Deport Foreign Criminals

A Common-Sense Proposal to Save UK Taxpayers Money

In the United Kingdom today, over 10% of the prison population is made up of foreign nationals. That’s approximately 9,000 individuals, many of whom are serving time for serious offences ranging from drug trafficking and violent assault to organised crime. While they are being held in British prisons, UK taxpayers are footing the bill — and the cost is staggering. At an average of £45,000 per prisoner per year, this amounts to well over £400 million annually. That’s nearly half a billion pounds being spent to house individuals who, in many cases, have no legal right to remain in the country once their sentences are complete.

This idea is simple: prioritise the deportation of all eligible foreign criminals currently held in UK custody. Deportation is not only legally viable — it is morally, fiscally, and socially necessary. The argument is not rooted in xenophobia but in fairness, efficiency, and public safety. No country should be expected to indefinitely house foreign nationals who have breached its laws and endangered its citizens.

Unfortunately, despite clear economic and security incentives, successive British governments have failed to take decisive action on this front. Foreign national offenders are routinely allowed to remain in the UK after completing their sentences. In some cases, they are released directly into British communities, free to reoffend — and many do. This is not just a failure of immigration enforcement; it’s a betrayal of the public trust and a gross misuse of public funds.

So why hasn’t this common-sense solution been implemented? The reasons are frustratingly predictable. Legal loopholes, diplomatic inertia, human rights appeals, and political cowardice have all played a role. The UK’s Human Rights Act — particularly Article 8, which protects the right to a private and family life — is frequently used to block deportations, even when the offender poses a clear danger to society. This legal framework has allowed lawyers and NGOs to stretch the definition of "family life" to absurd lengths, arguing that even the most tenuous personal ties to the UK should prevent removal.

This legal obstructionism is matched by political dysfunction. The Home Office has long been plagued by inefficiency, underfunding, and poor leadership. Ministers make promises, issue press releases, and commission reports — but little ever changes. Civil servants shuffle papers, but no one is held accountable when deportation orders are ignored, missed, or overturned. The result is a bloated and ineffective system that costs the country dearly in both money and public confidence.

Moreover, many foreign governments simply refuse to cooperate when it comes to accepting the return of their citizens — and the UK has done little to hold them accountable. There is no reason the British government cannot tie future visa access, aid, or trade preferences to cooperation on criminal deportations. Countries such as Australia, the United States, and Denmark have already implemented effective deportation regimes, often within strict legal timelines. The UK is falling behind — and it's costing us dearly.

Deportation should not be viewed as a punishment. It is the logical consequence of a criminal act committed by someone who is not entitled to reside in the country. Public safety, financial responsibility, and the rule of law all point to the same solution: return foreign criminals to their countries of origin upon completion of their sentence, or where possible, allow them to serve part of their sentence in their home country. We must make clear — through law and action — that the right to remain in the UK is a privilege, not a guarantee, especially for those who violate our laws.

The savings from such a policy would be significant. Reducing the foreign national prison population by even half could free up hundreds of millions of pounds per year — money that could be used to recruit more police officers, reduce court backlogs, or fund schools and hospitals. Beyond the financial savings, it would also serve as a strong deterrent, signalling that the UK will not tolerate criminal abuse of its hospitality.

This is a policy grounded in principle and pragmatism. It respects the rights of victims. It puts taxpayers first. And it sends a clear message that the UK takes crime, justice, and national sovereignty seriously.

If our political class cannot understand — or implement — such a straightforward reform, one must ask whether they are truly committed to serving the public interest at all. Too often, bold ideas are smothered by bureaucratic caution or ideological fear. But the British public is tired of excuses. They want action. They want fairness. They want common sense.

It is time to deliver.