G4S loses deportation contract


by Rumbold
30th October, 2010 at 10:44 am    

After the death of a deportee and other controversies, the Home Office has decided to award the lucrative deportation contract to another firm (though G4S claimed the award was to do with the price of its bid):

The company that will now deport detainees from next year, Reliance Security Task Management Limited, already manages several contracts for the Prison Service.

Three G4S guards were released on bail this month after being questioned over the death of Jimmy Mubenga, an Angolan who collapsed and died on BA flight 77 as it was preparing to depart for Luanda. G4S said it had received assurances that the failure to renew its contract was related to the price of its bid “and not to recent events”.

The question is will anything change though? G4S had been using controversial measures for years without much problem:

The performance of G4S guards has been questioned for several years. A document obtained by the Guardian reveals the Home Office warned G4S in 2006 that restraint techniques used by its guards potentially impeded breathing and could result in a fatality.

The letter, headed “positional asphyxia” – a form of suffocation caused when people are placed in dangerous restraint holds – was circulated to all G4S staff in 2006 after guards were spotted using an unauthorised form of restraint.

Let us hope the change in contract results in an increase in scrutiny. Deporting people is never going to be problem free, but this was clearly unacceptable.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs






8 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. sunny hundal

    Blogged: : G4S loses deportation contract http://bit.ly/cyH2xE


  2. Press Not Sorry

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : G4S loses deportation contract http://bit.ly/cyH2xE


  3. Crispin Cooper

    RT @sunny_hundal: Blogged: : G4S loses deportation contract http://bit.ly/cyH2xE


  4. Daniel(le) Nobody

    thank goodness RT @sunny_hundal: G4S loses deportation contract http://bit.ly/cyH2xE




  1. damon — on 31st October, 2010 at 3:41 am  

    How do you carry someone on to a plane if they are kicking and screaming and don’t want to go?
    Is it a matter of techniques as to how four people might carry a person on and then restrain them in a seat?

    Or is it a political view where all forcible deportations are to be seen as brutal?

    The USA under Barack Obama is happily deporting thousands back to Central America on special flights.

    Does it matter whatever the company is called? Group4, G4S? Aren’t they all the same?

    I’m not really sure what my opinion is.
    Have deportations – don’t have deportations?
    All the three main political parties seem to support it.

  2. Bored in Kavanagasau — on 31st October, 2010 at 12:00 pm  

    How do you carry someone on to a plane if they are kicking and screaming and don’t want to go? Is it a matter of techniques as to how four people might carry a person on and then restrain them in a seat?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zgQGfBOnh8

  3. MaidMarian — on 31st October, 2010 at 6:32 pm  

    Sorry Rumbold – I’m not buying it.

    We can scrutinise it all we want to, it is never going to look pretty. Not least because deportees have every incentive to drag out the process as long as possible.

  4. RezaV — on 5th November, 2010 at 9:48 am  

    I smell an agenda. The issue here is that many on the so-called left simply don’t want anyone deported.

    20 years ago my brother was spent a year working (legally) in LA.

    One day, immigration officers turned up at the café on Melrose where he worked and removed his friend and colleague, who was a French national and working illegally. He had been reported by an ex girlfriend.

    The French guy’s last words to my brother, as he was escorted out, was “I’ll come over to your place this evening”.

    He didn’t. He was taken to his apartment and given three hours to get his stuff together. From there he was taken into custody. The following day he was taken to LAX and put on a plane. His passport was stamped so that he wouldn’t be re-admitted to the US for many years.

    THAT’S how deportations should work. And with as much force as is necessary to remove someone who resists.

    People here illegally should be deported IMMEDIATELY.

    Britain would then become a much less attractive destination to the hundreds of thousands of bogus students, failed (because they were proven to be lying) asylum seekers and the hoard of unskilled and uneducated people from the third world that flock here illegally every year.

    There is always a danger that people who resist being moved from A to B will risk injury. The Angolan should not have resisted. He was an illegal immigrant. We had every right to deport him. He had no right to resist.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.