Thread: Any solution by @ukhomeoffice to tackle "criminal gangs", whether traffickers or smugglers, needs to recognise some key points. Gangs see asylum seekers as "commodities". Most of time they don't care if they live or die. Making routes more dangerous doesn't change that 1/

As with a lot of serious organised crime the main players are distanced from the on the ground activities. We know smugglers are forcing migrants through threats and blackmail to pilot boats for example, so arresting them makes no difference to the gang's activities. 2/

There also needs to be a recognition of two separate issues relating to asylum seekers. Those who know where they are heading to are liable to have particular driving factors, family, language, being unsafe elsewhere etc. A number don't know where they will end up though. 3/

This means that implementing hostile activities in the channel as a "deterrent" is irrational at best. You aren't going to deter people who have nothing left to lose and just want to reach safety and you can't deter people who don't know where they will end up anyway. 4/

If you make the route more dangerous gangs aren't just going to pack up. Think what we have seen with the global drugs trade. They will just look for other routes. As they face few personal risks on the journey it doesn't matter to them how dangerous these routes become. 5/

Here's the real kicker though. Smugglers tend to work on a transactional basis, as you increase difficulty you lead to an increase in the amount they charge to cover what risks they do take. This makes them unaffordable for many more people. 6/

As you have no way of deterring people who feel a desperate need to get to the UK though by helping to make these routes unaffordable you drive them into the hands of traffickers, who extract payment at the end through exploitation, often in illegal activities. 7/

At best, when talking about smugglers, by turning boats back or returning people to other EU states you are creating repeat business, so to speak, for smugglers. You aren't limiting their activities, you are ensuring that they are used more often. 8/

All this talk about "pushbacks", using nets to catch and tow dinghies into French waters, "offshoring asylum seekers" to act as a deterrent etc ignores the complexity of the situation and factors which play a part in people coming to the UK. 9/

You can't, as @CCTCommander did, claim that countries like France are "safe" because you personally feel safe there. Likewise, prosecuting asylum seekers, legally crossing the channel and seeking asylum because they have been forced to pilot boats doesn't hurt the gangs. 10/

Nothing we have heard from @pritipatel or the @ukhomeoffice will do anything to actually hurt the organised gangs operating smuggling and trafficking rings in any meaningful way. They will hurt already vulnerable asylum seekers though. 11/

We need a better "solution", but it won't be anything to do with making channel crossings "unviable". It will need to focus on the needs of asylum seekers, opening safe routes, making it easier to access the asylum system and have claims processes etc. 12/

If the @ukhomeoffice was serious about tackling the gangs as a way to stop them exploiting asylum seekers then they would look at stopping how they treat asylum seekers first. You need to reduce the number of people needing to rely on criminals if you want to create an impact 13/