Sunday, 16 December 2007

UK pays illegals to leave

The Tory Party and press are angry that thousands of failed asylum seekers have been flown out of Britain and set up in business back home in a £36 million taxpayer-funded scheme.

"These unwanted foreigners", fumes the Telegraph, "who had no legal right to remain, were given free flights, handed £1,000 in cash at the airport, then paid a further £3,000 to start enterprises in their homelands. More than 23,000 migrants have taken advantage of the scheme."

Ministers say that paying failed asylum seekers to leave is cheaper than forcibly deporting them, saving money for taxpayers. However, the Tories last night condemned the payouts as "bribes".

Well maybe they are, but let's 's consider a few salient factors. First, we, and the rest of Europe, are totally unable to deport illegals. Witness the fiasco last week when a plane due to deport over 300 Nigerians flew away with only nine on board.

Jesus H. Christ. Did they really expect all 300 to show up because they were politely asked? Are these people even more incompetent than we've given them credit for? The Immigration Industry (making the case against deportation), estimates that the average cost per deportee is about €40,000.

Bear in mind too that about 25% of our prison population is made up of non-nationals, and that it costs about €100k. p.a. to keep a prisoner incarcerated for a year.

So, while it reflects jaw-dropping incompetence and encourages illegal immigration, it's very cheap at the price to give these people the opportunity to flourish back home.

If we paid every unsuitable immigrant €50,000 each to go it'd the best money we'd ever spent.


Anonymous said...

Money well spent? The school buildings are crumbling, the NHS is suffering big cuts, the British armed forces are drastically underfunded, so much so that their military cannot even get decent priority medical treatment upon return from battle. Muslims are insulting returning soldiers in civilian hospitals. They don't have the necessary kit to fight the Taliban But.....

Allah bless the tax payer
one and all,
paying taxes to keep them all,
We give them homes and we give them food
'welcome welcome' illegal dude.

Dump the HRA,(Human Rights Act). withdraw benefits and watch their numbers fall.

SAVANT said...

You're dead right. All these things are under-funded. But dont forget that the costs of keeping unsuitable immigrants (most blacks, Muslims) as my post shows, is vastly in excess of this amount. I agree thta the less attractive you make it the better.

Anonymous said...

In Ireland you cant get kids into primary school there are so many blacks and other immigrants. We have built special schoolsfpr muslims. How much is all this costing?

Pay them to leave as the post says.

Anonymous said...

This is dhimmini thinking. It's flawed. If they are seeking asylum, because they need the protection then why are they being paid to return? If they no longer need the protection, and can safely return to their own country or their asylum application fails, deport them. The answer lies in the government being willing to 'force' them to leave, not ask them to show up for the flight.

Do I know how much its costing - you're dead right I do. Schools for blacks and other immigrants. It's the same story in every town, and every village throughout the island, and through out Britain. But paying them won't stop the influx, it will add to it.

Go to Britain, try your luck at asylum, no worries, if you fail they will even pay you to leave. You're on a pigs back. While OAP's cannot get enough in a pension to heat their homes.

Using exsisting laws to keep them out, while making things very very much less attractive while they are here would be a good start. They may think twice about coming if they are cold and homeless, and then deported.

The human rights act is at the heart of this, and in the north section 35 of the GFA. Bernadette Devlin runs her own advice centre for immigrants and says there is room for a couple million more!!


SAVANT said...

I take your point. And you're spot on when you say the hman rights act (or whatever it is)is central. But bear 2 things in mind. First we're too PC-whipped to even think of opting out of this act. Second, once bogus asylum seekers are in they're almost impossible to get out.

My suggestion is that it's more realistic and the lesser of 2 evils.

PS - didnt know about Bernadette Devlin. I tell you, there's a whole industry growing up around this.

Anonymous said...

You cant stop them cos their coming down over the border on trains and cars. Pay them to go might be the only solution

Anonymous said...

As long as we're signed up to the Geneva Convention on refugees, we're screwed.
This treaty effectively abolishes borders. It's the biggest invitation to fraud that was ever contrived.
Under its terms, we have to let in anyone who claims to be persecuted, whether they've got papers or not. They can make up any pack of lies they want about persecution and the onus is on the host country to prove them wrong. In many cases, they're even lying about what country they come from
. Any Western country that doesn't pull out of this treaty will be a Third World country in two or three generations.

SAVANT said...

Rob is 100% right, although Ireland has the Dublin II Cenvention which enables us to ship back to the EU country of entry any asylum tourists who try it on with us.

Needless to say we dont apply it. I saw an African guy at Cork airport a few months back claim asylum. I heard the immigration guy explain that he had to go back to his port of entry ( this was a flight from Heathrow). I waited around to see what would happen, and sure enough, 20 minutes later the tourist comes in, collects his luggage and heads into the city.

What's the point in anyone trying when this goes on?