> 17 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel accused of misleading parliament over controversial borders bill](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/17/fury-as-patels-borders-bill-found-misleading-on-safe-routes-for-migrants)
>
>The home secretary told MPs that the widely criticised nationality and borders bill would create new safe and legal routes to the UK for asylum seekers, suggesting that new routes would ensure that people no longer need to risk their lives trying to reach the UK.
>
During a parliamentary debate last November – held the day after 27 people drowned in the Channel as they tried to cross from France – Patel assured MPs that the bill “does create safe and legal routes”.
>
>However, the Home Office has now admitted that the proposed legislation, which is due to go back to the House of Commons this week, in fact contains no provision to provide safe government-backed routes for asylum seekers.
>
>A letter dated 5 April from Home Office minister Tom Pursglove to the humanitarian charity MSF UK directly contradicts Patel by stating that safe and legal routes “do not form part of the bill”.
–
>17 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel was warned evidence behind Rwanda plan ‘highly uncertain’, as Home Office concerns made public](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-rwanda-home-office-asylum-seekers-b2059588.html)
>
>In his letter to the home secretary, Mr Rycroft said he was “satisfied myself that it is regular, proper and feasible for this policy to proceed”, as he cited the intention to prevent loss of life in the Channel and maintain “public trust and confidence in border controls”.
.
>However, he stressed: “This advice highlights the uncertainty surrounding the value for money of this proposal. I recognise that, despite the high cost of this policy, there are potentially significant savings to be realised from deterring people entering the UK illegally.
>
>“Value for money of the policy is dependent on it being effective as a deterrent. Evidence of a deterrent effect is highly uncertain and cannot be quantified with sufficient certainty to provide me with the necessary level of assurance over value for money.”
>
>Requiring the home secretary’s “written instruction to proceed”, he added: “I do not believe sufficient evidence can be obtained to demonstrate that the policy will have a deterrent effect significant enough to make the policy value for money.
>
>“This does not mean that the MEDP [Migration and Economic Development Partnership] cannot have the appropriate deterrent effect; just that it there is not sufficient evidence for me to conclude that it will.”
–
>16 Apr 2022: [UK took in asylum seekers fleeing Rwanda as policy driven by ‘rank hypocrisy’](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/uk-took-76-asylum-seekers-26728424)
>
>Britain took in asylum seekers from Rwanda even as Home Secretary Priti Patel drew up plans to send refugees fleeing other countries there.
>
>Since 2017, 76 Rwandans have sought sanctuary in the UK, and 20 of them were granted some form of leave to remain, including two just last year.
>
>Meanwhile 3,610 Rwandans have sought asylum in European countries in the past five years.
Experts say this may be a fraction of the total number fleeing the country, as many seek refuge elsewhere in Africa.
–
>5 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel’s plan to criminalise English Channel refugees at risk after peers reject law for second time](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/patel-refugees-asylum-lords-law-b2051136.html)
>
>Priti Patel’s plan to criminalise refugees crossing the English Channel is in danger after the House of Lords rejected the proposed law for a second time.
>
>In a rare move, peers voted again to remove the offence of arriving in the UK – including British waters – without permission from the Nationality and Borders Bill.
>
>It was one of 12 defeats suffered by the government on Monday night, when peers including the former lord chief justice warned that the plans violate the Refugee Convention.
–
>30 Jan 2022: [Priti Patel ‘misleading’ public by calling Channel crossings illegal after court rules asylum seekers not committing crime](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/priti-patel-channel-crossings-illegal-misleading-b2003063.html)
>
>Priti Patel has been accused of misleading the public by continuing to label all Channel crossings by asylum seekers “illegal” after a court confirmed they were not.
>
>Judges ruled that refugees trying to reach a British port or be intercepted at sea have not committed a crime in December, and this week lawyers representing the home secretary told the High Court a “misunderstanding” about the law had been rectified.
>
>But the government has not publicly acknowledged the cases, as Ms Patel and other ministers continue to label the desperate journeys “illegal” in parliament.
>
>Stuart McDonald, a Scottish National Party (SNP) MP who sits on the Home Affairs Committee, called the situation “very troubling”.
>
>“It’s a misleading way of talking about this issue and totally mischaracterises what is happening,”
–
edit: Apr 5 link fixed
There’s a certain irony here when Redwood’s boss is a criminal who refuses to stand down.
Fuck business
Fuck the law
Fuck refugees
Fuck the EU
Fuck the poor
Fuck the middle class
Fuck the young
And Fuuuck God.
The Tory Party
And without even having heard the words “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, Rees-Mogg, Redwood, Bridgen and a host of others are lining up to play the part of the twenty-first century’s social media version of Hugh de Morville. What shameless, unprincipled villains they all are, with their Ladybird Book-level pantomiming of the past, led by a fool LARPing Churchill.
This is a really concerning thing for the Archbishop to do. The Church shouldn’t get involved in Government, that is the balance which has been achieved after 200 years of political/religious infighting. All thrown away because Welby needs to tell everyone what he thinks when literally no one cares.
Oh god. John Redwood. Says it all.
So, we have a bloke who believes that a mythical bearded man in the sky controls everything, being told by a bloke with an IQ of about half his shoe size, that believes that leaving a group with half a billion people in it, in exchange for a tonne of paperwork, would be a good thing for a country to do, telling us that sending people to a country that just last year was being condemned by the very same people for breaching human rights, whilst attempting to get rid of any safeguards of the human rights we have here, is a good thing.
Got it?
This country is fucking bonkers.
Tory MP needs to remember his boss is one of those law breakers…
How about for every immigrant we take in, France takes one of our tories?
I mean Jesus in his “Turn the other cheek, go the extra mile” part of Matt 5 literally called for Malicious compliance.
“Jesus was born like the poor, he lived with them, and on the cross he died like them. If Jesus is the divine revelation of God’s intention for humanity, then faith is nothing but trust in the one who came in Christ for the liberation of the poor. To place one’s trust in this god means that one’s value system is no longer derived from the established structures of the world, but from one’s struggle against those unjust structures.”
– James Cone, “Christian Faith and Political Praxis”
13 comments
The ‘ungodly plan’ is indefensible…just accept it, fire Bully Patel and limit the damage
It shows you where the Conservative party are heading when they think the Church of England are bleeding heart liberals.
Of course it’s lickspittle in chief and MP for the 19th century Reese-Mogg.
Says the party supporting a lying law breaking, criminally corrupt incompetent adulterous sleaze ball.
More:
>17 Apr 2022: [Rwanda asylum plan is ‘almost Easter story of redemption’, says Rees-Mogg](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/17/uk-asylum-seekers-plan-rwanda-jacob-rees-mogg)
–
> 17 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel accused of misleading parliament over controversial borders bill](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/apr/17/fury-as-patels-borders-bill-found-misleading-on-safe-routes-for-migrants)
>
>The home secretary told MPs that the widely criticised nationality and borders bill would create new safe and legal routes to the UK for asylum seekers, suggesting that new routes would ensure that people no longer need to risk their lives trying to reach the UK.
>
During a parliamentary debate last November – held the day after 27 people drowned in the Channel as they tried to cross from France – Patel assured MPs that the bill “does create safe and legal routes”.
>
>However, the Home Office has now admitted that the proposed legislation, which is due to go back to the House of Commons this week, in fact contains no provision to provide safe government-backed routes for asylum seekers.
>
>A letter dated 5 April from Home Office minister Tom Pursglove to the humanitarian charity MSF UK directly contradicts Patel by stating that safe and legal routes “do not form part of the bill”.
–
>17 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel was warned evidence behind Rwanda plan ‘highly uncertain’, as Home Office concerns made public](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/priti-patel-rwanda-home-office-asylum-seekers-b2059588.html)
>
>In his letter to the home secretary, Mr Rycroft said he was “satisfied myself that it is regular, proper and feasible for this policy to proceed”, as he cited the intention to prevent loss of life in the Channel and maintain “public trust and confidence in border controls”.
.
>However, he stressed: “This advice highlights the uncertainty surrounding the value for money of this proposal. I recognise that, despite the high cost of this policy, there are potentially significant savings to be realised from deterring people entering the UK illegally.
>
>“Value for money of the policy is dependent on it being effective as a deterrent. Evidence of a deterrent effect is highly uncertain and cannot be quantified with sufficient certainty to provide me with the necessary level of assurance over value for money.”
>
>Requiring the home secretary’s “written instruction to proceed”, he added: “I do not believe sufficient evidence can be obtained to demonstrate that the policy will have a deterrent effect significant enough to make the policy value for money.
>
>“This does not mean that the MEDP [Migration and Economic Development Partnership] cannot have the appropriate deterrent effect; just that it there is not sufficient evidence for me to conclude that it will.”
–
>16 Apr 2022: [UK took in asylum seekers fleeing Rwanda as policy driven by ‘rank hypocrisy’](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/uk-took-76-asylum-seekers-26728424)
>
>Britain took in asylum seekers from Rwanda even as Home Secretary Priti Patel drew up plans to send refugees fleeing other countries there.
>
>Since 2017, 76 Rwandans have sought sanctuary in the UK, and 20 of them were granted some form of leave to remain, including two just last year.
>
>Meanwhile 3,610 Rwandans have sought asylum in European countries in the past five years.
Experts say this may be a fraction of the total number fleeing the country, as many seek refuge elsewhere in Africa.
–
>5 Apr 2022: [Priti Patel’s plan to criminalise English Channel refugees at risk after peers reject law for second time](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/patel-refugees-asylum-lords-law-b2051136.html)
>
>Priti Patel’s plan to criminalise refugees crossing the English Channel is in danger after the House of Lords rejected the proposed law for a second time.
>
>In a rare move, peers voted again to remove the offence of arriving in the UK – including British waters – without permission from the Nationality and Borders Bill.
>
>It was one of 12 defeats suffered by the government on Monday night, when peers including the former lord chief justice warned that the plans violate the Refugee Convention.
–
>30 Jan 2022: [Priti Patel ‘misleading’ public by calling Channel crossings illegal after court rules asylum seekers not committing crime](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/priti-patel-channel-crossings-illegal-misleading-b2003063.html)
>
>Priti Patel has been accused of misleading the public by continuing to label all Channel crossings by asylum seekers “illegal” after a court confirmed they were not.
>
>Judges ruled that refugees trying to reach a British port or be intercepted at sea have not committed a crime in December, and this week lawyers representing the home secretary told the High Court a “misunderstanding” about the law had been rectified.
>
>But the government has not publicly acknowledged the cases, as Ms Patel and other ministers continue to label the desperate journeys “illegal” in parliament.
>
>Stuart McDonald, a Scottish National Party (SNP) MP who sits on the Home Affairs Committee, called the situation “very troubling”.
>
>“It’s a misleading way of talking about this issue and totally mischaracterises what is happening,”
–
edit: Apr 5 link fixed
There’s a certain irony here when Redwood’s boss is a criminal who refuses to stand down.
Fuck business
Fuck the law
Fuck refugees
Fuck the EU
Fuck the poor
Fuck the middle class
Fuck the young
And Fuuuck God.
The Tory Party
And without even having heard the words “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?”, Rees-Mogg, Redwood, Bridgen and a host of others are lining up to play the part of the twenty-first century’s social media version of Hugh de Morville. What shameless, unprincipled villains they all are, with their Ladybird Book-level pantomiming of the past, led by a fool LARPing Churchill.
This is a really concerning thing for the Archbishop to do. The Church shouldn’t get involved in Government, that is the balance which has been achieved after 200 years of political/religious infighting. All thrown away because Welby needs to tell everyone what he thinks when literally no one cares.
Oh god. John Redwood. Says it all.
So, we have a bloke who believes that a mythical bearded man in the sky controls everything, being told by a bloke with an IQ of about half his shoe size, that believes that leaving a group with half a billion people in it, in exchange for a tonne of paperwork, would be a good thing for a country to do, telling us that sending people to a country that just last year was being condemned by the very same people for breaching human rights, whilst attempting to get rid of any safeguards of the human rights we have here, is a good thing.
Got it?
This country is fucking bonkers.
Tory MP needs to remember his boss is one of those law breakers…
How about for every immigrant we take in, France takes one of our tories?
I mean Jesus in his “Turn the other cheek, go the extra mile” part of Matt 5 literally called for Malicious compliance.
“Jesus was born like the poor, he lived with them, and on the cross he died like them. If Jesus is the divine revelation of God’s intention for humanity, then faith is nothing but trust in the one who came in Christ for the liberation of the poor. To place one’s trust in this god means that one’s value system is no longer derived from the established structures of the world, but from one’s struggle against those unjust structures.”
– James Cone, “Christian Faith and Political Praxis”