German government supports rejected asylum seekers instead of reallocating funds to its citizens, AfD points out

Anyone who does not pay their radio license fees in Germany has to expect the relentless harshness of state authorities. On the other hand, foreigners who are obliged to leave the country but fail to do so have less to fear. Authorities often grant them a “Duldung,” which means that they can continue to live in the German welfare state without fear of deportation.

As Junge Freiheit reported, the AfD parliamentary group wanted to do something about the government’s sloppiness and use an effective lever against individual states and municipalities that deal with the enforcement of this foreign policy. The party wanted to erase federal payments made so far in connection with rejected asylum seekers. But in the “adjustment meeting” of the budget committee on Friday night, after which the members of the government coalition boasted about their uncompromising approach, the AfD attempts failed completely.

The parliamentary group sought to cut 4.4 billion euros from the budget of the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs of Hubertus Heil (SPD).

For its calculations, the AfD party used asylum statistics, which show that about 58 percent of all asylum applications were rejected in 2020. Since the rejected asylum seekers should actually leave the country and their further stay would no longer be justified, the AfD demanded a corresponding reduction in federal payments to the individual states.

The potential savings in Minister Heil’s budget would have been 4.46 billion euros. The largest portions of this amount would have been 1.76 billion euros for the “cost of accommodation” and 2.09 billion euros for social assistance payments. But the AfD request was strictly rejected by the budget committee.

Unsurprisingly, the AfD met with a lack of understanding. It is incomprehensible “why the federal government supports rejected asylum seekers in Germany instead of consistently deporting them and using the money for its own citizens,” said AfD member Ulrike Schielke-Ziesing.

The almost four and a half billion euros that would have been saved with the AfD’s plan could, in her opinion, have been used more sensibly in other areas of labor and social affairs.

But not only that. A cut in payments to the federal states would also have a beneficial effect, as these states would then try to avoid the loss of income. And federal politicians, such as Interior Minister Horst Seehofer (CSU), would then support their demand for faster deportations when the benefits for rejected asylum seekers got cut. Because whenever, for example, Islamists from abroad commit serious crimes, calls for quick deportations immediately emerge. That was the case, for example, when Abdullah Al Haj Hasan attacked a homosexual couple in Dresden. One man died, while the other was hospitalized with serious injuries.

Then, there was a huge hype when the Bavarian Interior Minister Joachim Herrmann (CSU) called for more deportations and declared that “protecting the citizens has top priority.” And the North Rhine-Westphalian Interior Minister Herbert Reul (CDU) demanded that “anyone who has carried out a terrorist attack should lose their guest rights. Immediate deportation should follow.”

There is, however, a large gap between Reul’s wish and reality. At the end of 2019, 249,922 foreigners were obliged to leave the Federal Republic of Germany. But out of this number, 202,387 foreigners were allowed to stay for various reasons. There is no deportation to Syria, even though the civil war there has ended in most parts of the country. Yet, this year (January to October), 29,413 asylum seekers claimed to be from Syria. At 35 percent, they were the largest group of all of the 83,735 asylum seekers (January to October 2020).

Last year, 22,097 asylum seekers were deported. The annual figures have declined slightly since 2016 when 26,375 asylum seekers were expelled. Most of the deported individuals were Albanians (1,604), Nigerians (1,432), and Georgians (1,242). However, they did not have to make a particularly long journey, as their most frequent destination country became Italy with 2,692 cases, followed by Albania (1,528) and France (1,196).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s