick has the chuztpah to say:

Utter Cunt said:
Illegal working causes untold harm to communities, cheating honest workers of employment, putting vulnerable people at risk and defrauding the public purse. Our immigration enforcement teams are working to bring those violating our laws to justice. It’s our priority to crack down on this crime and empower law enforcement to remove illegal migrants.
Click to expand...

Yes Robert, you'd know all about that because: Minister accepts Isle of Dogs housing development 'was unlawful'

with thanks to editor for the BBC link
 
This should frighten all of us I think, the language they’re using look at it “a rights break”.
Legislation that they know is not compatible with European convention on human rights but they’re broadcasting their plans to do it anyways.

They’re quite capable I think of trying to take us out of the echr just in order to cling to power by being the tough on immigrants party.

www.theguardian.com

Rishi Sunak to launch bill to stop people arriving on small boats claiming asylum

Law would also place duty on home secretary to send anyone who arrives on small boat in UK to Rwanda or another country
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
Anyone coming to the UK claiming asylum is not entering the country illegally afaik - pandering to the right wing vote is all I can see, & I’d wager it’ll never pass anyway.
 
Bear in mind, for a lot of the more headbangy Brexiteer mob the ECHR is as much of an enemy as the EU ever was. Launching these Bills and then complaining about sovereignty when they're knocked back is all part of the strategy to soften opinion towards Britain chucking out the bits of human rights law that they don't like.
 
I'm sensing that the boat people stuff is going to develop into a poorly-planned fuckup. They're advertising that they're going to ban migrant boats, but that's not what they're planning to do. So they'll have to spin it out indefinitely and never actually get round to it.
 
Rob Ray said:
Bear in mind, for a lot of the more headbangy Brexiteer mob the ECHR is as much of an enemy as the EU ever was. Launching these Bills and then complaining about sovereignty when they're knocked back is all part of the strategy to soften opinion towards Britain chucking out the bits of human rights law that they don't like.
Click to expand...

Yeah well they were never gonna get their Brexit and magically become happy were they.
 
bimble said:
hope so too. hopefully just theatre, anti immigrant chest beating to try to stave off total wipeout at election. i am dreading this election.
Click to expand...
Don't think it will make any difference tbh. Anti-immigration and anti-refugee policies are broadly popular but the sort of person whose vote is actively swayed by these measures was never going to vote anything but Tory anyway.
To win the next GE, the Tories need to get energy prices falling, house prices rising and at least some vague signs of economic growth. This is just a sideshow without those and they don't have a scoobies on how to resolve the real problems.
Raheem said:
I'm sensing that the boat people stuff is going to develop into a poorly-planned fuckup. They're advertising that they're going to ban migrant boats, but that's not what they're planning to do. So they'll have to spin it out indefinitely and never actually get round to it.
Click to expand...
Well Yes I think we can pretty much take that as a given.
Mr.Bishie said:
Which imo will never pass. The Rwanda shite didn’t either.
Click to expand...
It will pass as to whether it makes any difference very much doubt it. The channel is still only 20 miles wide, the French will still only make token efforts to stop them passing through. Rwanda is currently on hold and may or may not restart. I reckon there won't be another attempt for a while yet. The High Court has ruled it legal but it has been appealed to the Court of Appeal and it will deffo go to the Supreme Court either way after that.
Then there will be challenges by individuals come the day itself.
 
It just keeps geting worse. Years of kite flying to get to the current inhuman stupidity, flopped lower than Australia.

I suppose when they work out they can't deport the majority of asylum seekers they will come up with further 'solutions'. Camps for undesirables with no release dates. And Kier Starmer's Labour fully on board.

In my mind it started with Peter Lilley talking about 'bogus asylum seekers' at one of the shittier Tory conferences of the early 1990's. And has carried on under every administration, Tory or Labour, ever since. Always prefaced with some guff about the UK being a 'tolerant' and 'welcoming' place.

The entire asylum 'system' is now predicated on trying to deny entry rather than managing the numbers coming from parts of the world we can't pretend to have influence over. They have deftly conflated asylum with immigration more generally and let this become part of mainstream discourse. Squalid and dishonest.

Whether this particular dismal chapter is 'workable' or not matters less to me than the long-term direction of travel. Fucking bleak and dark.
 
Raheem said:
I'm sensing that the boat people stuff is going to develop into a poorly-planned fuckup. They're advertising that they're going to ban migrant boats, but that's not what they're planning to do. So they'll have to spin it out indefinitely and never actually get round to it.
Click to expand...
Now what makes you think that
 
"They will not stop coming here, until the world knows, that if you enter Britain illegally, you will be detained and swiftly removed. [pause] Removed back to your country, if it's safe, or to a safe country, safer country, like Rwanda."

"And that is precisely what this bill will do. That is how we will stop the boats."
 
"[T]his bill enables detention of illegal arrivals, without bail or judicial review within the first 28 days of detention, until they can be removed.

It puts a duty on the Home Secretary to remove illegal entrants, and will radically narrow the number of challenges and appeals that can suspend removal.

Only those under 18, medically unfit to fly, or at a serious risk of irreversible harm - and exceedingly high bar in the country we are removing them to - will be able to delay their removal. Any other claim will be heard remotely after removal."
 
Bear in mind there is nothing illegal about seeking asylum. But she uses that word continuously.
 
Dystopiary said:
"Modern slavery laws are being abused to block removals." ffs
Click to expand...
I have news for you. Last year the government created a new department to deal with cases of modern day slavery in respect of asylum seekers. This new department the IECA (Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority) was created without parliamentary approval - essentially against the rules, but when questioned about it the government predictably fobbed off the questioner. The IECA takes a lot longer to process NRM referrals (usually about 6-8 weeks rather that a week to 10 days with the SCA). Now in January this year the criteria for asylum seekers to claim support as victims of modern day slavery changed. They now have to provide documentary evidence in support of their claim otherwise it will be rejected, thus making it virtually impossible for asylum seekers to make a claim.

Bad Decisions: the creation of an Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority will undermine identifying and protecting victims of crime

www.labourexploitation.org www.labourexploitation.org
 
teqniq said:
I have news for you. Last year the government created a new department to deal with cases of modern day slavery in respect of asylum seekers. This new department the IECA (Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority) was created without parliamentary approval - essentially against the rules, but when questioned about it the government predictably fobbed off the questioner. The IECA takes a lot longer to process NRM referrals (usually about 6-8 weeks rather that a week to 10 days with the SCA). Now in January this year the criteria for asylum seekers to claim support as victims of modern day slavery changed. They now have to provide documentary evidence in support of their claim otherwise it will be rejected, thus making it virtually impossible for asylum seekers to make a claim.

Bad Decisions: the creation of an Immigration Enforcement Competent Authority will undermine identifying and protecting victims of crime

www.labourexploitation.org www.labourexploitation.org
Click to expand...
I must of missed this news when was it announced, because it must of been kept quiet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

likesfish
whose next for rwanda?
Replies
8
Views
325
bellaozzydog
bellaozzydog
Fez909
Positives about the next Labour government
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
178
Views
7K
Silas Loom
Silas Loom
Kid_Eternity
Is a revolution possible in the UK?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
168
Views
4K
wemakeyousoundb
wemakeyousoundb
Bingoman
SNP Government in Scotland on the verge of collapse?
Replies
4
Views
232
geminisnake
geminisnake
RD2003
Hotel housing asylum seekers attacked in Knowsley
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
194
Views
11K
PR1Berske
PR1Berske
Back
Top Bottom