Monday, 9 March 2009

I'm all for an amnesty on illegal immigrants.

Angry though I may be about the number of illegal immigrants (725,000 in 2007) that have managed to get into our country, I do find myself agreeing with Boris Johnson's initiative to have an amnesty.

From the BBC:
The study into the economic impact of an amnesty for illegal immigrants was carried out by the London School of Economics (LSE). It estimates that, if a minimum of five years' residence in the UK were needed to qualify, 450,000 illegal immigrants could be granted amnesty.
This would allow those who are not contributing to the nation to start working and paying taxes. Boris said:

"If it does look as though they could make a contribution to society, we should regularise their status or offer them the chance of regularising their status. "If people are going to be here and we've chronically failed to kick them out it's morally right that they should contribute in their taxes to the rest of society."

It's a mess, but Boris might be able to salvage some good out of a terrible situation.

UPDATE: Tonight's Panorama - Immigration - Time for an Amnesty? Click HERE to watch it


Cato said...

You're on your own Steve. If we find them, they should be booted out forthwith.

Daily Referendum said...


I would like to see every single illegal immigrant removed. But it is not going to happen. If there were 750,000 in 2007, the figure could be close to 1 million now. It would take decades and God knows how much money to track them all down. Better to accept Labours cock up and at least get these people paying taxes.

Of course, if they are criminals they should be removed no matter what.

Quiet_Man said...

Sorry Steve, Boris is wrong on this, if we do it once then it will only attract more as they will arrive in hope of us allowing an amnesty again, after all if we did it once................

The only place they ought to be able to gain entry is from the embassy in the country they have residence, anyone found here as an economic migrant is returned the same day if possible, their employer massively fined and charged the air fare for the privilege of returning their former employee.
Asylum seekers is a different problem, however if they've travelled through several friendly countries to reach us, the same rules apply in that they are returned to the nearest friendly country to the one they fled. If this is not possible, then they should be permitted to work, but in no sense permitted citizenship or benefits other than basic human rights.

Daily Referendum said...


I've said all those things myself in the past, but the numbers are too great. I'm not talking a free for all. The borders would have to be secure and the rules you have pointed out would have to apply.

At the moment we have at least 750,000 people either committing crime to survive or working illegally for next to nothing and not paying tax.

Cato said...

Steve, you say the borders would have to be secure. Isn't this what Nuliebor have been telling us for ages? We have the most secure borders anywhere. Well, that's patently a load of bollocks.
There is only one way to secure your borders and that's with a massive investment in manpower and technology. Every vehicle, car and lorry, coming in is searched...and I mean EVERY vehicle. But, they won't do it because the ferry operators would kick up a stink about delays. My point here is that you'd only have to do it for a year or more and the problem goes away.
As I said previously, every illegal found is booted out appeal, no nothing.
Asylum seekers returned to the last country they passed through..or failing that, their own country. Bollox to human rights...what about my human rights? Or yours? Or Granny down the road? Did any of us ask for this to be allowed to go on?

John M Ward said...

I've worked in immigration, and I have to say that an amnesty is, in general, not a good idea.

However, as a genuine once-off and because of the present situation, under the terms enunciated, I'd say it is pragmatic once — and only when — our borders are made as reasonably secure as we can make them, for the first time in over a decade(!)

I don't like it on principle, but as a "drawing a line under" exercise, it is probably the only realistic way to proceed, annoying though that is.

However, it will need a change of national government and a credible new style of border control to be established and proven over time before it could be done.

Skillipedia said...

Easy for nay-sayers to argue that one will lead to another amnesty. Can you find any other alternative, then?

Sink your face in the sand and hope they might just go home- just like that

William Gruff said...


Anonymous said...

Some of you seem to ignore the fact that a lot of these "illegal immigrants" are actually highly educated and hard working people. Quite a few actually pay correct taxes and NI contributions and obtain no benefits form this. It is only fair that their hard work and perseverance be recognised.
Have a heart for God's sake give them a break not all have become illegal through their own doing! Only a select few are criminals(which would be dramatically reduced if they are give the opportunity to regularise themselves!
I'm sure it would be much easier and economically viable to regularise their status rather than to remove the entire illegal immigrant population :)