What's new

India warns over UK plan to make visitors pay £3,000 bond

IndoCarib

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
10,784
Reaction score
-14
Country
India
Location
Antigua And Barbuda
Indian business leaders have criticised plans to make visitors pay a £3,000 "security bond" to enter the UK.

The idea, to be piloted from November, is aimed at deterring people from "high risk" countries staying in the UK once their short-term visas expire.

Under the plan, they would forfeit the money unless they left when required.

The Confederation of Indian Industry said it was "highly discriminatory" but Home Secretary Theresa May defended the "selective" approach to migration.

The UK government says the problem of so-called "overstayers" is one of the biggest challenges facing the immigration system and they want to target visitors from certain countries who present the greatest risk.


Although it has yet to be confirmed, it has been reported that visitors from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Ghana and Nigeria will be required to deposit £3,000 ($4,600) for a six-month visa, to be forfeited if they don't leave when they should.

'Disappointed'

The Confederation of Indian Industry, which represents the country's largest businesses, said the plan was "very unfortunate" and risked further undermining Anglo-Indian relations already strained by changes to the UK visa regime for students.

"We share the UK's concern on illegal immigration but surely there are other more effective and non-discriminatory ways to put a check on it," it said in a statement.

It added that this and other recent changes threatened the "special relationship" that UK politicians often speak of with India.

"The industry in India is disappointed by the way the immigration rules in UK have been changing over the last few years.

"It strongly feels that such blanket rules for visas will negatively affect not only businesses, especially small businesses, it will also further bring down the number of students going to UK for higher studies and affect the tourism inflow from India to UK."
'Political expediency'

Nigerian politicians have also criticised the plan as "unacceptable" and pledged to stand up for their country's interests.

"They should realise that it is not in the best interests of the UK," said Nnenna Elendu-Ukeje, who chairs the foreign affairs committee in the country's House of Representatives.

"It is contrary to the commitment made to our president by David Cameron during their last meeting.

"We believe it is for political reasons ahead of a general election. We seek that our long historical relationship should take precedence over political expediency."

The Home Office said the details of the pilot scheme had yet to be finalised and the countries yet to be selected.

'Intelligence-led'

But Mrs May said the move was "the next step in making sure our immigration system is more selective".

"In the long run we're interested in a system of bonds that deters overstaying and recovers costs if a foreign national has used our public services," she said.

"We're planning a pilot that focuses on overstayers and examines a couple of different ways of applying bonds.

"The pilot will apply to visitor visas, but if the scheme is successful we'd like to be able to apply it on an intelligence-led basis on any visa route and any country."

A No 10 spokesman said the government was "looking at ways of deterring overstaying and bonds are an option".

Indian students are already unhappy about new rules requiring graduates to find a job earning at least £20,000 to be able to remain in the UK once their studies end.

Mayor of London Boris Johnson has been among those to call for a rethink but, on a visit to India in February, Prime Minister David Cameron said the UK welcomed students from India and they should not be put off.


Net migration


The Conservatives have set a target for reducing net migration - the differences between the number of people entering the country and those leaving - to less than 100,000 by 2015.

Figures published last month showed net migration fell in the year to September 2012 from 242,000 to 153,000.

The Liberal Democrats and Labour have also set out their thinking on how immigration controls can be tightened, in response to what they say legitimate public concerns about migrants' impact on the economy and society in the past decade.

In a speech earlier this year, Mr Clegg said the security bond was a "useful tool" that, if implemented fairly and properly targeted, could make the immigration system work more efficiently.

The idea was floated several times by the previous Labour government but never implemented after protests at the turn of the century against plans for bonds of £3,000 and £10,000 being brought in.

BBC News - India warns over UK plan to make visitors pay £3,000 bond
 
If people can't even pay that much money then they are surely not coming to UK for a visit. One can easily smoke a couple of thousand pounds by just travelling around in UK. In my opinion it is a good move as it will help people think twice before coming to UK for illegal work.
 
If people can't even pay that much money then they are surely not coming to UK for a visit. One can easily smoke a couple of thousand pounds by just travelling around in UK. In my opinion it is a good move as it will help people think twice before coming to UK for illegal work.

that is a big amount for student visitors. I hope they don't implement this plan.
 
that is a big amount for student visitors. I hope they don't implement this plan.

Agreed that it a big amount but illegal workers from south asia are increasing at a rate faster than ever. This gives a Bad name to the countries they come from and most of them are coming here on Visit visas.
 
It is a simple cost/benefit calculation.

They figured that the amount of money being spent by low-income tourists was a lot less than the damage caused by illegal immigrants.

Since if those visitors can't afford a £3000 pound bond, then they won't be spending much in tourism anyway.
 
.......except that its Racist ? :rolleyes:

They have every right to safeguard their country from illegal immigration and lets face it we have our fair share of illegal immigrants.....unlike us who in the name of secularism gives voter id cards to ungrateful Bangladeshi pole vaulters.
 
Just recognises that people from particular countries are more prone to overstaying their welcome.
Somehow I don't think many Swiss people overstay their visas.

........some people of a few particular countries are more prone to be 'terrorists' .........do you think nations of the world treat citizens of that country any different ? :disagree: ........well at least officially they dont :P

......or that people from a particular country has the tendency to start wars and enslave nations ......

......or that people from a particular country kept racial discrimination active for a long long time .......

....still civilized nations do not 'sterotype' :disagree:

.....I dont expect closet racists to see this reality anyway ...

They have every right to safeguard their country from illegal immigration and lets face it we have our fair share of illegal immigrants.....unlike us who in the name of secularism gives voter id cards to ungrateful Bangladeshi pole vaulters.

There are rights ....and then there are responsibilities .....

Global rights are measured against global responsible behavior.

India does not object to illegal migration from Nepal, Bhutan or Sri Lanka or even Tibet ......only from Bangladesh or Pakistan. There is a historical reason behind it. Its because these nations were created for muslims who did not want to live with Hindus.......Once there was an agreement by both sides accepting this stand .....there is no going back.
 
Their country their rules.

Most visa procedures are maintained on a reciprocal basis.

Remember how Brazil reacted to compulsory fingerprinting of its national by USA? There is nothing stopping India from imposing the same bond condition upon tourists from UK traveling to India.

Problem solved.
 
China should consider imposing similar rules for indian and some other visitors to be fair to the british.
 
........some people of a few particular countries are more prone to be 'terrorists' .........do you think nations of the world treat citizens of that country any different ? :disagree: ........well at least officially they dont :P

......or that people from a particular country has the tendency to start wars and enslave nations ......

......or that people from a particular country kept racial discrimination active for a long long time .......

....still civilized nations do not 'sterotype' :disagree:

.....I dont expect closet racists to see this reality anyway ...

What would you have us do?
Do you think it would be fair, if we charged everyone including people from say Iceland. Whose people have done no wrong?
It has nothing to do with race anyway. It's not because your skin colour is different it is because your economic state is different.
I.e you think you can achieve a better life in the UK.
 
Back
Top Bottom