This is another instance where the home office have got their misplaced ideology blatantly wrong again. It targets honest taxpaying residents who pay a hefty tax towards the british economy anyway, contributing more than the british citizens themselves. I think the Home office need to get their act together and come up with measures that show commitment to reducing illegal immigration, not hassling the already belligerant highly skilled professional community that has started to feel increasingly unwelcome in this land.

priya, glasgow, scotland

From the report it would appear that this new measure is aimed at Indians - after all why is the Honourable Minister going to India? To explain what & to whom? Yes Indians have been the scourge of British society - never mind that their net contribution to the British economy is more than that of an ethnic Britisher? (to quote Jon Snow on Channel 4) they were the ones who bombed the tube in London... or was it some one else? I have a better suggestion for the Minister: Instead of expanding the number of visa application centres in India, simply shut down all offices in India. Wow! Think of the savings Mr. Minister on wages alone. But no visa applications, just think? So Britain may miss a bit of trade with one of the fastest growing economies, the NHS may miss a few doctors , a few software engineers less but there will be LESS MIGRATION from India! As for the illegal migrants, they will continue to arrive because they don't have any use for visas, in any case.

Amar Deo, Harrow, UK

In Canada you are responsible for your relatives for 10 years.
A small price to pay in my opinion. As a citizen of Canada and born in the UK, I have no problem with this bond immigration is proposing. However, I think it should only be for relatives from countries where there is a high risk of overstaying. The taxpayers should never be paying to send people back, or to set them up once they have returned to where they came from. The offending over stayers British family should be handed that bill.

Jason, Calgary, Canada

Not sure that I understand this - if my Japanese sister-in-law wants to visit London for a week as a tourist she can do so on a tourist visa, along with the other thousands of Japanese who visit, but if she comes to see me I will be asked to pay a £1000 bond? I would be interested in a more detailed explanation.

Peter, Cambridge, Cambridge,

Gosh! What a great idea. Too bad the US Government isn't thinking about such a scheme like this. At $2000 a head, plus the overstay fines we might be able to put a dent in the National Debt. Perhaps that has been the plan of the US Government all along since nothing has been done, nor is being done at the present to curtail the invasion of people from foreign countries.

G. Peterson, National City,, California USA

Liam Byrne, Nu Labour and the EU ministers have to admit it they have made a huge mistake on immigration that cannot be resolved by politics, only by history and history can be very unforgiving. God know what is going to happen in Europe? As someone who has studied history I can see Mars and Athena gathering their weapons

J Leigh, South London, England UK

About time too!

I am married to a Filipina and have heard about so many Filipinos who go to the UK to stay with their relatives so that they can work illegally & then overstay their visa.

But to totally eliminate relatives overstaying for illegal work purposes, there is a need to make that bond a cash bond (because insurance bond premuims being cheap would be no deterent) & variable in nature, i.e. the sponsoring UK relative has to pay an additional bond amount of $2,000 for every month the overseas relative overstays. That way the forfeited bond will cost more than any illegally earned work income. In addition the sponsoring relative should be permanently banned from sponsoring any future overseas visitors.

That way the UK relatives will think twice before abusing UK immigration laws & bringing relatives to the UK just so that they can work illegally.

As for any ethnic group that complains, if they don't abide by the existing laws of the UK then they deserve what they get

Richard W, Baguio City, Philippines

Yes, canadians are required to take financial responsibility for sponsoring a relative; however, the relative is intent on settling in canada permanently. This proposal appears to apply to family visiting for a set time of vacation. The proposal appears to be a bit over the top.

mac, edmonton, canada

Very good, Stuart, well done. But did you have to hand over 1000 pounds?

UK citizens sponsoring a tourist also have to take responsibility for their repatriation at present.

But I can't afford to put up a grand so that a family member can visit. It's absurd. And why are only family members included? Surely they are the ones who should be afforded more rights, as opposed to tourists and workers?

This idea, like the recent legislation that means visa types cannot be changed once they have been issued (e.g. from a tourist visa to a settlement visa) harm visitors to the UK generally.

It is a shotgun approach that will not weed out determined criminal applicants.

The problem is that the Home Office doesn't have the ability to determine which applicants are likely to abuse their conditions of stay, so it makes life difficult for everyone.

Rachel Weiss, Westram,

Paying illegal immigrants to leave?! Why? We never asked them to come here. Do WE get paid by any other countries when we leave them? No, of course not! They should pay for their own passage too.

Ian , Benfleet, UK

In Canada, when you sponsored a relative you had to accept full financial responsibility for a number of years. I dont know why that would not also apply in the UK. We sponsored my wife's sister in her move from the UK to Canada years ago and were more than willing to be responsible. We did not see this as any sort of racist program against poor white Canadians.

STUART, Edinburgh,