Express Mortgages Express Loans Bingo Lose Weight Franchising Dating Shopping Book Shop Find Spare Parts Cut Your Bills Wine Shop Legal Store FlatShare Cruises

HAVE YOUR SAY

SHOULD ASYLUM SEEKERS BE BRIBED TO GO HOME?

Should these people be sent home?

Friday March 14,2008

Comment Speech Bubble Have your say(75)

LABOUR’S shambolic immigration system is costing taxpayers £27,000 a day just to bribe failed asylum seekers to go home.

Some £8.3million has been spent persuading more than 2,500 people to go home.

That is the equivalent of £1,139 an hour – or £19 every minute.

Success rates in removing those who should not be in the UK has hit such a low that, on average, one in three failed asylum seekers who return home is now bribed – as revealed last year by the Daily Express.

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis, said: “This massive cost to the taxpayer has only come about because of the Government’s utter inability to remove anybody who has no right to be in this country.

“Until the Government gets a grip on the shambles in our immigration and asylum system, the taxpayer will continue to pick up the cost.”

So do you think taxpayers' money should be spent on bribing asylum seekers to go home? Are the Government failing to control our borders? Should we send these people home?

Have YOUR say NOW!

MISSED THE POINT AGAIN...

06.04.08, 11:41pm

You just can't do joined up thought can you??

There are lots of people born in this country who are not religious.

People commit crimes which are not religion motivated.

THAT was my point.

People are nasty b*****ds without religion.

The Muslim terrorists are that BECAUSE of their religion.

That is the difference.

If the prostitutes were killed because of religion well, fair enough, I would admit that was his reason.... but I honestly do not believe that was what happened in this particular case.

I haven't seen anywhere that he is a 'bible thumper' or 'God told me to do that' type of excuse... which is usually the case when these type of killings are done in the name of religion.

• Posted by: SandieL • Report Comment

BORING

06.04.08, 11:28pm

once again sandie, the same drivel and hypocracy.

any christian who commits a horrible act isnt a christan (by your judgmement seemingly), but any muslim who does it is a proper muslim only following the teachings (once again, by your judgment).

typical hypocritical garbage.

it's boring.

your point about the lack of mulsim denounciation of terrorism is well and truly dead on the other thread. that you would even suggest is shows a lack of perception, but there you go, proven wrong again.

nothing new there. boring.

• Posted by: crayfishbanker • Report Comment

TOO BLINDED BY BIAS TO READ MY POST PROPERLY - AS USUAL

03.04.08, 10:39pm

One again CFB you haven't read what I said.

I pointed out that the illegals who pay to get here are probably up to no good, and that is how they get their money - continuing their activities over here.

It is them rather than the other people left in Iraq etc., who appear to prosper. Hence my comment on 'the other poor buggers' left there.

You also chose not to read the part about the free house, electric, gas, water etc., - unlike Working Family 2008 who re-iterates that very same thing.

So it is NOT just £30 per week then is it?? Far more if you include council tax, then if they bring their relatives over - the added cost of schools, NHS treatment etc.,

It is you who 'unashamedly contradict yourself' not me... you just need better glasses perhaps?

And when I said 'rich' I actually meant 'had the means to pay people' - probably the chancers. I don't think the *real* rich of Iraq would likely have to pay some toerag people trafficker to get here, do you??

Re David Koresh... you mentioned him, and I agreed he was one prize lunatic.

The Muslims you so defend make it their business to indoctrinate as many people as possible into their evil ways.

If you read the article and can still defend them, well you have a problem.

As for the prostitues being found in the crucifixion position, well - if you think I think that man is anything less than low life scum - you are totally wrong.

This man is not a Christian. He is a total nutter, who probably never goes to church. He has just used that position for his own personal vendetta and for unknown reasons.

I doubt very much if it will have anything to do with his religious persuasion.

The terrorists *definately* commit their crimes in the name of Allah, you surely cannot deny that.

Don't they live their whole life by his laws?

And as for being anti-Muslim, you are totally wrong. I lived opposite a lovely Iraqi muslim family about 6 years ago. My sister had an Iranian partner a number of years ago, and my cousins daughter is married to a muslim.

So I know there are *some* decents ones. Like I said yesterday, it is the deafening silence from the Muslim Councils that worries me.

You don't appear to mind though, or indeed comment on that fact.

As usual, skimming over the comments and paying more personal insults.

• Posted by: SandieL • Report Comment

AGAIN,WHY DO THEY COME HERE?

03.04.08, 10:04pm

yes, muslims do hit the front pages alot,because their suggestions for islamic change go against what tradition we have left,and as mentioned by someone earlier,they supposedly make up only a small % of our population,mps make our front pages as do single white parents,criminals of all creed and colour,but the sugestions by this supposedly small % range from banning our flags,introducing sharia law,being allowed to wear the full headdress under the present threat conditions,they were the 1st suicide bombers that uk mainland have had ,their continual threat is daily,and global,it was found that over 40% interviewed agreed with 7/7 bombings,they protest in the most threatening manner,abu hamza ring a bell.
we need the tabloids to continually expose their intentions in order to keep the uk public on their toes,the same was when we had the i.r.a.some poor hair dresser is being sued because a muslim feels hurt about being asked to remove her headdress as a vital part as a hairdresser.
going back to the above article,as mentioned ,why do they come here?and how do they get the money?£30 a week maybe,that would include the free house,bills paid,allowances for food,clothing etc.a lady asked for one of the new council houses that had been standing empty for over 3 months ,the council said no,they were reserved for potential asylum seekers,so I would imagine its £30 plus the extras.sounds like an mp,the pay does'nt seem huge until you throw in all the extras.
anyway,tell the planes to circle back and drop them of back home i say.

• Posted by: workingfamily2008 • Report Comment

SANDIE

03.04.08, 6:12pm

i am, for the most part, irgnoring your comments, as they are not up to much, and it gets boring listening to the same willfully ignorant drivel over and over again.

however, i will deal with a couple of your statments below, just because they are so ludicrous, and telling:

"And yes, I do know about Christian fanatics like David Koresh... but how many of *them* do we hear about, as opposed to the Muslim fanatics??"

--yes sandie... how many do we hear about? this is a point i have been making to you time and time again. any time a muslim makes a wrong step, it is on the front page of the express, and this 'muslimness' is highlighted, whether it is a factor or not.
christians to daft things all the time, but they are not highlighted as 'christians'. say, for example, the fact that the serial killer who murdered all those prostitutes arranged them in a 'crucifix' pose. if it were inspried by some muslim iconography, that sure as heck would have made the front page. but christian inspired? not a problem...

secondly, on asylum seekers:

"The rich are likely THE only ones TO leave!!
The other poor buggers won't get that chance."

so on the one hand, you continually say that asylum seekers are scroungers and moochers, here to escape thier miserable economic conditions in order to recieve the massive 30£ a week benefit in vouchers that they get,

and on the other hand, you are now suggesting that only the rich ones get to come over?
so are these rich people leaving thier wealthy estates in iraq to scrounge 30£ in vouchers?

you just don't make any sense at all. it's actually funny how much you unashamedly contradict yourself.

• Posted by: crayfishbanker • Report Comment

WELL SAID WORKING FAMILY 2008!

03.04.08, 11:50am

How true.

It is the Government who are responsible for the bombing in Iraq and the mess that is Afghanistan - not the British public.

Most of us, did not and still do not support their invasions, but we are the ones who are suffering because of their actions.

1 Via unlimited people flowing into the country

2 Via unlimited amounts of our money supporting these people, both here and in their own country!!

We will be nigh on bankrupt shortly because of it.

Both situations need to end soon, but I doubt if it will happen.

The news on teletext says that MORE troops are go be send to Afghanistan, not less.

I totally disagree with this. We should have the troops pulled out, and let them get on with it themselves.

If the Russians couldn't tame Afghanistan, how the hell can we??

The bottomless pit of money being thrown at it could be much better spent on people in OUR country.... old people for a starter!