Thursday briefing: Why Suella Braverman attacked refugee rights in Washington

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

54% : To put it in some perspective, while asylum applications to the UK have increased, the UK ranks 19th when grouped with the rest of the EU for asylum applications per head.
49% : Why has she made this speech now?Suella Braverman has spent the last few days on the other side of the Atlantic discussing global migration and international refugee law.
45% : The other way to apply is through UN resettlement schemes that are extremely slow and restrictive, leaving most asylum seekers in the hands of dangerous smuggling gangs.
44% : The international asylum framework has created 780 million refugees, Braverman claimed, a number that is more than 20 times bigger than the widely used figures set by the UN that says there were 35 million people registered as refugees in 2022.
41% : "The difference is this time she attempted to build all of these ideas into one cohesive argument against a 70-year-old piece of international law that is signed by over a hundred countries - pretty ambitious stuff for a home secretary overseeing a department that can't even keep track of child asylum seekers under its care.
40% : For there to be any change to the 1951 refugee convention, all 149 member states of the United Nations would have to agree to the reforms that Braverman would like to implement - an unlikely scenario.
39% : "There's not a single part of the Home Office's brief that is actually functioning, so it's no wonder that that Suella Braverman would rather fly to America and make a speech about her grand theory of global migration and blame international law for the UK's problem," Rajeev says.
38% : Braverman decried the law as "outdated", said that it is creating "huge incentives for illegal migration" and would not rule out withdrawing from the convention altogether.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.