Down the memory hole
Spotted on Facebook :
Interesting change to the UKBA's policy and guidance section concerning EEA Family Permits (EUN 2.14). The text stating that it does not matter if the only reason a British national goes to another member state is to exercise an economic Treaty right so that they can come back to the UK with their family members has been removed!
I took a screenshot of the website before the change.
For future reference, it is here, along with the relevant text : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/for-future-reference-ukba-on-surinder.html
The text included this sentence :
It does not matter if the only reason the British national went to another Member State was to exercise an economic Treaty right was so that he / she could come back to the UK with his / her family members under EC law.
It doesn't any more. This is a fairly obvious attempt to limit knowledge of the Surinder Singh/EEA route which provides a way for British people to be with their non-EEA family members. Devious
As I said at the time -
For future reference, in case the website ever 'changes' in the future. Taken 30/Jun/2013.
From the Newsnight piece on Surinder Singh a few weeks ago : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23029195
The Immigration Minister Mark Harper declined to be interviewed for
BBC Asian Network/Newsnight's report and instead issued a statement:
"The EEA family permit is not a 'loophole'. It reflects the
current requirements of EU law and would not apply if someone went
abroad to a member state for a short time just in order to circumvent
the immigration rules. An application will be refused if it cannot be
proved the British citizen was genuinely engaged in employment."
This somewhat contradicts the UKBA website which says that it
does not matter if the only reason a British national goes to another
member state is to exercise an economic Treaty right so that they can
come back to the UK with their family members.
Quite clearly, the website was right on Surinder Singh. Are the changes to the website related to the Newsnight piece?
A screenshot of the current wording on the UKBA website (31 July 2013) is below. You can compare with the screenshot above to see the difference.
Shared in the interests of fair use and the historical record.