That’s the headline on a comment piece run by Pink News:
As he launched Labour’s international LGBT manifesto last Wednesday, foreign secretary David Miliband made one howler, echoed by another in the manifesto’s text.
He said: “Under Labour the UK will continue to be a beacon of hope for LGBT people.”
This delusion sounded a lot like Home Office minister Phil Woolas’ article last year, when he wrote that he was proud of the attendees of the London Pride march who’d found sanctuary in the UK – never mind that his office would have refused them and fought tooth-and-nail to remove them.
The pair should form a double act.
An Amnesty International report released today said that gays in Iraq have no protection from the state and are allegedly even being targeted by some security forces. Yet Miliband’s ‘beacon’ government would tell those seeking our sanctuary they could safely return and be “discreet”.
Recent research from the UK Lesbian and Gay Immigration Group on 50 refused asylum cases found that many were told to go home and not act gay.
You can read the full piece here.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Is "Let Bartlet Be Bartlet" good advice or not?
Why Liberals must take power away from the media billionaires
The abuse that threatens democracy
'Over me beat the invisible wings'- Ireland, Churchill and Lloyd George
Robin Ashby
Nigel Scott
Neil Sandison
Toby Keynes
John Reed
6 Comments
The Lib Dems have policy reaffirming our commitment (and indeed international obligation) to support people fleeing imprisonment, torture and death because of their sexuality or gender identity.
Thanks Mark. I know that the support LibDems (and Greens) have shown on LGBT asylum is enormously appreciated. Labour, within which I have a strong record on gay rights work, have failed to show any solidarity or interest on this issue. It is shocking to those of us who have trusted their internationalism and basic humanity to the weakest people in our society in the past. They have caved 120% to base instincts generally on asylum and LGBT Labour members in particular have, as I show, shunned their brothers and sisters because Labour’s record stinks and they know it.
This needs hammering home as they try to point at the Tories on gay issues and ignore the far-stronger-than-theirs LibDem record.
My article aims to expose this and hopefully both LGBT voters and people generally concerned about fairness will take note come May 6. As I said in my email to you, we look forward to working with LibDems to right the many wrongs after May6!
Genuine question, where is this codified as such? Although I see no obligation that any one country should act as the world’s social worker, I have no objections, in principle, to accepting foreign nationals on such pretexts if there is funding.
Maybe ask the UN?
Alec, the international obligation is I think based on the Refugee Convention, which requires that states grant asylum to those fleeing threats to their safety on the grounds of belonging to a particular group. There was much debate in the past about whether being gay constituted belonging to a particular group, but it is now almost universally acknowledged that it does. I could be wrong though.
U (if I can call you that), as far as I’m aware conventions such as the Refugee Convention are *not* obligations but courtesy agreements, and there should be no debate that the global situation has changed since it originally was codified in the backdrop of the Second World War.
My main disagreement with accepting particular social/cultural groups outwith all-out war is that it may place little to no pressure on the offending state to modify her ways. Plus, if a third party state were receiving such large numbers of asylum claims from the offending state, would concepts such as tort not apply and given them the pretext for launching action (military or otherwise)?
All that aside, I’m certain there’s no stipulation in the Refugee Convention that the UK fund applicants through the welfare system.
UN Gimp
You’re right, gays are recognised as a ‘particular group’. See UNHCR guidelines on Iraq for example http://madikazemi.blogspot.com/2009/05/un-advises-favourable-consideration-for.html