Boris Johnson's Tories would have us unite against refugees

Was the idea to make him seem so busily important he has no time to change? Or can we safely assume the man simply can't dress himself? Of course, social media was ready to take the piss out of his sartorial choices, as social media does so well.

Mr Johnson must enjoy these farcical diversions, a "Look! Squirrel!" relief from the reality of his brutal government and its unrelenting persecution of the country's most vulnerable.

Summer holidays and mask wearing have done a job of shoring up headlines and, understandably, pushing the raft of appalling political moves down the news agenda.

The government's cruel treatment of refugees and asylum seekers continues apace with the publication of the Nationality and Borders Bill this week, a multi-pronged attack on migrant rights.

We knew the threat of offshore detention centres, we were aware of the threat of four-year prison sentences for "entering illegally". What was striking, was the discovery that the government is willing to push even further with its assault on those seeking refuge in the UK.

The bill, which is about to make its way through parliament, seeks to punish and criminalise those who come to this country. But it also seeks to punish those who help.

Priti Patel has repeatedly said the new proposals are focused on breaking up smuggling gangs bringing people to the UK for the purposes of exploitation. Making it harder to arrive here to seek asylum does the opposite. However, the wording of the new bill now criminalises anyone who tries to help a person seeking asylum.

Previously, the legislation described the offence as occurring should a person "knowingly and for gain" facilitate the arrival of an asylum seeker. The new wording now omits "for gain".

It was widely suggested this would prevent the RNLI helping people aboard, say, a sinking dingy. The Home Office tweeted a rebuttal to this. But that wording would suggest those who seek to bring family members to the UK could be penalised.

It is unbearably cruel. Yet it is one in a host of cruelties.

On Monday the Elections Bill was introduced to parliament, including controversial plans to force people to show identification in order to vote. Labour has said this has the power to leave millions disenfranchised. As well as costing pointless millions of pounds, it would disenfranchise the most vulnerable and be another step towards the state surveillance of citizens.

Instances of voter fraud are tiny - three cases brought to court in the past seven years. What's the point of it, other than to penalise and exclude groups including, surprise, recent immigrants and ethnic minorities.

The Lords will now consider the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill, which passed through the Commons this week. It has already been widely criticised for strangulating the right to protest.

There has been pushback against its criminalising of traveller communities, an already marginalised and persecuted group.

Now homelessness charities have joined forces to write to Robert Jenrick with fears the new legislation could have the effect of criminalising rough sleepers should they be sleeping in or nor a vehicle and be asked to move on by the landowner.

In a further act of persecution of the most vulnerable, it was announced that the £20 Universal Credit uplift introduced during the pandemic will be phased out, despite a campaign to make the increase permanent.

Conservative MP Andrew Rosindell appeared on the BBC to demonstrate just out of touch the party is with the lives of so many. "I think there are people that quite like getting the extra £20," he posited, "But maybe they don’t need it".

Very simple rule of thumb for you, Andy: if you're on Universal Credit you can definitely make good use of an extra £20.

In similar disengaged manner, Andrew Bridgen played a blinder on the BBC on Tuesday night, referring to the UK's "indigenous" population on the BBC. In trying to find out what Mr Bridgen means by this (Is he going back as far as Homo antecessor? Or taking a more modern view with the Celts?) I stumbled across a marvellous op-ed by the MP.

While describing the perilous journey faced by refugees crossing the Channel in small boats, the Conservative member for North West Leicester shoehorns in a reference to having made the crossing on a yacht. Jolly good.

The Conservative strategy is to create an enemy and pledge to vanquish it, but how many enemies do they really need? These policies have one thing in common and that's the penalise the most vulnerable.

There are inherent contradictions there. That the Tories present themselves, and likely view themselves, as powerful: the party of sovereignty, law and order.

Instead, they come across as fearful. Afraid of empowering marginalised groups, afraid of supporting those who need help. Afraid of anyone born overseas. Like... Boris Johnson. Maybe there's something in that after all.

Another hypocrisy is that Boris Johnson sells himself as a liberal yet his actions are those of an authoritarian; a politician who wants increased surveillance; tighter borders; an enemy made of the voiceless and vulnerable; and who then undermines the rights of citizens to peacefully protest against these steps.

It makes his indecision and whif-whaffing back and forth during the covid crisis all the more indefensible. He was not slow to act due to a natural disinclination to curb individual freedoms, he was merely useless.

It's easy to look at the prime minister as a shambling, harmless harlequin who can't dress himself but he is at the helm of a government using cruelty as a strategy. I would like to believe most people are decent, and good, and will see that there is an enemy but that the targets of these bills are not it.