REVANCHIST REACTIONARY
UN rebukes Suella Braverman over her attack on refugee convention
UNHCR defends 1951 convention after UK home secretary’s speech on ‘uncontrolled and illegal migration’
01:44 Global asylum framework incentivises illegal migration, says Suella Braverman – video
UNHCR defends 1951 convention after UK home secretary’s speech on ‘uncontrolled and illegal migration’
01:44 Global asylum framework incentivises illegal migration, says Suella Braverman – video
Rajeev Syal and Ben Quinn
THE GUARDIAN
Braverman held back from calling for the UK to leave the ECHR – a move that friends say she would like to see in a Conservative election manifesto – but said leaving human rights conventions had been supported by previous Tory leaders.
“As home secretary, Theresa May called for Britain to leave the ECHR. And it was Conservative party policy under Michael Howard to leave the refugee convention – I’m merely advocating for reform,” she said.
A former Tory cabinet minister told the Guardian that Braverman was making a “cynical pitch” to gain support before the Conservative party’s annual conference, which begins this weekend.
“The home secretary has created a row to obscure her poor record in office given she has a stalled Rwanda scheme, a stalled barge for migrants, and a mutinous police force,” the former minister said.
As she left the thinktank’s venue, Braverman ignored a question from a reporter asking whether her speech had been designed to improve her chances of becoming Conservative leader.
Tue 26 Sep 2023
The UN’s refugee agency has rebuked Suella Braverman after she claimed that world leaders had failed to make wholesale reform of human rights laws because of fears of being branded “racist or illiberal”.
The UNHCR issued a highly unusual statement on Tuesday defending the 1951 refugee convention and highlighting the UK’s record asylum claim backlog.
It came after the home secretary refused to rule out leaving the convention and said the international community had “collectively failed” to modernise international laws.
She also claimed that women and gay people must face more than discrimination if they are to qualify as a refugee – a statement that has been challenged by refugee charities.
Speaking to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, Braverman claimed the international community had failed to reform the UN’s refugee convention of 1951 and the European convention on human rights (ECHR).
“The first [reason] is simply that it is very hard to renegotiate these instruments. The second is much more cynical. The fear of being branded a racist or illiberal. Any attempt to reform the refugee convention will see you smeared as anti-refugee,” she said.
She began her speech by claiming that uncontrolled and illegal migration posed an “existential challenge” to Europe and the US.
“I’m here in America to talk about a critical and shared global challenge: uncontrolled and illegal migration,” she said. “It is an existential challenge for the political and cultural institutions of the west.”
She claimed case law arising from the refugee convention had lowered the threshold so that asylum seekers needed only prove that they faced discrimination instead of a real risk of torture, death or violence.
“Where individuals are being persecuted, it is right that we offer sanctuary. But we will not be able to sustain an asylum system if, in effect, simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin is sufficient to qualify for protection.”
Asked after the speech whether the UK would consider leaving the convention if changes were not delivered, Braverman said the government would do “whatever is required” to tackle the issue of migrants arriving via unauthorised routes.
She said: “The prime minister himself has said we will do whatever it takes to stop the boats and that is my position.”
In a statement, the UNHCR backed the convention and questioned Braverman’s distinction between persecution and discrimination.
“The refugee convention remains as relevant today as when it was adopted. Where individuals are at risk of persecution on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, it is crucial that they are able to seek safety and protection,” it said.
Rejecting an overhaul of the convention, the UNHCR called for a “more consistent application of the convention and its underlying principle of responsibility-sharing” and pointedly referred to the UK’s asylum backlog, which was more than 175,000 last month.
“An appropriate response to the increase in arrivals and to the UK’s current asylum backlog would include strengthening and expediting decision-making procedures,” the statement said.
Responding to the speech, the Refugee Council, which works closely with asylum seekers, questioned Braverman’s claim that there was a lower bar to being granted asylum on the grounds of discrimination.
Jon Featonby, the charity’s chief policy analyst, said: “In our work with people in the asylum system, we have seen no evidence that Home Office decision-makers are lowering the threshold for asylum so that a well-founded fear of persecution is replaced with discrimination. The home secretary’s claims do not appear to be grounded in credible evidence.”
ActionAid UK said seeking asylum was the only lifeline left for the many women and girls its dealt with who were fleeing persecution. The charity’s chief executive, Halima Begum, said: “Denying this fundamental right is not just a policy choice; it’s a direct affront to gender equality and human rights.”
Andrew Boff, a Conservative London assembly member and patron of the LGBT+ Conservative group, said Braverman should stop engaging in “dog-whistle” politics and focus on the “basket case” that was her department.
“Talking about the victims of persecution as if they are the problem is incredibly unhelpful and really paints us as an uncaring party. I’m deeply unhappy with it,” he said.
The 4,497-word speech came after two days of headlines about Braverman’s three-day visit to the US during which she is expected to meet representatives of the Biden administration.
The UN’s refugee agency has rebuked Suella Braverman after she claimed that world leaders had failed to make wholesale reform of human rights laws because of fears of being branded “racist or illiberal”.
The UNHCR issued a highly unusual statement on Tuesday defending the 1951 refugee convention and highlighting the UK’s record asylum claim backlog.
It came after the home secretary refused to rule out leaving the convention and said the international community had “collectively failed” to modernise international laws.
She also claimed that women and gay people must face more than discrimination if they are to qualify as a refugee – a statement that has been challenged by refugee charities.
Speaking to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, Braverman claimed the international community had failed to reform the UN’s refugee convention of 1951 and the European convention on human rights (ECHR).
“The first [reason] is simply that it is very hard to renegotiate these instruments. The second is much more cynical. The fear of being branded a racist or illiberal. Any attempt to reform the refugee convention will see you smeared as anti-refugee,” she said.
She began her speech by claiming that uncontrolled and illegal migration posed an “existential challenge” to Europe and the US.
“I’m here in America to talk about a critical and shared global challenge: uncontrolled and illegal migration,” she said. “It is an existential challenge for the political and cultural institutions of the west.”
She claimed case law arising from the refugee convention had lowered the threshold so that asylum seekers needed only prove that they faced discrimination instead of a real risk of torture, death or violence.
“Where individuals are being persecuted, it is right that we offer sanctuary. But we will not be able to sustain an asylum system if, in effect, simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin is sufficient to qualify for protection.”
Asked after the speech whether the UK would consider leaving the convention if changes were not delivered, Braverman said the government would do “whatever is required” to tackle the issue of migrants arriving via unauthorised routes.
She said: “The prime minister himself has said we will do whatever it takes to stop the boats and that is my position.”
In a statement, the UNHCR backed the convention and questioned Braverman’s distinction between persecution and discrimination.
“The refugee convention remains as relevant today as when it was adopted. Where individuals are at risk of persecution on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity, it is crucial that they are able to seek safety and protection,” it said.
Rejecting an overhaul of the convention, the UNHCR called for a “more consistent application of the convention and its underlying principle of responsibility-sharing” and pointedly referred to the UK’s asylum backlog, which was more than 175,000 last month.
“An appropriate response to the increase in arrivals and to the UK’s current asylum backlog would include strengthening and expediting decision-making procedures,” the statement said.
Responding to the speech, the Refugee Council, which works closely with asylum seekers, questioned Braverman’s claim that there was a lower bar to being granted asylum on the grounds of discrimination.
Jon Featonby, the charity’s chief policy analyst, said: “In our work with people in the asylum system, we have seen no evidence that Home Office decision-makers are lowering the threshold for asylum so that a well-founded fear of persecution is replaced with discrimination. The home secretary’s claims do not appear to be grounded in credible evidence.”
ActionAid UK said seeking asylum was the only lifeline left for the many women and girls its dealt with who were fleeing persecution. The charity’s chief executive, Halima Begum, said: “Denying this fundamental right is not just a policy choice; it’s a direct affront to gender equality and human rights.”
Andrew Boff, a Conservative London assembly member and patron of the LGBT+ Conservative group, said Braverman should stop engaging in “dog-whistle” politics and focus on the “basket case” that was her department.
“Talking about the victims of persecution as if they are the problem is incredibly unhelpful and really paints us as an uncaring party. I’m deeply unhappy with it,” he said.
The 4,497-word speech came after two days of headlines about Braverman’s three-day visit to the US during which she is expected to meet representatives of the Biden administration.
Braverman held back from calling for the UK to leave the ECHR – a move that friends say she would like to see in a Conservative election manifesto – but said leaving human rights conventions had been supported by previous Tory leaders.
“As home secretary, Theresa May called for Britain to leave the ECHR. And it was Conservative party policy under Michael Howard to leave the refugee convention – I’m merely advocating for reform,” she said.
A former Tory cabinet minister told the Guardian that Braverman was making a “cynical pitch” to gain support before the Conservative party’s annual conference, which begins this weekend.
“The home secretary has created a row to obscure her poor record in office given she has a stalled Rwanda scheme, a stalled barge for migrants, and a mutinous police force,” the former minister said.
As she left the thinktank’s venue, Braverman ignored a question from a reporter asking whether her speech had been designed to improve her chances of becoming Conservative leader.
By AFP
September 26, 2023
UK interior minister Suella Braverman was on Tuesday to question whether the United Nations Refugee Convention was “fit for our modern age” during a keynote speech at a US think-tank in Washington.The speech at the centre-right American Enterprise Institute is intended to lay out an international plan to deal with the refugee crisis, a key political issue for her struggling Conservative party back home.
Braverman is set to call the UN convention “an incredible achievement of its age”, according to extracts released to the British media.
“But more than 70 years on, we now live in a completely different time,” she was to say, citing a study that says the convention now gives 780 million people the potential right to move to another country.
“It is therefore incumbent upon politicians and thought leaders to ask whether the Refugee Convention, and the way it has come to be interpreted through our courts, is fit for our modern age. Or whether it is in need of reform.”
Western countries will not be able to sustain an asylum system “if in effect simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin is sufficient to qualify for protection”, she was to add.
– ‘Absurd’ –
The 1951 Refugee Convention legally defines the term “refugee” and outlines their rights.
The UK government is currently languishing in the polls and has been struggling to stem the flow since Brexit of small boat crossings from mainland Europe.
Almost 24,000 people have made the trip this year, adding to a record backlog in asylum claims and heaping pressure on ministers who promised to “take back control” of UK borders after leaving the European Union.
Controversial proposals to tackle the issue include criminalising irregular migration and sending failed asylum seekers for resettlement in Rwanda.
Braverman, a lawyer who has criticised the European Convention on Human Rights for blocking the Rwanda scheme, will say that a system where “people are able to travel through multiple safe countries… while they pick their preferred destination to claim asylum, is absurd and unsustainable”.
But non-profit group the Refugee Council said the UK should instead be “addressing the real issues in the asylum system, such as the record backlog, and providing safe routes for those in need of protection” rather than taking aim at the UN convention.
Yvette Cooper, home affairs spokeswoman for the opposition Labour Party, accused Braverman of having “given up on fixing the Tories’ asylum chaos” and is “looking for anyone else to blame”.
While in the United States, Braverman is due to meet US Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland for talks on migration, among other topics.
Smirking Suella trashes 70 years of human rights in 30 minutes
Time to ditch the UN convention, said Braverman, we’d all been far too nice to people fleeing persecution
THE GUARDIAN
Tue 26 Sep 2023
Call the US jaunt a win-win for Suella Braverman. Trying to get the rest of the world to ditch its obligations to the 1951 UN refugee convention was always a long shot, but there was the off chance that UK voters would be confused enough to imagine the home secretary was on top of the small boats chaos. More to the point, Braverman got to imitate a global player ahead of this weekend’s Conservative party conference.
No bad thing, when there might be a vacancy for a new leader within a year or so. There’s nothing the Tory right love more than someone who bounces around their own echo chamber. And here was Suella out-Kemiing Kemi. Imagining she was saying the things that cannot be said, when really all she was doing was cynically stoking a culture war. Not to mention blaming her own failures on international agreements. No matter. Braverman will say anything, do anything, to secure the Tory leadership. Though if Suella is the answer, the Tories should urgently ask themselves what exactly the question is.
It’s sometimes hard to know why Braverman is still in her job. After all, it’s not as if she’s made a success of being home secretary. One of Rishi Sunak’s five promises was to stop the boats this year and she’s failed spectacularly at that. Worse, the backlog for processing asylum claims is growing with the hotel bill for applicants now £8m a day. Under normal circumstances that might make her vulnerable to the sack, but Suella is armour plated. No one cares that she’s actually not very capable or even very bright – becoming a lawyer must be easier than it looks. All that seems to count is that she is the darling of the right.
Whether anyone in the US was actually listening to the home secretary – almost certainly not – was immaterial. This was an overseas speech given at the centre-right American Enterprise Institute aimed almost exclusively at a home audience. Braverman didn’t waste any time with introductions, cutting to the chase immediately. The greatest threat to the planet was uncontrolled and illegal migration. I could have sworn that poverty and the climate crisis might be up there as greater threats. Then, what do I know. We must all bow before the weight of Suella’s intellect.
Braverman went on to quote a whole load of statistics. Only one of which was sourced. To Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s former adviser. It would be no surprise if all the numbers later turned out to be complete bollocks. Then anyone who dares question her has been duped by the global consensus.
Anyway, here was the deal. There were 900 million migrants on the loose and they were all headed for the UK in the largest ever convoy of small boats. And almost all of the 900 million were heading to Leicester where they were out to cause trouble. As far as anyone in the Home Office knows, Suella has never been to Leicester and knows nothing about it. But for some reason she’s got it in for the city.
There was then a brief acknowledgment of her own immigrant status. It was because her parents were immigrants that she knew how untrustworthy most immigrants were. Her parents had made an effort to assimilate British values. They had understood the importance of mutual respect and tolerance. But for some reason they had forgotten to pass those on to her. So she knew of what she spoke. Multiculturalism had failed. Even though the home secretary and the prime minister have Asian heritage. There were too many foreigners who had no interest in any culture other than their own. More importantly, the country was full. She had no idea that many European countries took far more asylum seekers than we did.
This led on to her solution. Get rid of the refugee convention. It was outdated. Past its sell-by date. Far too soft. We’d all been far too nice to people fleeing persecution. Now we were granting asylum to anyone who was feeling a wee bit uncomfortable in their homelands. Now, she had nothing against gay people or women. But really, it was about time they all toughened up a bit. If you can’t take a bit of discrimination and the odd death sentence then you’re not going to survive a moment in the modern world.
Then there was the European convention on human rights. Just open to abuse from lefty lawyers trying to make sure the law was upheld. There was nothing wrong with sending asylum seekers to Rwanda. So the ECHR had to go. There was nothing wrong in aligning with Russia and Belarus.
The only thing stopping most countries leaving these international conventions was that their leaders had been captured by the wokerati. They were too worried about being thought to be racists and bigots. People should just throw off their shackles and embrace their inner racist and bigot. It didn’t seem to have crossed Suella’s mind that the reason other countries weren’t keen to trash global treaties was that they weren’t racist or bigoted. Then, not a lot crosses her mind these days. She has very limited bandwidth.
What was needed was a new definition of refugee status. Preferably one that insisted anyone claiming to be a refugee was automatically lying and therefore could not be considered to be a refugee. As far as Braverman was concerned, this meant anyone coming from France could not be a refugee and therefore could be legally drowned. She wouldn’t rest until there were no asylum seekers left in the country.
That was it. Braverman smirked. It wasn’t clear whether she had just been freelancing or this was all now government policy. And Sunak was far too weak to tell us. So in 30 minutes, the home secretary had in effect trashed the UK’s human rights record for the past 70 years. Willing us to become a pariah state. She must be so proud. As must we.
Call the US jaunt a win-win for Suella Braverman. Trying to get the rest of the world to ditch its obligations to the 1951 UN refugee convention was always a long shot, but there was the off chance that UK voters would be confused enough to imagine the home secretary was on top of the small boats chaos. More to the point, Braverman got to imitate a global player ahead of this weekend’s Conservative party conference.
No bad thing, when there might be a vacancy for a new leader within a year or so. There’s nothing the Tory right love more than someone who bounces around their own echo chamber. And here was Suella out-Kemiing Kemi. Imagining she was saying the things that cannot be said, when really all she was doing was cynically stoking a culture war. Not to mention blaming her own failures on international agreements. No matter. Braverman will say anything, do anything, to secure the Tory leadership. Though if Suella is the answer, the Tories should urgently ask themselves what exactly the question is.
It’s sometimes hard to know why Braverman is still in her job. After all, it’s not as if she’s made a success of being home secretary. One of Rishi Sunak’s five promises was to stop the boats this year and she’s failed spectacularly at that. Worse, the backlog for processing asylum claims is growing with the hotel bill for applicants now £8m a day. Under normal circumstances that might make her vulnerable to the sack, but Suella is armour plated. No one cares that she’s actually not very capable or even very bright – becoming a lawyer must be easier than it looks. All that seems to count is that she is the darling of the right.
Whether anyone in the US was actually listening to the home secretary – almost certainly not – was immaterial. This was an overseas speech given at the centre-right American Enterprise Institute aimed almost exclusively at a home audience. Braverman didn’t waste any time with introductions, cutting to the chase immediately. The greatest threat to the planet was uncontrolled and illegal migration. I could have sworn that poverty and the climate crisis might be up there as greater threats. Then, what do I know. We must all bow before the weight of Suella’s intellect.
Braverman went on to quote a whole load of statistics. Only one of which was sourced. To Nick Timothy, Theresa May’s former adviser. It would be no surprise if all the numbers later turned out to be complete bollocks. Then anyone who dares question her has been duped by the global consensus.
Anyway, here was the deal. There were 900 million migrants on the loose and they were all headed for the UK in the largest ever convoy of small boats. And almost all of the 900 million were heading to Leicester where they were out to cause trouble. As far as anyone in the Home Office knows, Suella has never been to Leicester and knows nothing about it. But for some reason she’s got it in for the city.
There was then a brief acknowledgment of her own immigrant status. It was because her parents were immigrants that she knew how untrustworthy most immigrants were. Her parents had made an effort to assimilate British values. They had understood the importance of mutual respect and tolerance. But for some reason they had forgotten to pass those on to her. So she knew of what she spoke. Multiculturalism had failed. Even though the home secretary and the prime minister have Asian heritage. There were too many foreigners who had no interest in any culture other than their own. More importantly, the country was full. She had no idea that many European countries took far more asylum seekers than we did.
This led on to her solution. Get rid of the refugee convention. It was outdated. Past its sell-by date. Far too soft. We’d all been far too nice to people fleeing persecution. Now we were granting asylum to anyone who was feeling a wee bit uncomfortable in their homelands. Now, she had nothing against gay people or women. But really, it was about time they all toughened up a bit. If you can’t take a bit of discrimination and the odd death sentence then you’re not going to survive a moment in the modern world.
Then there was the European convention on human rights. Just open to abuse from lefty lawyers trying to make sure the law was upheld. There was nothing wrong with sending asylum seekers to Rwanda. So the ECHR had to go. There was nothing wrong in aligning with Russia and Belarus.
The only thing stopping most countries leaving these international conventions was that their leaders had been captured by the wokerati. They were too worried about being thought to be racists and bigots. People should just throw off their shackles and embrace their inner racist and bigot. It didn’t seem to have crossed Suella’s mind that the reason other countries weren’t keen to trash global treaties was that they weren’t racist or bigoted. Then, not a lot crosses her mind these days. She has very limited bandwidth.
What was needed was a new definition of refugee status. Preferably one that insisted anyone claiming to be a refugee was automatically lying and therefore could not be considered to be a refugee. As far as Braverman was concerned, this meant anyone coming from France could not be a refugee and therefore could be legally drowned. She wouldn’t rest until there were no asylum seekers left in the country.
That was it. Braverman smirked. It wasn’t clear whether she had just been freelancing or this was all now government policy. And Sunak was far too weak to tell us. So in 30 minutes, the home secretary had in effect trashed the UK’s human rights record for the past 70 years. Willing us to become a pariah state. She must be so proud. As must we.
LGBT+ Conservatives patron accuses Braverman of ‘dog-whistle’ politics
UK home secretary will say in US that Britain should not grant asylum to people who simply express fear of discrimination for being gay
UK home secretary will say in US that Britain should not grant asylum to people who simply express fear of discrimination for being gay
Political correspondent
THE GUARDIAN
@BenQuinn75
@BenQuinn75
Tue 26 Sep 2023
Suella Braverman has been accused of “dog-whistle” politics by a senior patron of LGBT+ Conservatives before a speech in which she will say that Britain should not grant asylum to people who simply express a fear of discrimination for being gay.
Comments the home secretary’s office said she would make were drawing criticism even before her speech to a rightwing US thinktank, and Labour challenged Conservative LGBT+ MPs and others to condemn the remarks.
Speaking to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, Braverman will argue that the UN’s 1951 refugee convention must be reformed to tackle a worldwide migration crisis.
She will argue that case law arising from the convention has lowered the threshold so that asylum seekers need only prove that they face “discrimination” instead of a real risk of torture, death or violence.
She will say the change has increased the number of those who may qualify for asylum to “unsustainable” levels, adding: “Let me be clear, there are vast swathes of the world where it is extremely difficult to be gay, or to be a woman.”
“Where individuals are being persecuted, it is right that we offer sanctuary. But we will not be able to sustain an asylum system if, in effect, simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin, is sufficient to qualify for protection,” she will say, in pre-briefed comments that have already drawn fire.
Andrew Boff, a Conservative London Assembly member and patron of the LGBT+ Conservative group, said Braverman should stop engaging in “dog whistle” politics and focus on the “basket case” that was her department.
“Talking about the victims of persecution as if they are the problem is incredibly unhelpful and really paints us an an uncaring party. I’m deeply unhappy with it.”
“We have a proud record when it comes to gay rights, on things like HIV and equal marriage. I don’t want us to become one of those parties like Fidesz,” he added, referring to Hungary’s ruling party, which has become steadily more socially conservative and authoritarian.
The Labour MP, Ben Bradshaw, said on Twitter: “Any LGBT or other Tories prepared to condemn Braverman for this? She doesn’t seem to grasp that simply being gay is enough to result in persecution or death in many countries.”
However, Michael Fabricant, a Tory MP and another patron of the Conservative LGBT+ group, said that claiming to be gay “should not provide the key to entry to our country”.
“It’s unwise to make broad generalisations. If someone claims to be gay in order to seek asylum, that should not lift the bar to entry to the UK,” he said.
“However, if someone has experienced persecution from the country from which they are escaping, it presents a different and far more persuasive case. Each application should be considered carefully on its merits.”
The police minister, Chris Philp, told broadcasters that the UN’s refugee convention needed a rethink because people were using it to claim asylum on the basis of persecution they did not face.
He told Times Radio:“When I was immigration minister I came across a number of cases when people had claimed to be gay, produced photographs of them and a sort of same-sex partner and it turned out on further investigation it was a sibling, it wasn’t a same-sex partner at all,” he added.
Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy and advocacy at Bond, an umbrella body for UK NGOs, said Braverman was engaging in “divisive and dangerous” rhetoric after the number of LGBTQ+ refugees and asylum-seekers globally had increased in recent decades.
Comments the home secretary’s office said she would make were drawing criticism even before her speech to a rightwing US thinktank, and Labour challenged Conservative LGBT+ MPs and others to condemn the remarks.
Speaking to the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, Braverman will argue that the UN’s 1951 refugee convention must be reformed to tackle a worldwide migration crisis.
She will argue that case law arising from the convention has lowered the threshold so that asylum seekers need only prove that they face “discrimination” instead of a real risk of torture, death or violence.
She will say the change has increased the number of those who may qualify for asylum to “unsustainable” levels, adding: “Let me be clear, there are vast swathes of the world where it is extremely difficult to be gay, or to be a woman.”
“Where individuals are being persecuted, it is right that we offer sanctuary. But we will not be able to sustain an asylum system if, in effect, simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin, is sufficient to qualify for protection,” she will say, in pre-briefed comments that have already drawn fire.
Andrew Boff, a Conservative London Assembly member and patron of the LGBT+ Conservative group, said Braverman should stop engaging in “dog whistle” politics and focus on the “basket case” that was her department.
“Talking about the victims of persecution as if they are the problem is incredibly unhelpful and really paints us an an uncaring party. I’m deeply unhappy with it.”
“We have a proud record when it comes to gay rights, on things like HIV and equal marriage. I don’t want us to become one of those parties like Fidesz,” he added, referring to Hungary’s ruling party, which has become steadily more socially conservative and authoritarian.
The Labour MP, Ben Bradshaw, said on Twitter: “Any LGBT or other Tories prepared to condemn Braverman for this? She doesn’t seem to grasp that simply being gay is enough to result in persecution or death in many countries.”
However, Michael Fabricant, a Tory MP and another patron of the Conservative LGBT+ group, said that claiming to be gay “should not provide the key to entry to our country”.
“It’s unwise to make broad generalisations. If someone claims to be gay in order to seek asylum, that should not lift the bar to entry to the UK,” he said.
“However, if someone has experienced persecution from the country from which they are escaping, it presents a different and far more persuasive case. Each application should be considered carefully on its merits.”
The police minister, Chris Philp, told broadcasters that the UN’s refugee convention needed a rethink because people were using it to claim asylum on the basis of persecution they did not face.
He told Times Radio:“When I was immigration minister I came across a number of cases when people had claimed to be gay, produced photographs of them and a sort of same-sex partner and it turned out on further investigation it was a sibling, it wasn’t a same-sex partner at all,” he added.
Gideon Rabinowitz, director of policy and advocacy at Bond, an umbrella body for UK NGOs, said Braverman was engaging in “divisive and dangerous” rhetoric after the number of LGBTQ+ refugees and asylum-seekers globally had increased in recent decades.
No comments:
Post a Comment