RFI: UK Immigration Policy

Labour have promised a points system for economic migrants which could cut either way depending on how they skew it. Labour know that they need a good supply of public servents (nurses, doctors, teachers etc.) and they also know that full employment is a reality in certain regions and sectors and so to grow the british economy they either have to stimulate productivity (hard, especially for governments and especially hard for governments with even a little social concience) or they have to allow skilled employable immigrants to come in and start paying tax to pay for improvements in the public services and help put off the baby boom demographic crisis until after they have any responsibility for dealing with it.

Raw untreated migration data can be had from the Office for National Statistics

Cost in terms of UK jobs has been marginal. Wages growth has been stagnant but it was stagnant for years before 2004 and this has more to do with overseas competition than incoming workers.

The kind of work that attracts illegal workers (unskilled, cash in hand etc) tends to be most common in areas of high unemployment (the countryside, mostly). By preventing employers from taking advantage of low-cost, under-the-radar immigrant labour, the government is making it harder for, say, a farmer to fire all his legit minimum wage fruit-pickers and replace them with people earning tuppance an hour, thus screwing over the new arrivals and the people who were there already.

The Polish plumbers have been great for the big cities, but the arrival of Chinese cockle-pickers in Morecambe Bay has been less great for Morecambe's exisiting cockle-pickers, not to mention the Chinese ones.

Apparently the UK has some crazy new limits on migration to the UK? This article explains what's going on, but I want to check with UK people here: is this right? So an American who gets a lectureship at say Cambridge can only hope to stay for five years now? This is insane, & sadly relevant to my interests right now, so I want to see if this is what you all understand to be the new Cameron-Clegg policy.

Here's the scoop from that article:

"...[T]he proposed changes would restrict the opportunity of non-EU economic migrants to settle as follows:
• Tier 1: As noted, this route has been closed, leaving only very limited routes for wealthy investors and entrepreneurs (around 500 people) and a new category of ‘exceptional talent’ in science and the arts (around 1,000). These smaller replacement routes will still allow for settlement. Indeed, they will offer an accelerated route: migrants depositing £10 million in a British bank account will be allowed to settle after two years, and migrants investing £5 million after three years, rather than the usual five.
• Tier 2: The new proposals classify all new Tier 2 applicants as temporary migrants (from April 2011). There will be no route to settlement, other than a few exceptions: the wealthy (those earning over £150,000) plus elite sportspeople (around 250) and ministers of religion (around 370). Intra-company transfers, which accounted for 22,000 out of 36,000 entrants via Tier 2 in 2009, have been excluded from the ‘cap’ but are covered by these proposed restrictions on settlement. A new category will
be created into which ‘exceptional’ Tier 2 migrants will be able to switch after three years, in which they would be allowed to apply for settlement – but with very strict criteria, and, very probably, a limit on numbers. All others would have to leave after a maximum of five years.
• Tier 4: The post-study work category for university-level students is being closed (though those who started their course before the change will still be able to qualify). Non-EU students will only be able to stay on by switching into the replacements
for Tier 1 (very unlikely) or into Tier 2 (which no longer allows for settlement in most cases), or as a spouse or partner of a citizen or settled resident.
• Tier 5: Temporary workers will be restricted to a stay of 12 months maximum, with no possibility of settlement; youth mobility is unchanged at a maximum of two years.
• Domestic workers: These routes will either be abolished, or restricted to 12 months or shorter with no possibility of settlement.
If successful, the overall effect of these policies would be to reduce the number of non-EU economic migrants settling each year, from current levels of around 40,000 (plus a roughly equal number of dependents) to around 1,000 (plus dependents)."

Also see here.

Yes, that seems accurate as far as i am aware. Bear in mind that policy changes so quickly that in five years' time the law could be completely different though.

Any other thoughts on this?

like, are they really doing this? how are UK universities going to stay globally competitive if they're restricted to hiring just EU citizens?

The final proposals are likely to be watered down a little but it's the gist of what they're up to. It's economic and social vandalism but they're determined to drive down headline non-EU immigration figures.

The changes to Tier 4 UK student visas are mostly already in place and they're starting to bite. There's a general feeling that the majority of degree-awarding universities in the state sector will keep their heads above water but that it's going to kill off a giant swathe of the below-degree-level colleges who are currently attracting thousands and thousands of students on business, finance, etc courses. Some of them deserve it, tbh, but a lot of decent institutions are going to go to the wall as well. There's always been a fear that 'bogus students' are signing up to fictitious courses just to get a visa. There are also strict English language proficiency requirements that provide an extra hurdle.

It's going to be tough for mainstream universities as well - the UK is unquestionably less attractive as a destination than it was five years ago but there's a case for saying that Australia is even more restrictive and the US has a range of its own issues. They might be gambling on a rising number of affluent students from places like China, Central Asia and Brazil making up for any lost numbers. It's likely to take billions out of the UK economy though.

this is far from the worst thing the current govt is doing, but conceivably the most thoroughly stupid

Some of them deserve it, tbh

Too right they doo

There's always been a fear that 'bogus students' are signing up to fictitious courses just to get a visa

They are, speaking from experience here before you ask

Yes, absolutely, but the way to stop that is having a proper inspection system in place to monitor colleges, not cutting the whole sector off at the knees.

It looks like London Metropolitan University might have its right to educate non-EU students taken away permanently. This could mean all current students, even those who have completed part of their degrees, would have sixty days to find another university ofrbe deported. London Met, and their students, apparently found out about this via a Sunday Times article yesterday. They had had their license suspended for six weeks but, as far as they were aware, the investigation was still ongoing. Evidently someone at the Home Office briefed the paper.

http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/news/news-releases/2012-press-releases/response-in-regard-to-the-sunday-times-story-on-london-metropolitan-universitys-highly-trusted-status.cfm

Handling the situation this way is going to be catastrophic for the image of UK education abroad. The number of people applying for Tier 4 student visas has plummeted already. If students can potentially get thrown out of the country through no fault of their own, having already paid tens of thousands of pounds for an education, it's difficult to see why anyone would want to come in the future.

"or be deported"

Home Office are saying no decision has been made, but I suppose that's academic (...)

Official now.

From the Guardian comments thread:

UKBA decision is callous in the the extreme to existing non EU students who now have only 60 days to find somewhere to finish their studies. For home/EU students it could mean that some courses have insufficient students to continue.

In the 60 days, a student has to find the tuition fees (11k +) for a new university, at least £2000 of maintenance money, deposit it in a valid bank account for 28 days. They have to secure a place at another university, get a valid CAS and English certificate. Note many B2 English certificates expire after 2 years, so someone who would be entering their 3rd year of a course, certificate may have expired. Some universities are allowed to make their own assessment, but UKBA prefer their approved ones. Submit a valid visa application, best to do an in person application at £768, because if start another course whilst your visa is being processed you do so at your own risk. Some universities/colleges don't even allow you to start without holding a valid visa for their institution. Current in country visa applications can take in excess of 3 months to be processed.

Oh and by the way it is less than one month before most university terms start. Many non EU students may have already paid this coming year tuition fees to London Met, as they offered a discount for early payment in full. So let's hope London Met can refund those fees promptly.

ffs

London Met has long been a basket case, so though sad for everyone concerned, this isn't very surprising. It sounds to me like they've got serious problems managing student data- see for example this from 2009: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7853203.stm

That said, the Home Office's heavy handed and counter-productive attitude towards overseas students, stemming from Tory paranoia about immigration, is the root cause of the problem.

London Met certainly has problems. They blame a lot of them on the previous management administration, but it's clear that there were ongoing issues. This is a spectacularly cruel way to treat international students, though, most of whom will have their paperwork in order.

It's not even paranoia, it's policy. The government has said that it's going to cut net immigration from the "hundreds of thousands" to the "tens of thousands". Literally the only way they can do this is to turn away legitimate students who are contributing billions to the economy and propping up large numbers of universities. It's madness. Green is too stubborn to support the change in designation of temporary students so they don't count as immigrants. Willetts apparently support this.

Agreed on both points.

Here's more on bad stuff happening at London Met, something close to my heart as a librarian: http://doombrarian.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/do-you-want-outsourcing-with-that-london-met-to-sell-off-support-and-library-services/

Yeah, that was interesting. Seen by many as a first step towards something much bigger:

http://www.wonkhe.com/2012/08/23/london-met-outsourcing-or-something-else/

ugh. Presumably the holding company will be exempt from providing all those extraneous luxuries such as HE payscales, pensions etc.

It's going to be a real challenge for LMU to continue in its current guise, i think. They're at least £30m down in student fees and could face significant legal action. Even if they get their license back in six months' time, their brand reputation will have been destroyed. Of course, this doesn't just affect the current students, it is going to reflect badly on anyone who holds one of their degrees or will do in the future. They're probably big enough so survive but i wouldn't rule out a change of name and management. It might be a risky, but potentially opportune, time for someone to look at privatisation.

I haven't had a proper look at the stats yet but it looked to me like the home office figures were showing a drop of 50,000 in net immigration and a drop of 112,000 in student visas granted.

Tempted to start a rolling international education thread but this will do for now. Expect the Panorama show on Monday about visa fraud to have a pretty significant impact on short term policy wrt student migration.

What's your background/current situtation, SV, if you don't mind saying? (can't remember if you're an "international" student or if you work in HE)

Neither, as such. I work for a big education company that provides a lot of products and services to students, HE institutions, etc.

Mark Harper, the immigration minister responsible for the Go Home racist vans, has resigned after being found to have employed an undocumented cleaner.

Haha! That's priceless.

I'd be interested in that thread, ShariVari! I am an academic in les É tats-Unis but I am heading back to Olde Gaule later this year for another extended stint over there. there's a lot of consolidation of French universities going on right now, and the one at which I'll be ensconced is one of the newest, and largest, of the new fusions.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/24/english-language-tests-cheating-results-invalid-overseas-students

3 universities and 57 FE colleges have had their overseas student licences suspended. In theory up to 50,000 people could be deported if still in the UK, though that's unlikely.

Christ. Had heard rumours today and were wondering which Unis they'd turn out to be...

May be more to come...

Immigration minister James Brokenshire

omg

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/18/border-police-arrest-cleaner-mark-harper-immigration-isabella-acevedo

Two days after Harper got a new government post.

The lack of compassion shown by border police is pretty disgusting. So is the reappointment of Harper, really.

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2014/12/02/without-due-process-how-britain-deported-50-000-students

I know that people who had taken TOEIC to support a visa application were given an opportunity to take an alternative test if their application was still being processed.

If the article is correct, it looks like they've identified entire cohorts of test takers as fraudulent and are using that identification to automatically invalidate any visas that were granted prior to the scandal breaking, though. How watertight that identification is, i don't know though. The structure of the cheating would have made it impossible for anyone in the room to have been unaware / complicit in most cases but i'd assume that proving it on a case by case basis for 29k-50k people would be tricky.

*unaware / not complicit*

How watertight that identification is, i don't know though.

Not at all, there won't even be any grounds for suspicion in most cases - this is just a bullshit pretext to game the figures, because who gives a fuck about immigrants getting deported lol

It's relatively easy to identify testing centres that were providing fraudulent exams and also possible to identify who took tests at those centres and when. The way most of the the cheating was organised would have meant that anyone who wasn't paying the premium for a guaranteed pass wouldn't have been allowed in the room. On the balance of probabilities, the bulk of the people they've identified are likely to have cheated but that's a fair way from proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/foreign-students-could-be-sent-home-before-applying-for-work-visas-to-cut-immigration-9938145.html

Looks like nuisance value rather than anything else - foreign graduates would have to go abroad to submit applications for UK work visas rather than being able to do it while in the UK. I think many have to do so already though. The interesting bit is buried:

Mrs May is also pressing for the power to be able to penalise colleges and universities that would have low success rates in ensuring the departure of foreign graduates and to deprive them of their right to sponsor overseas students, the source added.

So not only would universities be responsible for monitoring the whereabouts of their students while they are studying, they would be responsible for ensuring that they left the country after they graduated.

There's more coming before the election. Expect the sector to be up in arms.

Sigh

Remarkable stroke of luck that the Saville report and the name of the British ISIS dude were both released on the same morning as the immigration statistics.

And the government's response is to...further restrict the rules around student visas.

I was a bit "eh was Seville an immigrant" for a sec there tbh

(xp) ... and blame the EU (though the biggest increase in immigration was in non-EU nationals) and the Lib Dems (get used to this line, you'll be hearing it a lot).

Was it luck?

re becoming a UK citizen:

One referee should be a person of any nationality who has professional standing, eg minister of religion, civil servant, or a member of a professional body e.g. accountant or solicitor (who is not representing you with this application).

WTF is this bullshit. What if you don't personally know any so-called "professional" people?

Thought this was going to be a bump about Nigel Farage wanting to do away with anti-discrimination laws...

my dentist counter-signed my passport application.

here's a list of suggestions:
http://www.immigrationboards.com/british-citizenship/british-passport-application-who-can-countersign-t53718.html

what about this section:

they have known the applicant personally for more than 3 years; • they are willing to give full details of their knowledge of the applicant;

seems like a dentist might have issues with this.

I would guess that virtually everyone will know at least one of a doctor, teacher, dentist or pharmacist on a purely professional basis but that's very different from knowing them personally for more than three years, if only because GPs and teachers move around so much.

(And I'm guessing this is written for people who have been legally resident in the country for a while, I may be wrong)

Well exactly. Even if you've been in the country for 11 years that doesn't mean you're friends with doctors and dentists! Is this just another way of keeping out working class people or something?

public librarians are happy to sign these kind of things, by and large

public librarians are happy to lie on official forms that they have known someone personally for 3 years? Fair enough, but you'd think the £5000 fine would put them off.

This isn't for a passport application btw, it is for a citizenship application, hence being on the UK immigration thread.

ah sorry, advice rescinded then

the dentist was really my only hope - i was registered at a doctor's surgery but would see a different doctor every time i went. whereas i had seen the same dentist at least once every 6 months for 8 years so...

the 'personally' thing depends on what you mean by 'personally'. i was a person to him, not just a name, not an unknown person asking for his signature. he had my address on file, i'd paid bills... and i'm sure he'd've refused if he didn't feel he could vouch for me.

yah can see how this would be tough. Last time I had to re-apply for my airport airside pass I thought I'd never get it because they needed a friend who wasn't a relative to assert that you were of good character and that they had known you for over 2 years. I don't have any actual friends so got a co-worker (who I never see socially) to vouch for me. They were a bit iffy about accepting this tbh. If I had to produce a professional that I'd known for 3 years I would have zero chance, as I don't know or have contact with any.

Also idly wondering what percentage of non-EU immigrants would know a religious leader well. Disproportionate to the rest of the country I'd imagine?

The irony is we're only doing this so we can get out of this shithole country, but not have a load of hassle if we decide we want to move back at some point.

the 'personally' thing depends on what you mean by 'personally'. i was a person to him, not just a name, not an unknown person asking for his signature. he had my address on file, i'd paid bills... and i'm sure he'd've refused if he didn't feel he could vouch for me.

― koogs, Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:03 PM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is what I meant by my librarian suggestion- if you've been a member of a public library for a number of years then that is probably good enough for most purposes, though citizenship applications might be tougher/more rigorous. In any case a librarian in a public library would be likely to help you find out exactly what the criterion implies. Or maybe go to the CAB.

Poo, you should have webmail.

Cheers Aldo, I replied on FB

Just wanted to mention how much I enjoyed receiving an email from "the bowels are not what they seem" to my Colonel Poo email account.

You need to do this to buy premiums bonds as well see days, it's a massive pain in the neck.

At least an American won't have to do a language test on top of everything else.

Do you really? I was about to buy some premium bonds, luckily my friends are middler-classier than me.

I had to provide a certified copy of my passport (signed by a community member of good standing) as proof of ID and a bank statement as proof of address but i might just have been unlucky. Idk if they select a certain proportion to scrutinise or if they do it to everyone.

I bought some for my godson as a christening present a few years back and the only thing that annoyed me was that I had to get my mum to do it as being grandparent is acceptable to buy a present on behalf of a child and being an aunt isn't.

I was lucky with the 'professional people' thing because at the time I applied I had been working at the same small company for a few years and could get the CEO/director to vouch for me. But I imagine a lot of people struggle with it, as if anyone needs more crap to worry about on top of the money they have to conjure for the whole process. The paperwork etc from my arrival in the UK to my full citizenship cost over 3000 pounds, which is just an insane amount of money, even if it is spread over a few years.

http://i.imgur.com/EYu5Tzo.png

Worth remembering that he was "convicted" without having been arrested, put on trial or given any kind of formal sentence.

he should come to the uk and perform a crime (the more spurious the better) here, so he has to stay for longer to be put on trial, lol

Landlords could face up to five years in jail for letting properties to undocumented migrants - or failing to check whether the people they let to have the legal right to remain in the country.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/03/illegal-immigrants-face-eviction-without-court-order-under-plans-to-discourage-migrants

The degree to which the government has farmed enforcement out to non-professionals is often underestimated. Landlords must act as immigration officials or face jail, universities have to or face financial ruin, lorry drivers are automatically responsible for anyone caught in their vehicles, etc. Trucking companies have been fined nearly £7m this year, iirc, for failing to secure their lorries against stowaways.

This might be the most incoherent policy yet:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33750709

Labour and the Conservatives both pledged that anyone in a public-facing role in the state sector must have an appropriate level of English and could lose their jobs if they failed to meet that benchmark but i think this is the first time the actual benchmark has been identified. They have chose proficiency in English equivalent to "GCSE grace C". This is odd for a number of reasons.

There are lots of different ways to measure English proficiency for speakers of other languages and GCSEs aren't really one of them. They are designed with native speakers in mind and might reflect core competencies but don't assess them in a formal way. They are not ESOL tests. The guide used for visas in the UK and by every other ministry i can think of across Europe (Polish Civil Service, Greek Civil Service, Italian Ministry of Education, etc) is the Common European Framework of Reference.

I'll skip the technical details but the upshot is that to work in any customer-facing role, you'd need a level of English broadly comparable to the requirements for Highly Skilled migrant visas and most MBA courses and higher than the entry point for almost every undergraduate degree in the country. Given that 39% of British people fail to get a C grade in GCSE English, i'm not sure what is expected.

The most absurd element of all is that the initial documents seem to suggest it will be up to managers to determine how to check the English levels of their staff.

that's before you take into account that in a couple of years GCSE grading is going to change to an "interesting" new 9-1 scheme

http://www.aqa.org.uk/supporting-education/policy/gcse-and-a-level-changes/structure-of-new-gcses/explaining-new-gcse-grades-transcript

i'm not even gonna get into the serious issues with English and Maths teaching at post-16 because professional discretion but let's just say in brief there are nowhere near enough teachers to meet demand from the government for continuing study for pupils who haven't achieved GCSE passes at school

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-says-migrant-families-could-be-broken-up-and-mothers-deported-if-they-fail-new-english-a6818631.html

The government has just announced some kind of fund targeted at helping Muslim women learn English on nat sec grounds, which would not have been necessary has they not bulldozed the existing funds for migrants looking to improve their language skills. Presumably if you are not a Muslim woman, you are still out of luck.

As ever, there's no detail on the level of English required, or the process. To get a spouse visa / further leave to remain, you already need to be able to pass an English test at the A1 level, the reference to toughening up the system and to demonstrating your level of English is "improving" suggests it'll be another test at a higher level.

The plans to deport anyone not earning £35,000 after five years continue to roll on:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-urged-to-rethink-new-35000-earnings-threshold-for-non-eu-migrants-as-teachers-face-a6814841.html

was on radio4 this morning. interviewer pointed out that it was same government (albeit in coalition) that removed the funding in the first place.

Good luck being a dyslexic Muslim woman (or related to one) in 2016.

I think / hope they'll stick with the format of testing speaking and listening only, rather than reading and writing, as there's probably a recognition that literacy and English ability aren't interchangeable but it certainly makes things harder for people learning the language with minimal support.

The income threshold blows me away. Is that per person or per family?

Per person. Nurses are temporarily exempted but teachers, etc are not aiui.

Wow. That would be higher than the average UK salary.

50% higher

...than median household income, £7.5k above average salary apparently

That'll be fun, keeping tabs on thousands of people's incomes for years after they've arrived, sounds like a good use of resources

The best case scenario is that this is all about cheap headline chasing and they don't intend to follow through on it, but who the fuck knows any more.

Wow. That would be higher than the average UK salary.

― droit au butt (Euler), Monday, 18 January 2016 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Don't be surprised - value is to be measured in a number always and 4evah.

Although this does apply to migrants outside the EU. Plenty of cheap labour to be obtained from the inside of it?

That's true.

My wife was just pointing out that this could be seen as just another instance of colonialism: poach valuable talent from other countries like one used to poach valuable resources from them.

But it's more complex than that, because these are people, who presumably want to emigrate to the UK. We're not talking slavery here.

But slaves to capital?

I don't know.

Keeps out the riff raff.

And don't forget, for £7400 you can get "Super Premium" service, where immigration officials visit a location you specify and give you an answer within 24 hours:
https://www.gov.uk/ukvi-premium-service-centres/use-the-super-premium-service

xp

There are some countries that have identified 'brain drain' as a pressing economic problem but the reverse of that is the remittances that come from overseas workers, which account for up to 30% of the GDP of countries like Nepal and Moldova and pay for the domestic higher-ed opportunities of family members elsewhere.

It's not as though people are going to stop emigrating, they're just going to do worse jobs for less money in other countries.

Yes, that's true. Still, it divides families: only the wage earner can stay in the UK for more than five years.

And the Nepalese need doctors too.

And might not their staying in Nepal contribute to a development of the Nepalese economy?

And who ought to make these decisions?

xp on the ELT stuff.

The government has just announced some kind of fund targeted at helping Muslim women learn English on nat sec grounds, which would not have been necessary has they not bulldozed the existing funds for migrants looking to improve their language skills. Presumably if you are not a Muslim woman, you are still out of luck.

As ever, there's no detail on the level of English required, or the process. To get a spouse visa / further leave to remain, you already need to be able to pass an English test at the A1 level, the reference to toughening up the system and to demonstrating your level of English is "improving" suggests it'll be another test at a higher level.

This is classic Cameron, isn't it? They announced something similar in 2011, when the people expected to deliver this pointed out that funding had been cut. Empty announcement designed to get a lot of noise in the press - it feels with a bit of luck like it might be one of a number of Cameron announcements that just never happens ie what Matt DC said.

Yes, that's true. Still, it divides families: only the wage earner can stay in the UK for more than five years.

And the Nepalese need doctors too.

And might not their staying in Nepal contribute to a development of the Nepalese economy?

And who ought to make these decisions?

Who can make them other than the individuals concerned?

Under the points-based system, dependents can be eligible for visas.

Doctors will typically earn more than £35k so aren't necessarily a great example but the options are typically not a) come to the UK or b) stay in X. You have a lot of very qualified people driving cabs or working on building sites in Dubai. There's nothing much, apart from North Korea style bans on travelling overseas, that countries can do to stop it.

The main objections around the £35k minimum from a practical perspective are that it's not based on need. It cuts off the possibility of recruiting across whole sections of industry that might be experiencing skills shortages but don't pay substantially higher than the average wage.

The main objection from a human perspective is that it's going to apply to people who have built a life in the UK over the course of a number of years and are going to get kicked out at the end based solely on their salary.

How long do they get to reach that level of salary?

(The 35k figure looks like a pipe dream for me, it's at least a decade away even if ever get there ... struggling to get head round the idea that anyone should have to earn this much to be worthy to stay)

Five years, then you're out.

jeez

Will this affect people who already live here?

Yes, that's my understanding.

I don't see how it's possible to round up a bunch of people who have been ILR for years and years, who have paid as much tax as any British citizen on their income, and who have been entitled to the same programme of benefits etc. How is this even workable after the five years required to qualify for ILR?

It does sound like an unworkable mess, but I wouldn't be shocked if the tories attempt to implement it. Feels very Trumpish. Very sorry for everyone who has this hanging over their heads.

The ludicrous policy of trying to get net immigration down to 'tens of thousands' from 250k+ is at the heart of all this nonsense. It's essentially impossible - despite their best efforts they haven't prevented the university sector from recruiting foreign students, they have zero control over EU immigration and, in the one area they can actually influence (Tier 2 skilled migration), numbers have actually gone up iirc, partly due to the skills gap in the tech sector and positioning of London as the no.1 financial services hub in the world. Pretty much the only thing that they can do is announce cruel, stupid things in the hope that they're perceived to be cracking down.

This is me, isn't it? People on EEA-2s and EEA-4s?

I think that EEA2/4 are not covered. Non-EU partners of EU workers tend to get preferential treatment over non-EU partners of British nationals, but I'm not an expert.

You are probably good until the referendum.

I just have no-frills ILR, granted in 1995 after four years of renewing my visa (and before all these ~categories~ were invented). If they want to apply this to people who've been here *forever*, does that in effect mean a huge number of long-time British taxpayers will risk deportation if they have the audacity to lose a job or fall ill? A new layer of insecurity isn't exactly what anyone having a Very Special Freelancer's January needs right now.

lol :(

There's no way they can go that far, right? This retrospective bullshit is about as practical as kicking out all the French people living here if the EU referendum passes (or fails, I'm not sure which way the question will be phrased you know what I mean). Which they also wouldn't do, right? Right?

Reviewing the 2012 policy docs, it looks like it's effective for Tier 2 visa holders who started after the 6th of April 2011. Anyone before that should be ok.

Is this an example of the new rules coming into force, or something else:

https://kingstonshakespeareseminar.wordpress.com/2016/01/25/shameful-start-to-shakespeare-400-dr-paul-hamilton-arrested-and-held-by-uk-immigration/

Something else. This is how a lot of people who have recently finished studying get treated.

it's pretty diabolical. almost amusingly egregious.

No expert here but there seems to be a lot of worth in the common idea that 'If you make controls on immigration stricter and stricter, you're only going to penalise well-meaning people who haven't done anything wrong, because they're the easiest to track down'?

Pretty damning:

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/03/23/disaster-for-theresa-may-as-legal-ruling-brings-student-depo

I probably shouldn't say too much about this off 77 but I think the vast majority were probably cheating though it's very possible honest candidates were unjustly impacted.

Also fairly sure that voice recognition, which was the public justification for the dragnet and the point at which the Home Office defence fell down at tribunal, had next to nothing to do with anything.

Well, a vague feeling that the vast majority were probably cheating was all the government had to go on, so ur in good(?) company.

Altho I'd say even the cheating candidates were unjustly impacted tbh

No. The cheating was so unsophisticated it would be very easy to detect if you were looking properly. The nature of the cheating (certain defined test centres charging a premium to read the answers out at the front) would have made it hard for honest candidates to have been accidentally caught up. However there could be grey areas where centres were offering bent and honest sessions at the same time. You could probably work out with a reasonable degree of confidence which was which but possibly not beyond a reasonable doubt.

Having the language requirement for students isn't wildly unfair but it is for families, etc. The main problem was ETS not paying attention and the government choosing an inappropriate test for inclusion.

Kind of interesting given the fact that this is hugely embarrassing to the Home Office - both painting it as incompetent in dealing with tribunals and having very little idea of what they're doing when it comes to a major policy affecting hundreds of thousands of people - that it has received such little coverage in the press.

At the moment you have a politics.co.uk blog, a brief Times Higher Education article, a paywalled piece on the FT and one article in the Independent. Everyone else, from The Guardian to the Mail, hasn't touched it afaict.

all frightened to talk about immigration because of bullying by PC liberal thugs

tories losing legal rulings right, right and centre right

idk how much of this i am reading correctly but it looks like Byron organised a special "training event" across 15 of its branches as a ruse to round up all its foreign workers so the Border Force could come and deport any without valid visas:

http://www.eliberico.com/la-policia-de-s-a-sus-paises.html

what the fuck

Henry Dimbleby (Leon owner) is the child of which newscaster, again?

My Spanish isn't so hot but I'm pretty sure Leon isn't mentioned in there.

This isn't really the right thread for this but close enough.

My uncle is dying of cancer. Probably talking days left. He was living in Thailand but came back to go into hospital as he had no medical insurance there. His partner of 10 years is a Thai citizen, and we want to get him over here so they can be together for the last time, but he needs a Visa to enter the UK and it seems to take 3 months which we don't have. We think there is some kind of fast track way to get around this but I don't know how this stuff works and there seems to be a lot of dubious websites offering Visa services and I don't know if they are trustworthy or this is even possible. We're not really talking immigration because he just wants to be able to visit for a couple of weeks.

Long shot maybe but any ideas ILX?

Is your uncle a British citizen?

Yes

VFS runs visa processing for the UK in Thailand and I think they offer a priority service. That should be the first place you look. A visa consulting agency will typically only make sure you have all your documents in order and won't necessary speed things up otherwise.

May also be a long shot but there wouldn't be any harm in calling the British Embassy in Bangkok and explaining the situation to see if they have any emergency options.

OK, thanks SV - VFS is the main one we've been looking at but like I said not sure if these kinds of things are just scams or not. They do have a priority service for £750. Says it's for medical emergencies in the family tho and not sure if an unmarried gay relationship is gonna count for that :(

We've tried ringing the Thai embassy here in case they know anything but they're closed til Monday.

I think my uncle's partner has been in touch with an embassy or consulate in Chiang Mai, my mum drafted up a letter over email explaining the circumstances for him to give them.

VFS is the official processing partner of the embassy. They are the same people you go to if you want a Russian or Indian visa in the UK. They're usually very good.

Great, thanks. Feel more at ease we're looking in the right place now.

Good luck.

UK asylum refusal decision: 'Your strong attachment to your Islamic faith is inconsistent with your claim to use lesbian dating sites ...'

https://twitter.com/Paul_Dillane/status/763326753595133954

The treatment of LGBT asylum applicants is one of the great, under-reported scandals.

awful

Just putting this here.

jesus, kuwait denaturalized 3% of the population, making many stateless. “Every week for months, the government published vast lists of newly stateless people, which Kuwaitis feverishly scanned for their own names, or those of friends and family.” https://t.co/7xuelRPMuG

— csz (@cszabla) March 10, 2025