Deportation threat hangs over visa row trainee GP

A DOCTOR on the verge of qualifying as a GP faces being thrown out of Britain because he was just a few days late renewing his visa.

After ten years in the UK, including seven working for the NHS, Dr Luke Ong, who is from Singapore, tried to book an appointment with officials to extend his stay.

But they said they could only see him on September 2 last year – 18 days after his visa had expired.

Even though he was days from gaining an automatic right to remain in the UK as someone who has been in the country legitimately for ten years, he was declared an illegal immigrant and told he must leave.

His taxpayer-funded GP training was brought to an immediate halt with only five months to go, and his passport and medical degree certificate were confiscated. His initial appeal was upheld by an immigration judge, who ruled it ‘would not be proportionate’ to remove him.

However, the Government has applied to take the case to a higher tribunal in order to throw him out.

Dr Ong, 31, has spent seven months fighting for permission to stay. ‘I have given the best years of my life to the NHS... paying taxes and contributing to wider society,’ he said at his home in Manchester.

‘Sadly all this counts for nothing, and the Home Office are now treating me as an illegal immigrant.

‘Any other country would be happy to have a doctor work for their health service, but here I face endless persecution by the Home Office, having to suffer the indignity of being treated like an unwanted intruder.’

The case comes as the NHS plans to spend £100million to bring in 3,000 foreign GPs to alleviate shortages. Recruitment agencies will earn around £20,000 for each successful placement in England.

Last night, former Labour home secretary Lord Blunkett said Dr Ong’s treatment was ‘crackers’ and urged Home Secretary Amber Rudd to intervene.

The Home Office said it would be ‘inappropriate’ to comment while the case is ongoing, adding: ‘All visa applications are considered in line with immigration rules and on the evidence provided.’