Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Deport Convicted Immigrants - MP

North Thanet's MP, Roger Gale, has this evening returned to his call for immigrants convicted of indictable offences to be immediately deported to their country of origin.

The MP, speaking in his constituency following the conviction and sentencing of immigrants for murder and associated offences, first raised this issue in the Commons during the second reading of the United Kingdom Borders Bill on 5th February.

"I said in the House that I believed that those who come to this Country seeking asylum or work and who then abuse the hospitality of Britain by committing imprisonable crimes should be returned to their country of origin, irrespective of its human rights status, immediately upon conviction " says the MP.

"I see no reason why the UK taxpayer should be required to foot bills of many hundreds of thousands of pounds or why our overcrowded prisons should accommodate those who have come to this country, been accepted in good faith and have then so grossly abused the hospitality and the succour that they have been offered. I do not believe that those that I was elected to represent find this situation remotely proper and I think that it is necessary for the government and the official opposition to address this issue during the passage of the Borders Bill through the House."


Anonymous said...

I completely agree with and support my MP on this matter.

Anonymous said...

anon again!

It might not be PC to do that! However,
I do think that a tougher 'screening' of applicants be an essential factor. Those with a criminal record, of any kind, should not be let in. I read that the Germans do this best. Why can't we copy their system.
Otherwise, a murderer or rapist might be deported by us, and end up in some other 'friendly' Country to murder or rape further.
I am totally in agreeance with ID Cards for Asylum Seeking migrants,
and it should be mandatory to learn English as quickly as possible. Kids pick it up fast in schools, and the parents have nothing much else to do all day.

Anonymous said...

Did you also see today about the four brummie grown al qaeda lads captured fighting in somalia. Apparenty the locals were going to bump them off but the british government had them rescued and flown back here, where, guess what, they've been released because they havent comitted any crimes here.

What is this government thinking about are they completly **** mad or what? Its OK mate, welcome home, doesn't matter that your a dangerous terrorist who hates us all...

Cllr David Green said...

So the steady drip of poison from Mr Nasty continues. Hasnt he been told yet that the Tories have changed, or is this an indication that he wont be contending reselection?
As for the knee jerk "send them back", apart from the fact that John Major signed a treaty that we wouldnt do that if they would be in danger if we did that, the point was well made that this could just be passing the problem to someone else. Tough but fair entry controls, sure.

DrMoores said...

The central question that I believe concerns everyone, regardless of political affiliation, is that is it right that we should remain exposed to the risk from violent criminals who have abused our hospitality, may spend a few years in jail at our considerable expense - a large proportion of the prison population now - and will be released at some future date to potentially commit crimes again. This being a likely probability given published rates of recidivism.

stuart said...

What I really want to know is why Gale (and Simon) is of the opinion we still care about his views?

DrMoores said...

For one, he's our MP and the only chance for anyone's views on the subject to be sensibly represented to government. Secondly because it's very likely that a greater part of the population probably feel the same way on this subject and so his position is valid.

Anonymous said...

By 'Mr Nasty' are you referring to Roger Gale MP, Councillor Green? As for your comment 'steady drip of poison' the less said. I am surprised at such a vitriolic personal attack; is it because the argument he puts upsets your PC nature? If we have 7,000 prisoners in this country who are not citizens, does that not concern you in any way? It says a great deal about the inability of this Government to monitor our borders and vet who comes into this country. As a tax-payer, I see no reason not to expel criminal foreign nationals to their homelands. We have the farce in this country that as a foreign national you can argue about being expelled from Britain but British subjects can be held indefinitely in the USA having been despatched their by HM Government under an extradition arrangements that fly in the face of justice and in which there is no reciprocation. Does this not worry you? Roger Gale argues the point well and yet all you can do is behave in a juvenile way with the written equivalent of "yabooo sucks"; shame on you Councillor.

Anonymous said...

Whilst I support Mr Gales view the reality is much more complicated. Cllr Green is somewhat mistaken in blaming the last Tory government for the mess we are in. If they haven't been able to fix the problem despite ten years in power when will they sort it out?
John Major signed up to the Dublin agreement despite the misgivings of the Immigration Service. In principal it was a good idea. The bogus asylum seekers turning up in Dover (ie the overwhelming majority) would be returned to the country where they had entered Europe. Since it was not realistic for them to magically appear in Calais they should in theory be returned to France and then on to whichever border they crossed initially. In practice many of our "European friends" did everything possible to avoid this. The Italians for example would not fingerprint illegals as this would mean we would get a trace. The French never fingerprint the illegals loitering in and around Calais nor did they when Sangatte was full to bursting. The only countries to act with integity were / are the Germans and Austrians and thousands were sent back to them. Though it would seem the Austrians got around that problem by issuing them with Austrian passports and thereby making them European so we ended up with them anyway!

As for removing criminals to countries like Somalia and Sierra Leone for example. It is damn near impossible given the problems obtaining travel documents from their "governments" added to this the asylum legal industry that has sprouted up to allow a seemingly endless procession of appeals.

The answer to this in my view is complicated. Firstly allow immigration officers at the border to assess asylum applications. If they are not satisfied they are genuine then remove them. Any appeal should be out of country at the appellants expense not as it is now in the UK at our expense. People who are failed asylum seekers and criminals but not easily removable should be detained indefinitely until such time as they choose to apply for a passport. People who come to the UK and obtain British citizenship or indefinte leave to remain and go on to break our laws should be stripped of citizenship and removed. Furthermore Europeans who come here to live and then break our laws should be deported. The present requirement for them to have committed a crime which carries a sentence of at least two years before considering deportation is a nonsense.

James Maskell said...

Rather we act tough on immigration and say that those who outstay the hospitality of Britain or act against British values and laws should be removed from this country rather than conduct this open doors policy which has seen local authorities burdened with other countries problems and encouraged terrorism on our own doorsteps.