Congratulations, Nigerians! E ku orire.
By paying a mere three thousand pound sterling, you get a visa that
enables you to live in the United Kingdom permanently. And it is all
legit, courtesy, Ms. Theresa May, the UK Home Secretary. Now, you can
legally become an “eroya” (emigre) with all the rights appertaining to
every Briton. Your money qualifies you for a modern day equivalent of
the Middle Age’s papal pardon. After you’ve paid to the British
Exchequer, you can give the Immigration Department the slip, and
overstay your welcome in the UK. The Home Office promises to look the
other way. When, like little foxes, you make little holes in the pockets
of the Exchequer, your sins will be forgiven. Nigerians should have a
more favourable attitude toward the proposed visa bond. For such a
little amount, you can pretend to stay for six months only, and end up
staying permanently. You can even form a pressure group to enforce your
rights to the facilities that you paid for. Nigerians, just chill,
appreciate your good fortune, then hurry up, scrape money from anywhere,
everywhere — beg, borrow, liquidate your “esusu” (thrift) contribution
or work overtime — and get the visa to the Anglo el dorado. To think
that this break comes without the drills and hassles you go through for
the American visa lottery.
Continue after the cut....
From November 2013, citizens of British
Commonwealth nations such as Nigeria, Ghana, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh
and Sri Lanka, who propose to visit the United Kingdom through the
six-month Tourist or Family Visitor visa plans, must post a refundable
three thousand pounds sterling financial bond. Incidentally, these
countries contribute the highest number of illegal immigrants to the UK.
This bond is to ensure that they will return to their countries when
their visa expires. But if they abscond, they forfeit the money to the
British Government. And it will be used to defray costs they would incur
for using British public services as they extend their stay beyond the
six months allowed by their visa. Media reports indicate that of the 2.2
million people who visited the UK in 2012, about 101,000 were
Nigerians. But the British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Dr. Andrew
Pocock, insists that the figure was 125,000, about 70 per cent of the
number that actually applied for the visa.
Those, like Mrs. Abike Dabiri-Erewa, of
the House of Representatives, who suggest retaliatory moves should read
Buddha: “Hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by
love!” Softly kill John Bull with cuddly love. Reject the tit-for-tat
that Nigeria resorted to when South Africa asked Nigerians to pay
N100,000 deportation fee. Don’t introduce a bond or whatever, but rather
waive visa fees, and indiscriminately award entry visa to every Briton
who wants to visit Nigeria. This will encourage them to come over to
Nigeria in droves. The Nigeria High Commission in London should recruit a
kidnap crew that will grab Britons on the street, and coral them into
aircraft bound for Nigeria. As more Britons come to Nigeria, they create
more leg room behind for Nigerians who manage to post the financial
bond. Just one housekeeping matter: Five Nigerians should replace every
Briton that comes to Nigeria. If you compare the fortune spent by the
Nigerian system to maintain a British expatriate, to the pittance a
Nigerian ekes out in the UK, you will catch the drift of this logic.
May, obviously another “Snatcher” in the
making, didn’t list the public services that illegal aliens enjoy in
her country. She hasn’t explained why they begin to enjoy those services
only when their visas expire. She also did not say if the bond refund
will attract accrued interest, as the principle of equity demands. But
she obviously wants high net-worth visitors. She is reported to have
said: “This is the next step in making sure our immigration system is
more selective (selective?), bring down net migration from the hundreds
of thousands, to the tens of thousands, while still welcoming the best
(the best?) to Britain.” She has even derived an algebraic formula for a
geometric winding down of alien arrivals at Heathrow Airport. Such
arrogance and insensitivity, from a nation known for its civility! She
continues: “In the long run, we are interested in a system of bonds that
deters overstaying and recovers costs if a foreign national has used
our public service.” Her policy rather justifies overstaying.
Would these public services include
rides on the underground railway and intra-city municipal buses, and
utilities such as housing, water, telephone and electricity? The last
time anyone checked, everyone (including absconded visitors) pay for
these services on pay-as-you-go basis. Do people get free tickets
to movies, discotheques, football matches, the horse races, for a
haircut or a drink at the pub? Could you get free food? As for medical
bills, Yemi Olaofe, lawyer and immigration advisor, based in the UK
affirms: “Where a person is British, or has residency, Government pays.
If not, the individual pays.” Are immigrants exempt from paying into the
parking meter or from paying tax if they work? Could you get on the
dole as a fugitive? Is Ms. May worried that aliens would breathe the
God-given free air, stroll on London sidewalks, view the beautiful
skylines, shoot the breeze by the Thames, hear music from the corner
music shop, smell the heady aroma of a cappuccino, read the free sheets
abandoned on the seats of the underground coaches, feel the chill of the
unpredictable English weather, be helped out of inebriation by
Alcoholics Anonymous, rescued by the Red Cross, or attend church
services on Sunday? Or is just being in the UK intolerable?
Is it true? The rumour that John Bull is
going broke, and is looking to fetch up by squeezing out water out of
every rock in sight. If, as others suggest, the policy is an admission
that the UK is looking for ways to screen potential terrorists, this
method is laughable. Those terrorists can afford any amount imposed on
visitors. But everyone knows that those nationals who engage in acts of
terrorism against western institutions are not from West Africa or the
Asian nations targeted by this selective policy, but from the Middle
East. The House of Representatives has hinted that the bond policy could
have negative impact on relations between Nigeria and the UK. Ms Nnenna
Elendu-Ekeje, Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Relations, has
observed that the policy contradicts the spirit of the Commonwealth,
and David Cameron’s promise to improve trade relations between the two
countries. She speculates that maybe the policy is just a vote-catching
gimmickry for the coming general election. This suggests that the
British electorate are becoming xenophobic.
There is cheerful news,
though. After meeting with Ambassador Olugbenga Ashiru, Nigeria’s
Minister for Foreign Affairs, Pocock said that his Government has yet to
finalise the bond policy; the details are still being worked out. This
is diplomatese for a policy review. He adds that bonafide
Nigerians who wish to work, study or do business in the UK will be
welcome, though the bond will still apply to a minority of potential
abusers. He must clarify those who fall into this category.
Anglo-Nigerian relations are on a great roll right now, no one should be
putting clogs in the spokes of a wheel that is running well. In
addition, the UK Tourism Minister should ask May not to spoil his
business.- Lekan Sote (lekansote@yahoo.com)
Share your thoughts....thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment