Read on Twitter
I know that others, including both @ColinYeo1 and @stand_for_all have had a crack at this, but it makes me so spittingly angry, I can't not. 1/ https://twitter.com/AthertonNWales/status/1295655113495924736
1. We’ve had a points-based immigration system since 2008. It is for all student and work visas, ie, “economic” migrants. 2/
2. It’s not particularly “Australian” to have a points-based system. Many countries -- including us, see point (1) -- have one. It also is not synonymous with immigration control. How many migrants come in under a points-based system depends entirely on how it is devised. 3/
3. Economic migration is completely separate to asylum. 4/
4. A PBS doesn't mean “pushing boats back into international waters” or “indefinite offshore detention”. A points-based system coexists with the latter policies (which breach international law) in Australia, but the two facts do not have any legal connection with one another. 5/
5. There is no queue, and therefore there is no “queue-jumping.” Our PBS does not now, and the new one planned will not, put a cap on numbers coming in. 6/
6. In any event, see point (4) above. It would be contrary to international law to refuse any asylum claim because a cap on numbers is reached. 7/
7. Nothing is happening on “huge scale.” The numbers are 4000 for the year so far. That’s approximately 12.23% of asylum claims lodged in 2019 (32,693); 1.76% of 2019 net migration (226,000); and 0.006% of UK population (66.65 million). 8/
8. And most of them would have been coming by the Chunnel or ferry, if those routes hadn’t been shut down, so this is not a new stream of arrivals in any event. 9/
9. They are mostly not economic migrants. 50% have their claims granted at first instance; on appeal a further 50% succeed, for a total of 75%. 10/
10. They are brought by human smugglers, not traffickers. Smugglers take payment in advance and smuggle you in. Traffickers smuggle you in and then take payment in your labour (physical or sexual) after you’ve arrived. 11/
11. France was recently found in breach of the rights of asylum seekers to freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment. Press release from HUDOC: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng-press# {%22fulltext%22:[%2228820/13%22]} (Adobe link at top of page); at Refworld: https://refworld.org/cases,ECHR,5f0455264.html; ... 12/
...mainstream press coverage: https://www.france24.com/en/20200702-european-court-of-human-rights-condemns-france-over-inhuman-living-conditions-for-asylum-seekers 13/
12. France, whose population is approximately the same as the UK’s, had 154,620 asylum claims in 2019. The UK had 32,693 (see point (7) above). (I have seen numbers varying form 32,000-40,000 per annum for UK and 140,000-154,000 per annum for France.) 14/
13. The UK has an obligation to process any asylum claim, regardless or whether or not the claimant has passed through France. (And there is no obligation whatsoever on an asylum seeker as regards where they claim.) 15/
14. Currently, the UK can (subject to exceptions) request France to take back asylum seekers with a previous claim registered there. This is an EU law mechanism. If we want to return claimants to France after 31 December, we'll need a new agreement with them or the whole EU 16/
15. The framework has nothing to do with “human rights lawyers.” It’s part of EU law, and losing it will be part of leaving EU law. 17/
16. I can’t do better than Colin on this one. “Human rights lawyers are accountable to the Courts and to our clients.” https://barstandardsboard.org.uk/for-barristers/bsb-handbook-and-code-guidance/the-bsb-handbook.html https://sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/code-conduct-solicitors/ “We’re not some sort of 5th column, FFS.” 18/
17. Proposing bringing gunboats against desperate asylum seekers in rubber dinghies discloses a contempt for humanity, human rights, & international law. 19/
18. People with contempt for humanity, human rights, and international law are unfit for any position of leadership. 20/
19. That’s without even getting into the abject poverty of information, education, and intelligence betrayed throughout this abhorrent letter (see points (1)-(16) above). 21/
20. This MP should resign in disgrace, but under this government is more likely to be made Minister for Immigration in the upcoming cabinet shuffle when Gavin Williamson gets the boot. She's clearly trying to out-Patel Patel. Too bad she seems even less skilled. /end
