Deport all foreign criminals, says Labour MP in attack on ECHR

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/03/25/deport-all-foreign-criminals-says-labour-mp-attack-echr/

by ParkedUpWithCoffee

32 comments

  1. This should not be a controversial opinion at all, so glad Labour have some common sense unlike the Tories who did nothing to address this issue (we should also permanently bar convicted criminals from applying for visas or asylum in the future – we need to be so much more sensible with our standards lol)

  2. Resistance from public = 0

    Resistance from uber-lawyer boss = 100

  3. I’m super far left but if you’re here without permanent residence or whatever and commit crimes you should get your arse booted out of the fucking door.

  4. Find it interesting how far we’ve shifted.

    A few years ago, you had very left wing party’s expressing the same opinions, but now none of them are.

  5. I would adore for this to happen, and sharpish. They are guests and should be reminded that the privilege of our hospitality can be sharply revoked.

  7. I’m just going to copy the content of a post that I saved a while back to show a small portion of the things being part of the ECHR has protected us from over the last few decades.

    Here is a list of some of the things our various governments over the last 50 years have been prevented from doing by the convention. This is not even a complete list.

    * **Torturing Irish republican detainees** (1978)
    * **Covering up the thalidomide scandal** (1979)
    * **Treating homosexuality as criminal in N.Ireland** (1981)
    * **Letting teachers hit children** (1986)
    * **Forcing journalists to ‘out’ their sources** (1996)
    * **Discriminating against refugees of a particular race at the border** (2001)
    * **Detaining people for years without charging them a crime** (2004)
    * **Mistreating detainees in Iraq** (2005)
    * **Ignoring domestic slavery** (2006)
    * **Barring gay people from serving in the military** (2007)
    * **Letting employers snoop on employees emails** (2007)
    * **Allowing the police to hold innocent people’s DNA forever** (2008)
    * **Giving police free reign on stop & search without due cause** (2010)
    * **Detaining mentally ill people arbitrarily and indefinitely** (2011)
    * **Sending people abroad to be tortured** (2012)
    * **Stopping gay people inheriting from their partners** (2013)
    * **Spying on everyone’s communications in bulk** (2016)
    * **Removing refugees to an unsafe country for asylum processing** (2022)

    These are not theoretical problems. These are measures that successive governments managed to pass through parliament and were stopped by the ECHR tribunal.

    In our system with its ‘Parliamentary sovereignty’ and no way to entrench Human Rights laws as superior to other legislation, without the ECHR, they would have gone ahead. Even a UK Supreme Court judge does not have the power to stop primary legislation.

    Think about this when you hear parties suggest we should exit the convention.

    Thanks to [u/ianjm](https://www.reddit.com/user/ianjm/) for the original post a few months ago.

  8. The tells-lies-graph making you believe the ECHR is bad for you, again!!

    Don’t click it. Don’t buy in to it… the percentages are miniscule.

  9. They’ll just get their asylum claims in while incarcerated.

  10. I really don’t see how this is even contentious

    If you commit a moderately serious* crime and weren’t born here you get deported with no right to return under any circumstances, it should genuinely be that simple

    *obviously we don’t need to deport people for getting caught speeding

  11. I think that if your in the UK as a non citizen without any permanent residence, commiting a non petty crime (Unless these petty crimes are constantly done) should see you deported. If you have permanent residence, a serious crime (I.e Murder, etc.) should see the person deported from the country as well.

  12. Finally. Now you actually deliver on it. You might actually stay in power

  13. But what about their right to a family life in the UK T_T

  14. As someone who has researched and engaged with this attacking the ECHR is both shortsighted and ignores the underlying reasons why many of these decisions go the way they do. The UK will not deport someone to their death or to be tortured, and the right to a family life is for the whole family not just the criminal. I understand why people are upset over this, but attacking the ECHR is right wing propaganda. The ECHR protects all Britains rights, not just those making the headlines.

  15. Given the comments that have been coming out from the British government over the past couple of weeks, they really are just Trump light

  16. There’s no good reason for that to be controversial.

  17. You ditch the ECHR. You can kiss goodbye to human rights. Any government from then on will play fast and loose with them and dodge scrutiny at every opportunity.

    A replacement human rights act will be full of loopholes that a government will put in and exploit.

    There’s tons of misinformation about the ECHR. The fact that everyone spouts it st every given opportunity makes me question why everyone is so bloody gullible in this country.

  18. Have no idea why this is an issue tbh. I grew up in Ghana I remember when over foreign national commit crimes aka sexual crimes, robbery you name it they get deported. I don’t get why Labour are against this.

  19. finally some bollocks on a labour politician. hopefully sets the wheels in motion, although the realist in me assumes nothing will change

  20. This is proof the difference between Labour and Tories is paper thin

  21. Yeah. Send them to the colony.

    Ffs. Are we still 1788?

  22. It’s not difficult really , if you commit a serious crime in this country you leave

  23. This is one of those ideas that sounds good at a glance but is daft when you think about it. It effectively turns being a foreign member of an organised crime group into an overseas secondment of indeterminate length.

    Move to the UK to work for the gang, work for as long as it takes to get caught, get sent back home. Doesn’t seem like a great deterrent.

    It could only work if we deport criminals after their sentence has been carried out.

  24. I really just see this as common sense.

    If you go to another country as a guest and break the law, you get booted out.

    If I had a guest in my house and found they were stealing stuff or just behaving like a dick, I’d kick them out too.

    No appeals, no second chances – you’re out.

    With the exception of minor driving offences, I don’t care what the crime is. You act badly, you go back to your own country.

  25. There’s absolutely no logic or reason as to why this isn’t a already done. It would also free up in excess of 10% of the prison system.

  26. The problem you’ve got is you can’t deport someone, even if they’ve committed a crime, to somewhere where they’ll be murdered, tortured, forced into slavery, not given due process, etc.

    And those are good things.

  27. Depends on what he means by criminal.

    If he’s looking to deport someone for petty theft or vandalism they did as a teenager a decade ago then no, but if he’s looking to get rid of murderers, armed robbers, rapists, and paedos then I completely support him.

    There was a case a few years ago where a guy was arrested for almost murdering someone, he was wanted in his own country (I think it was Romania, but I’m not sure) in connection with a murder and organised crime, and despite knowing his own country wanted him for heinous crimes and the fact he almost killed someone here, they still gave him a suspended sentence and he was allowed to stay here indefinitely because he was facing imprisonment back in his own country, which quite frankly makes no fucking sense.

    If you can’t follow this countries laws then you don’t deserve to be here, why should someone in the UK have to be a raped or murdered because we care more about the criminal than the victims.

  28. The problem is only partially who we should deport, the other half of the problem is the ridiculously long and expensive appeals process.

    Why does it take so long to get them out? The answer, the ECHR, which we need to leave.

  29. The only thing I disagree about with this is that we shouldn’t need to leave the ECHR to do all. This always seems to me to be an issue with interpretation of it. Focusing on the right to privacy and effects of family rather than the parts where it says infractions of the law allow a state to ignore that.

    Certainly, those convicted of a violent or sexual crime certainly should be on the first flight home after their prison sentence. Non-violent crimes I feel the three-strikes should be enough.

    For those convicted elsewhere, I think we should look at a bit more case-by-case on whether their conviction was part of a political vendetta or criminality for something that wouldn’t be so here (homosexuality, apostasy or blasphemy, etc).

  31. Sensible policy of course all foreign criminals should be deported. It really is a sign of how far gone we are that this isn’t happening.

  32. For people who read headlines only:

    TELEGRAPH ATTACKS ECHR

    LABOUR READS ECHR

    TURNS OUT ECHR DOESN’T BLOCK IMMIGATION UK COURTS DO.

Comments are closed.